Statement of Jason A. Turner, Commissioner,
New York City Human Resources Administration

Testimony Before the Subcommittee on Human Resources
of the House Committee on Ways and Means

Hearing on Welfare Reform and Work

April 3, 2001

I am pleased to have this opportunity to present to this Committee information on how work requirements in TANF are being carried out in the country's largest local welfare program, and what our experience means for reauthorization in this area. The specific subject of my remarks revolve around the provision of PRWORA requiring states to engage recipients not in private employment in work experience.

At the onset of his administration in 1994, Mayor Giuliani made welfare reform and crime reduction the central aspects of his new administration. Specifically, for welfare he set out to create a large program to allow recipients the opportunity to practice work while returning valuable services to the city while receiving benefits. In New York this is called "WEP," or the Work Experience Program. The Mayor's program was set in motion fully two years before being required under PWRORA.

Today, we have seen the merit of work experience on a large scale. Caseloads have dropped by more than half since their peak in March of 1995, while follow-up surveys show high rates of employment and retention. Moreover every day New York City employs tens of thousands of welfare recipients in work activities which help them get ready for private employment, while benefiting all New York citizens in the form of improved city services.

Work Experience Today

Work experience is defined as unpaid work activity by adults receiving benefits who are not generally employed in the private economy. Work experience can have one or more of the following objectives.

1. Increasing the employability of participants by offering opportunities to practice work and to learn the habits and social skills necessary to succeed in entry level employment;

2. Reducing welfare dependency by improving employment prospects and by altering the work/leisure tradeoff;

3. Fulfilling a social and moral obligation of recipients to contribute to society in exchange for benefits;

4. Attacking the culture of poverty, which is related to the notion of social obligation above, but is not the same.

Although work while on welfare for those not privately employed was one of the central goals of PRWORA, it is not now a significant component of the welfare reform programs that most states offer. Given the goals of TANF, this is a surprising and important fact which is not widely recognized and to which we will return.

Congressional expectations regarding the inclusion of work experience under TANF were much higher than in the earlier JOBS program

The authors of TANF clearly intended that work, even while still receiving benefits, should transform the meaning of temporary assistance, and they signaled this by setting high levels of weekly work levels and participation rates. In addition, the TANF authors took special care to observe the lessons from past failed attempts to legislate work requirements, for instance that unless clearly defined, states would not actually require work. Notwithstanding the flexibility otherwise inherent in the TANF block grant, the work requirements and measurements are very specifically spelled out. By contrast with earlier federal legislation, especially in light of the disappointing Job Opportunities and Basic Skills Training Program (JOBS) created by the Family Support Act in 1988, TANF drafters attempted to lock in higher work levels. They did so in four ways:

First, they insisted on honest counting. The participation standards written into the earlier JOBS program had been beset by the phenomenon of the "shrinking denominator," or the ability of states to exclude large numbers of individuals from being counted as available for work-related activities. Thus states were allowed to announce work participation rates which were misleadingly high. TANF helped resolve this by keeping a broad definition of who is available for work, including nearly all adults minus only those cases with a child under age one (at state option for a period of up to 12 months per family) and those cases in sanction status (for no more than three months within the preceding 12 months). Thus, few cases can be removed from the denominator of the ratio of those actually working. 

Second, the TANF statute defines precisely what counts as work (in the numerator of the calculation), rather than leaving this definition to the states. The definition of work under TANF conforms to the common sense meaning of the word, rather than absorbing into it education, training, and other assorted activities.

Third, the legislation includes substantial required participation rates, beginning with 25 percent of the caseload in 1997, and increasing to 50 percent by 2002 (and higher for two-parent families). Required hours also increase over time, rising from 20 hours per week in 1997 to 30 hours in 2000 and thereafter. Penalties assessed to states for non-compliance with the above standards were set at a realistically low level (5 percent the first year increasing by 2 percentage points for each consecutive year of failure). This was intended to increase the probability that the penalty would actually be imposed and collected (thereby signaling that program adherence is expected), rather than blocked in Congress by home state members.

Fourth, TANF imposes more severe financial penalties (sanctions) against participants who do not comply with program requirements.

Surprisingly, there is a very low rate of usage of work experience by states.

With all the attention paid to work participation standards by the drafters of TANF, a provision was included in the bill which made achieving high work rates less imperative than it seemed at the time the legislation was enacted. This provision is the caseload reduction credit, which reduces the participation rate requirement by one percentage point for each percentage point a state's welfare caseload falls below 1995 levels. Thus, if a given state's caseload were to fall by 25 percent between 1995 and 1999, the TANF work requirement would fall from the required 1999 level of 35 percent to 10 percent (35 percent - 25 percent = 10 percent). Since many states already have well over 10 percent of their caseload combining private employment with welfare, states such as the one in this example would not need to have any welfare recipient in a work program to meet the 35 percent work standard.

Not surprisingly, given the caseload reduction credit, national data for 1999 show that the typical state had very few welfare recipients in a work experience program. Although over 40 percent of the adult caseload in the average state is involved in some required activity, nearly 70 percent of these are in unsubsidized employment; i.e., they are collecting welfare while working at a regular job. By contrast, under 10 percent of all adults who are participating in any activity while receiving welfare benefits are in work experience of any kind. This figure translates to just 4 percent of the entire caseload of 2.1 million adults. Thus, the number of adults on TANF who participate in work experience is exceedingly low by any standard. Even the Family Support Act enrolled an estimated 20,000 to 35,000 in work experience on an average monthly basis in 1994, as compared to 78,000 now.

Clearly, states as a group have exercised their option under the TANF caseload reduction credit to focus management attention on other parts of the program. The significant efforts which would be necessary to organize state programs around a substantial commitment to work has evidently not been generated by TANF as it is currently configured.

How one views this development depends partly upon one's judgment as to the relative value of maximizing state program flexibility as compared to that of requiring full engagement in work activity as a primary goal of welfare reform. Our view is that real reform means that, for those unable to work in the private economy, work in exchange for benefits is the next best alternative.

A major management commitment is necessary to mount a large and ongoing work experience program for a high proportion of recipients, and although the policy makers who drafted the TANF program may have anticipated that most recipients would be involved in actual work, implementation by states has simply not produced this result.

Running a Work Experience Program: Lessons from New York City and Elsewhere

New York City and Wisconsin each run programs which share the aspiration to have a fully work-based welfare system, which means that for those not in private employment, work-experience makes up the greater part of a full-time simulated work-week, with other activities such as job search and education included as lesser parts. The work obligation applies to all adults with almost no exceptions, and substantial management attention is devoted to attendance, tracking, and monitoring of sites. In order to assure suitable work assignments for those of all capabilities, provisions for specialized work sites are made which incorporate vocational rehabilitation. Taken together, Wisconsin and New York's work experience programs offer guidance as to what might be expected as a result of a more extensive national program, as reflected in the observations below.

Work experience should constitute genuine practice for private employment. 

While empirical evidence is lacking, certain features of work experience appear to make it more effective in preparing people for actual jobs.

· The program should operate on a standard full-time workweek which conforms to the expectations of private employment. This allows participants to practice organizing their lives around a realistic work schedule of eight hour work days and five day work weeks; 

· Real work must be accomplished. Nothing is more dispiriting to those expecting to work than to remain idle on the job or worse, ignored. By contrast, the pride and satisfaction of successfully mastering work tasks often results in a big psychological lift and translates into confidence in the search for private employment;

· Third party medical review must be available to determine work capability. Medical reviews are essential for the health and safety of participants, and to maintain a uniform work standard not subject to "doctor shopping"; 

· Work assignments must include close supervision and regular feedback. Those who lack work histories are often not familiar with workplace norms of professionalism and conduct, and frequently find it difficult to submit to supervisory authority or get along with co-workers. Good supervisors who agree to make part of their task the acculturation of participants play a large role in the success of their charges; 

· There must be swift consequences for non-attendance without cause . Consequences can be a new experience for those used to being involved in a bureaucratic welfare system in which not much changes. Thus, the importance of reliability must be taught, and for this to occur benefits must be closely tied to attendance.

Work experience is the operational component which best allows for the goal of replacing cash assistance with work.  Work experience expands or contracts to accommodate the ebbs and flows of the private economy like an accordion. It is always there to absorb those outside of the labor force while keeping work habits and skills in good repair. As compared to other work related component activities such as grant diversion or public service employment, work experience has these characteristics: it can be operated on a large scale; can constitute the major part of a full-time program week (e.g. 35 hours); can accommodate participants who remain in the component for extended periods; and provides an immediate and ever-present work option for individuals rotating into and out of assistance.

Work experience probably exerts its greatest net caseload impact at the time of enrollment.  Where work experience has been required of applicants who do not find private employment within a certain period of time, the number of actual slots used by participants is almost always far fewer than anticipated. Fewer slots are necessary because individuals who know they must work in exchange for benefits frequently elect not to enroll in the program in the first place. Instead, they find immediate employment or increase their hours of part-time jobs. In other instances they rely on alternatives which were already present, such as combinations of unreported work, doubling-up, help from relatives, and help from friends.

The phenomenon of lower than expected work experience usage was much in evidence in the transition from the AFDC entitlement program to the completely work-based W-2 program in Wisconsin. There, of the 26,000 AFDC families with an adult head who were obligated to enroll in the new W-2 program in which near full-time work-experience was required, 45 percent elected not to transfer and closed their case. Another 16 percent accepted W-2 case management services but did not wish to engage in work experience in order to receive cash benefits.

Universal work programs require work slots for individuals of all capabilities. In New York, excluding child-only cases in which there is no adult, fully 87 percent of the TANF caseload is deemed "engageable," meaning that they are ready for some kind of work assignment. Having a near-universal expectation of work helps change the culture of the system and channels the energy of recipients in a constructive direction away from attempting to qualify for exemptions.

A work experience program which aspires to have close to universal applicability must also have an inventory of assignments suitable for participants of varying ability levels. Both New York City and Wisconsin provide for a "ladder" of work options which provide real work for adults with all levels of experience and job readiness. Standard work assignments range from outdoor physical work to office jobs in government or non-profit agencies For adults with mild disabilities, vocational rehabilitation agencies such as Goodwill can provide work in specialized settings. In New York City, roughly one third of the mildly disabled who enroll in work rehabilitation have orthopedic limitations such as back weaknesses, another third have mental health problems, especially depression, and the balance have mostly asthma or cardiovascular limitations.

The incremental costs of running a work experience program are manageable, particularly in light of increased resources available as a result of significant recent caseload reductions. The research organization, Manpower Demonstration Research Corporation (MDRC), studied early work experience programs and found the annual costs per filled slot in work experience programs to range from $700 to $8000. In New York City, the incremental cost of running its large-scale program is within the lower part of the range found by MDRC. Total 1999 expenditures on work experience were about $43.1 million or about $1400 annually per filled slot excluding child care (because each slot turns over multiple times per year, the cost per participant is lower than the annual amount). Of the $1400 cost, 67 percent goes to payments to other government agencies for direct costs, including timekeepers, coordinators, and field supervisors as well as tools and equipment (non-profit agencies that host work experience participants often absorb these costs). Another 24 percent of costs go for third party medical assessments. The remaining nearly 10 percent is used for welfare agency administrative costs.

There can be significant benefits to participating agencies which offset some of the costs, and can provide real improvements in the services delivered by government and non-profits. Most New York city agencies were reluctant to take on the responsibility for managing large numbers of work experience participants until Mayor Giuliani himself made it clear that work opportunities for welfare recipients was a city priority. Once set up to accommodate work experience participants however, these same agencies came to see significant improvements in the level of service they were able to provide the public. To take one example, immediately prior to the introduction of large numbers of work experience participants, the city's parks had an "acceptable cleanliness" rating of 74 percent. Largely as a result of the additional labor available beginning in 1995, which peaked at more than three thousand full-time worker equivalents, the acceptable cleanliness rating of the city's parks climbed to 95 percent. More recently the sharp caseload declines have resulted in fewer work experience participants for Parks, prompting the department to request an increase in referrals from the city welfare agency.

The productivity of work experience participants as compared to regular employees was estimated in MDRC's 1993 evaluation of work experience programs. MDRC surveyed supervisors, who overall said work experience participants were as productive, or nearly as productive, as regular employees.). Based on our New York City experience, it seems likely that productivity is somewhat lower than that of regular employees because of higher turnover, more frequent absences, and a tendency for welfare recipients to bring at-home problems to the worksite.

Sanction policies play a large role in achieving high levels of participation. High non-participation rates are a feature of most mandatory programs. In Wisconsin, where the W-2 program pays cash benefits only to those who first participate in work activities, compliance by definition is high. However, in states like New York that do not use a version of full-check sanction for non-participation, a large proportion of families may accept a lower TANF payment rather than engage in work. In a high intensity program, the number of recipients who accept sanctions to avoid work can actually exceed the number of recipients who meet the participation requirement. For instance, in New York recently there were 17,000 active TANF work experience participants, along with 15,000 engaged in other primary activities, for a total of 32,000. At the same time, there were 17,500 individuals in sanction status for non-participation, with an additional 17,000 in the sanction determination process, for a total of 34,500, or a number slightly higher than those properly engaged in work experience.

However, even strong sanction policies will not encourage all potential participants to meet their work obligation. In order to reach greater numbers of non-participants, New York City contracted with several faith based organizations to make home visits to counsel and assist families with problems in an atmosphere of greater trust. Church counselors say that they are usually welcomed into these homes and develop positive relationships with recipients. However, a minority of those they encounter have remained isolated at home for such long periods that they lack minimal will and confidence to enter the program. Many of these adults believe that even if they did participate in work experience, they would fail. For this subset, a longer period of relationship building combined with special interventions, perhaps with non-government counselors, may be beneficial.

High turnover rates present management problems but lower the number of required work slots. In addition to high initial no-show rates, work experience turnover rates are high for those who do enroll. In New York, for those who begin a work experience assignment, the 1996 TANF drop out rate was 38 percent after one month, 53 percent after two months, and 61 percent after three months. Since 1996 the turnover rate has increased even further as the system has approached near universal enrollment and the caseload has declined further.

The high turnover rate has at least two causes. One cause is that those who reliably participate in their work assignments, even for short periods, find they can obtain private employment (experience shows that private employers like to receive attendance information and recommendations from work experience supervisors and take them into account). Fully half of all individuals who participated in New York's work experience program for any period during the first quarter of 2000 found employment the same calendar year. In addition, normal caseload dynamics in which recipients leave the rolls, further increases turnover.

The high work experience turnover rate means that far fewer actual slots are needed to run a universal program than would otherwise be required. For its TANF caseload of 161,000, of which 128,000 have an adult in the household, New York City is able to run a mandatory universal work program with only 17,000 slots, (with the caveat that many are not participating even though required to do so), with an additional 15,000 slots for other primary activities such as high school, post-secondary education or training, and initial-stage substance abuse treatment. An additional 10,000 work experience slots are sufficient for a general assistance caseload of 75,000.

Considerations for Reauthorization

The analysis of work experience presented in this paper, combined with our experience in administering these programs, leads us to make several recommendations to Congress as it pursues welfare reform reauthorization over the next two years.

Increase the proportion of TANF recipients participating in work experience. First and foremost, we strongly recommend that Congress take action to increase the proportion of adult welfare recipients who are subject to a work experience requirement. The level of work experience participation should be increased simply by requiring a higher percentage of the caseload to meet the work requirement so that work becomes an expected standard for those receiving benefits. Every state should be required to have a substantial proportion of its caseload, say 35 percent to 45 percent, in a work program.

Enforce the provision of TANF requiring that sanctions for non-participation be applied as a pro-rata reduction of family benefits. The statutory text of the TANF program requires that full-check sanctions be applied to cases in which there is a complete failure to participate without good cause. In the case of partial participation, the legislation requires reductions equal to the portion of hours of activity missed without good cause. This interpretation of the term "pro rata" (see Section 404(e)(1)(A) of the Social Security Act) was made explicit in the conference report for the 1996 welfare reform legislation. However, in its regulations HHS chose to permit states wide latitude in interpreting the provision, even to the extent of ignoring the provision entirely and retaining the sanction provisions of the former AFDC program.

As a result, several states, including large states like New York and California, do not as a practical matter require participation in work activities for those who elect to opt out and accept slightly lower benefits. For work to become a meaningful and integrated part of receiving welfare, the original intent of the TANF provisions must be restored so that all states will be required to terminate cash benefits for recipients who refuse to participate in work requirements.

States should be able to merge work obligations under the Food Stamp program with those under TANF.   TANF made several important changes to the Food Stamp law in order to make administration of the two programs more compatible. For instance, the "Simplified Food Stamp Program" option is intended to allow states to have greater procedural flexibility in the process of determining benefits, so that there is greater compatibility with TANF. Other provisions of the new law allow for greater compatibility with TANF's work program. However, these statutory changes have been interpreted narrowly by the Department of Agriculture, and the statutory changes themselves do not go far enough.

Constraints imposed on work experience programs by Federal regulations should be lifted through legislative clarification. The interpretation of various federal statutes bearing on work experience programs, issued by both the Departments of Labor and Health and Human Services, interfere unnecessarily with the operation of these programs and should be clarified by legislation. Among the workplace laws which, according to departmental regulations, can have applicability to work experience programs, are the Fair Labor Standards Act (especially the minimum wage); Occupational Safety and Health Administration rules; Unemployment Insurance (at certain non-government sites); the Americans with Disabilities Act; titles VI and VII of the Civil Rights Act; the Age Discrimination in Employment Act; and the Equal Pay Act. With the TANF program being in its early life and with work experience not heavily used, many of the above provisions have not yet generated litigation, but experience predicts that litigation can be expected.

The minimum wage provisions of the Fair Labor Standards Act, which constrain the number of hours recipients can be required to participate in work activity, is being averted in states which have deemed work experience a training activity. Other states are restricting the scheduled hours of work experience. However, this rule, after a court test, may constrain work experience in every state because the courts may not agree that work experience is training. Because, as we have argued, work experience is most powerful when it parallels a full-time work schedule of 35 hours per week, these rules on allowable hours of work directly reduce the program's effectiveness.

The current federal interpretation of the applicability of workplace law is out of place in the context of state run work experience programs under TANF. Participants in work experience are already covered by the same program standards and protections afforded those in side-by-side activities such as job search, training, and education. Applying federal employment laws to these program operations was clearly not intended under the TANF statute, and opens up a whole range of new conflict and litigation based on decades of overlapping laws, regulations, and legal precedents which may have nothing to do with welfare-to-work programs. The Family Support Act, which preceded TANF, had specific exemptions from several requirements of labor law. These exemptions, which were originally included in the Community Work Experience Program (CWEP), specified that AFDC benefits were not to be construed as compensation for work performed. The logic of this provision was that work experience assignments for those receiving welfare payments are intended to be educational in the sense of preparing adults to take private employment. Congress should revert to its earlier explicit exemption of work experience from employment law. 

Conclusion

The promise of the welfare reform law has been achieved to a far greater degree than was anticipated by most of its critics. Its most distinctive achievement, as shown by the papers in this volume, has been to greatly increase the number of single mothers who are working in the private economy and who have brought their families out of poverty. Ironically, the large number of mothers who have left welfare has served to reduce the need for states to maintain high levels of participation in work experience programs because of the caseload reduction credit. We should be concerned that states are not developing the work programs and infrastructure necessary to constructively engage those who remain on assistance and those who are sure to return in the next business cycle. For those not able to move to work quite yet, work experience remains the next best alternative. It can transform the meaning of welfare and may even be capable of affecting the larger culture of poverty, yet the low level of participation in this important activity means that this part of the promise of the welfare reform revolution remains unfulfilled.

City of New York
Parks & Recreation

Work Experience Program
Procedures Manual for Crew Chiefs

Rudolph W. Giuliani                      Henry J. Stern
           Mayor                                   Commissioner

New WEP participants report to Borough Orientations every other Monday (Tuesday when there is an official City holiday).  Participants listen to a three hour information session on topics such as Time Limits, Park Policies, Procedures, and Safety in the Workplace.  Participants are then assigned to the District to which they are expected to report the following day—Tuesday  (Wednesday, if Monday was an official City holiday).

When WEP participants first report to their district, the Crew Chief is responsible for providing them with a comprehensive District Orientation based on an orientation script (see Appendix A for District Orientation Script).

The District Orientation should cover the following topics:

¨      Rules & Regulations of the District

¨      Chain of Command & District Contact Information (Phone and Pager Numbers)

¨      Medically Limited (EII) Participants (see Procedure #8)

¨      All WEP Participants will be treated Equally and Fairly (see Procedures #11 and #12)

¨      District Work Policy (see Procedure # 2)

¨      Issue Uniforms and Demonstrate Tool Use (see Procedure #6)

¨      Safety in the Workplace (see Procedure #13)

¨      Getting Help In Finding A Job (see Procedures #20 and #21)

¨      Awards (see Procedure # 19)

¨      Question/Answer session

Crew Chiefs must create files for participants with medical limitations which include the:

u       EII forms or Doctor’s note

u       Copy of Duty Description form

 Crew Chiefs must make sure that they receive from their Borough Coordinators the EII and assignment forms for every WEP participant with medical limitations.  Duty Description forms must be filled out by Crew Chiefs and a copy must be sent to their Borough Coordinator within 24 hours of the participant’s arrival in the District.

Crew Chiefs must note participants’ EII status on all biweekly schedules and time sheets so that substitute supervisors are aware of medically limited participants’ conditions.  Once it is determined that a participant is medically limited, the classification will appear on each participant’s time card.

WHEN A PARTICIPANT CLAIMS TO BE MEDICALLY LIMITED:

If a participant claims to be medically limited after arriving in the District, the following procedures must be followed:

u       If the participant presents a completed EII form, s/he should be assigned to appropriate tasks according to his/her HSS doctor and the Appropriate Duties for Medically Limited Participants form.  Crew Chiefs must immediately send a copy of the EII form to the Borough Coordinator.

u       If a participant presents a private doctor’s note, but does not have an EII form, the Crew Chief must immediately contact the Borough Coordinator for further guidance and send him/her a copy of the documentation.

u       If the participant does not present any documentation, but s/he claims to be ill, the Crew Chief should send the participant home and give him/her 24 hours to present a doctor’s note to the Borough Coordinator.

u       If the participant is not able or refuses to obtain a doctor’s note, the Crew Chief should immediately contact the Borough Coordinator.

Crew Chiefs must announce the Parks policy on medical limitations at District Orientations.  At these orientations, Crew Chiefs must ensure that they have all participants’ medical limitation documentation.

The proper documentation from a doctor must be printed on letterhead and have the doctor’s signature. It must state the participant’s medical condition in detail and give the date that s/he will be able to work without any limitations.  This note must be dated within the last 30 days.

Crew Chiefs must read all Assignment forms, including the comment section of these forms, to make sure that they have a record of all participants with medical limitations.

If at any time during the workday, a participant suffers from an illness, nausea, dizziness, heat stroke, etc., the Crew Chief should be sure to take all necessary precautions to help the participant.  For example: move the person out of the sun, get the participant water, call an ambulance, send him/her home.

If a participant sustains an injury on the job, the Crew Chief must:

r   Ensure that the participant gets proper medical treatment immediately (call Central Communications and 911).

r   Inform Central Communications, the District Supervisor, and the Borough WEP Coordinator, of the incident as soon as possible.

r   Travel with the participant to the hospital (if the participant requires medical attention) and stay there until his/her status is known.  If the Crew Chief is unable to accompany the participant, s/he must make arrangements for another Parks employee to go with the participant to the hospital.

r   Complete the Worker’s Compensation C2 form and addendum (see appendix for sample Worker’s Compensation C2 form).

r   Submit the original C2 form and addendum to the Borough WEP Office.  The Crew Chief should retain a copy of the forms for his/her own records.

r   Complete the participant’s time sheet, recording the date and nature of the incident.

r   Keep the Borough WEP Coordinator informed of the participant’s status following the incident.

r   Submit a Parks Incident Report to the Borough WEP Office (see appendix for sample Parks Incident Report form).

If a participant becomes ill on the job (i.e. suffers a seizure, or passes out), the Crew Chief must:

u      Ensure that the participant gets proper medical treatment immediately (call Central and 911).

u      Inform the Central Communications, the District Supervisor, and the Borough WEP Coordinator of the incident as soon as possible.

u      Travel with the participant to the hospital (should the participant require medical attention), and stay there until his/her status is known. If the Crew Chief is unable to go with the participant, s/he must make arrangements for another Parks employee to go with the participant to the hospital.

u      Complete the participant’s time sheet, recording the date and nature of the incident.

u      Keep the Borough WEP Coordinator informed of the participant’s status following the incident.

u      Submit Parks Incident Report to the Borough WEP Office (see appendix for sample Parks Incident Report form).

The work rules and standards of conduct that Parks employees follow also apply to WEP participants.  A successful working relationship with WEP participants is achieved when they feel like they are a part of the Parks team.  Crew Chiefs should stress that participants’ contributions are valuable and enhance the quality of life in New York City.  Crew Chiefs should keep the following things in mind:

u       Participants are not to be assigned to perform tasks alone; they must be assigned as a team of at least 2.

u       WEP participants should follow the same work and break schedule as Parks employees.

u       All participants should be provided with the proper tools and equipment to perform their duties safely.

u       Work assignments should not be hazardous or endanger participants’ health.

u       Participants are expected to achieve the same levels of performance as Parks’ employees.

It is the policy of Parks & Recreation to provide a work environment free from discrimination and sexual harassment. This policy is not designed to regulate or interfere with voluntary social relationships between fellow employees, but it does prohibit those actions and behaviors that are unwanted and unwelcome, and/or create an intimidating and hostile work environment.

Granting professional benefits or favors on the basis of race or creed or to an employee who has accepted sexual advances is as much an act of misconduct as refusing to grant such benefits on the basis of race or creed or to an employee who has resisted such advances.

Anti-discrimination protection applies to all of the terms and conditions of employment, including, but not limited to:

It is unlawful to discriminate on the basis of:

Sexual harassment is any repeated or unwelcome sexual advance, request for sexual favors, or other verbal or physical conduct of a sexual nature.  The federal Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEO) defines such conduct as sexual harassment when:

u       Submission to such conduct is made, either explicitly or implicitly, a term or condition of an individual’s employment.

u       Submission or rejection of such conduct by an individual is used as a basis for employment decisions affecting such individual, or such conduct has the purpose or effect of unreasonably interfering with an individual’s work performance or creating an intimidating, hostile or offensive work environment.

u      Any Crew Chief who is aware of active discrimination, sexually intimidating or hostile work environment, should take immediate action to correct such situations. The Crew Chief should keep a written record of the situation and the proposed solution. If the solution fails to address the matter to the satisfaction of the people involved, the Borough Coordinator should be contacted. Contact the Parks Borough Office to find out the name and number of the appropriate EEO Coordinator.

u       All complaints of sexual harassment made either to a Crew Chief or to an EEO Officer will be addressed with confidentiality, and immediate and appropriate action will be taken.

u       Harassment and retaliation against those who press charges of discrimination or harassment is unlawful. Any employee who retaliates against another employee for filling a discrimination or sexual harassment complaint, or for cooperating in the investigation of a complaint, will be subject to disciplinary action.

While Borough WEP Orientations cover the procedures for safely dealing with hazardous materials, Crew Chiefs must reinforce these rules to their crew. Hazardous materials may include, but are not limited to:

u       Drugs or drug-related paraphernalia

u       Weapons, including knives or blades of any sort

 If hazardous materials are encountered on the job site, the following steps should be taken:

u      WEP participants are not to pick up or handle hazardous materials.

u      Any WEP participant discovering a hazardous object should immediately notify his or her Crew Chief or any other Parks employee or call 1800-201-PARK.

u      The Park Supervisor or Crew Chief will “flag” the area using either a small red flag or cone (provided at each location) and call Central Communications at (718) 383-6363 and provide the following information:

·         Park where “flag” is located

·         Nearest landmark

·         Object being flagged

·         Caller’s name and title

u     Central Communications will then notify the nearest trained sector mobile crew to respond and dispose of the material. “Flagging” is done to prevent children or other workers from coming in contact with the material. The Borough Health and Safety Manager should be contacted if a particular site does not have flags or cones.

EXTREME WEATHER CONDITIONS:

u     Only the Chief of Operations can authorize participants to go home early in extremely hot/cold weather conditions.

u     If any WEP participants are excused due to inclement weather, it must be noted on their time sheets and they will be given credit for all hours which they were scheduled to work that day.  Crew Chiefs must note the credited hours in the hours worked column on the time sheet.  Participants who report to work will receive a full day’s carfare.

u       Participants are not expected to work in conditions under which other Park employees are not expected to work.

INCLEMENT WEATHER WORK PLANS:

u      All Crew Chiefs must have inclement weather work plans that can go into effect when it rains or snows, or when the weather is particularly hot or cold. The following is a list of possible indoor assignments.

 

·         Cleaning indoor facilities	·         Servicing mechanical equipment
·         Cleaning bathrooms	·         Being trained in the use of mechanical equipment by Crew Chiefs
·         Taking inventory of materials
·         Washing windows
·         Painting trash barrels

u       WEP participants who are suitably dressed for inclement weather (rain gear or winter clothing) may also be assigned to outdoor work on cold and rainy days. However, participants should be given ample breaks from work in such harsh weather.

u       On hot days, water should be readily available. Crew Chiefs should also make certain that participants take sufficient breaks in shady areas.

u       If, after implementing inclement weather work plans, there are still participants who cannot be utilized, the Chief of Operations can authorize a Crew Chief to excuse them for the day.

A WEP site may be visited at any time by inspectors from:

u       Parks & Recreation

u       Human Resources Administration

u       Other City, State or Federal Agencies

If an inspection of your site occurs, inform your Borough WEP Coordinator immediately. You should work with your Borough WEP Coordinator to comply with any requested follow-up action.

The following procedures are to be observed when any unauthorized representative visits a WEP site.  Note: The Crew Chief should call Central Communications and inform them of the visit.

The Crew Chief should inform the representative that s/he may only speak to WEP participants during times not scheduled for work. These times are:

·         before their assigned reporting times

·         at official break times

·         after their tour of duty

If the representative refuses to leave, inform him/her that the Parks Enforcement Patrol (PEP) will be called to escort him/her off the premises.  If the representative does not leave, call Central Communications at (718) 383-6363 or (800) 201-PARK to have PEP dispatched to the site. Crew Chiefs should call their Borough WEP Coordinator and Chief of Operations immediately afterwards to report the incident.

 Note: You should direct members of the press or anyone else seeking extensive information to the public information office (212) 360-8311.

The following procedures should be followed for State Motor Vehicle Inspections and Preventive Maintenance Inspections on leased WEP vehicles.

STATE MOTOR VEHICLE INSPECTIONS:

State inspections must be conducted once a year on the date indicated on each vehicle’s sate inspection sticker. To receive a state inspection, the Crew Chief responsible for the vehicle should call the WEP office or the dispatcher to make an appointment for an inspection.  The vehicle should be driven to Cartov Leasing’s Fort Hamilton Parkway location (address listed below), where the inspection will be conducted while the Parks vehicle operator waits.

 PREVENTIVE MAINTENANCE INSPECTIONS (PMI):

Each leased WEP vehicle is required to have three PMI’s per year. Dates for these PMI’s are assigned in the “PMI schedule for leased vans.”  The Crew Chief responsible for the vehicle should make an appointment with Cartov Leasing to have the inspection done during the week the vehicle is assigned in the “PMI schedule for leased vans.”  If the Crew Chief responsible for the vehicle is unaware of the assigned PMI dates, s/he should request a schedule from his/her Borough WEP Coordinator. PMI’s are performed at Cartov Leasing’s Fort Hamilton Parkway location, while the Parks vehicle operator waits.  Cartov will note body damage on the PMI forms and will leave PMI receipts on the dashboard of the vehicle.  Once a PMI has been completed, it should be recorded in the monthly “WEP van breakdown and PMI report” (see appendix sample WEP Van Breakdown and PMI form), which is sent to the Borough WEP Coordinator at the end of each month.

 Cartov’s Fort Hamilton Parkway location:
3475 Fort Hamilton Parkway (between 36^th Street and Chester Avenue)

 REPAIRS:

WEP vehicles may also be sent to Cartov Leasing for repairs.   Contact the following people to coordinate repairs for your vehicle:

Ø    Bronx: John Condon (718) 430-1873 and/or Elliott Sykes (718) 430-1896

Ø    Brooklyn: Kent Stridiron (718) 965-8929

Ø    Manhattan: Melissa Mendez (212)408-0225 and/or the Manhattan WEP Office (212)408-0228

Ø    Queens: Bob Gervasi (718) 699-4242 and/or Linda Koenig (718) 520-5930

Ø    Staten Island: Jack Guidotti (718) 816-9166 

TOWING:

u       During the day, contact the borough dispatcher or Central Communications.

u       At night or weekends, contact the dispatcher or Central Communications at 1-800-201-PARK.

u       Cartov Leasing can tow a vehicle to its Fort Hamilton location. Call (718) 972-4990.

DOCUMENTING REPAIRS:

u       Keep a running log of all vehicle breakdowns.

u       Record the date on which the vehicle is first brought in for repair, and track the number of days that it remains out of service in the WEP Van Breakdown and PMI report.

u      At the end of the month, send the WEP Van Breakdown and PMI report (accompanied by receipts for the work done) to your Borough WEP Coordinator.

u      Note: Because Parks does not own its WEP vehicles, their out-of-service rates can not be tracked on the city’s MCMS (Maintenance Control Management System).

ACCIDENT & VANDALISM PROCEDURE

If the vehicle was just involved in an accident with another vehicle, fixed object, or pedestrian:

u       Contact Central Communications immediately (1800-201-PARK) and follow any instructions they give.

u       Obtain all relevant information regarding the other driver(s) involved in the accident (i.e. name, address, Driver’s License #, license plate, vehicle info, insurance info, etc.).  If the other driver(s) involved in the accident requests insurance information from you, inform them that any claim for damage or injury must be sent  to:

City of New York/Office of the Comptroller
Bureau of Law and Adjustment
1 Centre Street, Room 1225
New York, NY 10007 

u       Your supervisor must be notified of the accident, even if no violations are issued and there are no injuries.

ACCIDENT Continued

u       Fill out the Parks Driver Accident Report Form and the N.Y State Department of Motor Vehicles Accident Form (MV 104) located in the glove compartment of the vehicle (they are also available at the dispatch office).  These forms MUST be filled out within twenty-four (24) hours of an accident.  The Parks form must be submitted to your Supervisor for completion.  The DMV form must be sent to the state (as indicated on the form), with a copy going to your Supervisor.

VANDALISM

u       A “A Property Damage/ Theft Report” must be filed regarding each incident of vehicle vandalism or vehicle abuse.  Vandalism report should be reported to the Police and Central Communications.  Copies must also be submitted to garage dispatch and 5-boro.

u       An “injury/illness/incident report” must be filed for each case of vehicle abuse or suspected abuse.  These are to be reported to garage dispatch and to the appropriate supervisor.

 Note: Under no circumstances are WEP participants allowed to drive.

As part of Parks & Recreation’s effort to provide incentives to outstanding WEP participants, the following WEP Appreciation programs have been implemented:

 DISTRICT WEP PARTICIPANT OF THE MONTH:

Crew Chiefs should receive a District WEP Participant of the Month nomination form from their WEP Borough Coordinator (see appendix for sample WEP Nomination Form).  Crew Chiefs should complete the form to nominate an outstanding WEP participant from their district, and return it to the WEP Borough Coordinator.   Call your Borough WEP Coordinator’s office to find out when the Nomination Forms must be submitted.  Upon a favorable review of the nominated participants from each district, an individual will be selected as the District WEP Participant of the Month, and his/her Crew Chief will be contacted with the results..  Winners also become candidates for the Borough WEP Participant of the Month award.  A district recognition ceremony should be arranged during which the appropriate district manager presents the participant with a certificate and a Parks T-shirt. 

BOROUGH WEP PARTICIPANT OF THE MONTH:

The WEP Participant of the Month for each Borough is selected from the recipients of District WEP Participants of the Month.  Each of these five outstanding participants is awarded a certificate of achievement, a Parks T-shirt, and a check for $30.00.  Call your Borough WEP Coordinator’s office to find out when the T-shirts, certificates, and checks will be available for distribution. 

 BI-ANNUAL BOROUGH WEP PARTICIPANT OF THE MONTH LUNCHEON:

Every six months, a luncheon is arranged through the Central WEP Office to honor the Borough WEP Participants of the Month.  Held at the Arsenal in Manhattan, this ceremony is attended by the Parks Commissioner, First Deputy Commissioner, and Deputy Commissioner, various District Managers, Borough Commissioners and/or Chief of Operations.

 ZAP AWARDS:

ZAP Awards (food, event tickets, T-shirts, etc.) are solicited from major corporations so that WEP Crew Chiefs can provide instant rewards for outstanding work.  Contact your Borough WEP Coordinator for more information.

PARKS CAREER TRAINING PROGRAM (PACT)

WEP participants interested in moving into full-time employment should be encouraged to apply to PACT.  Those individuals accepted to the program agree to work 35 hours per week, in exchange for job counseling, skill building, driver training, and job placement services that are designed to help them find full-time employment in the private sector.  Additionally, PACT participants have access to General Equivalency Degree, Basic Education, and English as a Second Language classes.

PACT job skill training is primarily on-the-job and takes place in parks and park facilities throughout the five boroughs.  This hands-on training is supplemented with workshops ranging from computer classes to chain saw use.  The PACT training period varies from one to eight months.

The PACT major training areas include, but are not limited to, the following:

u       Custodial/Maintenance

u       Clerical

u       Horticulture

u       Security

u       Handyman/Fix-it

Approximately half of the PACT participants are assigned to PACT-supervised training crews and half are assigned to individual apprenticeship assignments.

To be considered for the PACT program, a WEP participant must:

u       Have a strong desire to move from public assistance to employment in the private sector.

u       Be willing to work 35 hours per week.

u       Each year PACT places over 300 participants into full-time jobs.

Crew Chiefs should encourage participants to call the PACT office at (212) 830-7778, or to contact their Borough WEP Coordinator for more information.

JOB ASSISTANCE CENTER (JAC)

The Job Assistance Center (JAC) is Parks’ own concurrent job search program (see procedure # 4 for more information on concurrent job search).

Participants are assigned to JAC by HRA and are required to spend 21 hours a week at their WEP assignment and 14 hours a week at their JAC assignment.  WEP participants may also volunteer to be enrolled in JAC by contacting their borough WEP office.

JAC offers workshops and job placement assistance. WEP participants who are assigned to JAC have access to:

¨      Board of Education Certified GED and ESL classes ¨      Clerical Academies ¨      job shadowing program

¨      interview appropriate attire through our in-house clothing closet and through Dress For Success

Each year JAC places over 200 participants into full-time jobs.

Crew Chiefs who are interested in learning more about JAC should call the Central Office at (212) 360-8130.

College WEP is designed for participants who:

u       Are presently in college.

u       Have a college degree or some college background.

The program places eligible Parks WEP participants in WEP assignments that use their skills and are related to their field of study or extra curricular interests. Current placements include:

u       Administrative offices

u       Telecommunications

u       Horticulture

u       Environmental education

u       Pre-school and after-school children’s programs

u       Computer resource centers

u       Recreational activities

u       Senior citizen programs.

Crew Chiefs should encourage eligible WEP participants apply for this program.  Interested WEP participants should call their Borough WEP Coordinator.

Business Link was established by the Human Resources Administration (HRA) to assist WEP participants in their search for outside employment. It is very important that participants be made aware of the employment opportunities offered through Business Link. Business Link periodically issues job notices with information regarding jobs currently available to WEP participants. There is usually a deadline for responses, so immediate action is required. Upon receipt of the Business Link posting, Crew Chiefs are expected to do the following:

u       Immediately post Business Link notices in areas accessible to all WEP participants.

u       Encourage participants to respond to job notices.

u       Permit participants to use Parks telephones to arrange Business Link appointments.

Parks & Recreation conducts blood drives semi-annually, and all WEP participants should be encouraged to participate.  Those who participate will receive credit for three hours of earned time. If a participant attends the drive, confirmation of his/her attendance will be sent to the Borough WEP Office by the blood drive coordinator.  If the participant donates blood and leaves prior to his/her tour, the three hours of earned time will be applied to complete that day.  If the participant returns to the job site directly after attending the drive, his/her three hours should be granted at a later date.

Information regarding time and location will be made available to the Borough Offices prior to each blood drive.