Wausau HR Committee approves employee handbook edits, adds HR director nepotism carve-out

The Wausau Human Resources Committee on July 14 unanimously approved edits to the June minutes and two changes to the city employee handbook: a wording change to policy 4.03 and a new carve-out to policy 3.04 regarding potential conflicts when the Human Resources director could influence compensation or promotions.

Committee members debated the scale and reason for the carve-out for the HR director and accepted language requiring a second, nonbiased oversight in personnel decisions where the HR director has a familial or personal relationship with affected employees.

The committee first approved the June minutes after a member pointed out a typographical error in the draft minutes (a line that read “sobs” instead of “jobs”). Committee member Killian moved to approve the minutes; committee member Martins seconded the motion. The chair called for the ayes and the motion passed unanimously.

A revision to employee handbook policy 4.03, covering summer and alternate work hours, was presented at the request of the director of economic development. The change removes a maintenance-specific reference and replaces it with a reference to the Community Development Authority to make the policy “more representative of the entire department with respect to summer hours and alternate hours,” according to committee discussion. Committee member Tierney moved to adopt the revised language; Martins seconded. The committee approved the change unanimously.

The most detailed discussion centered on proposed language added to employee handbook policy 3.04 (nepotism/employment of relatives and personal relationships). The Human Resources director explained the reason for the addition and framed it as a best practice to prevent conflicts where the HR director could have influence over compensation or promotions. The director said, “Should the HR director position have any direct influence or purview over, somebody with any, you know, familial relationships, it's best that there is a second oversight, by an individual, non biased party to any decisions that would render compensatory increases or promotions.”

Committee members asked whether the carve-out would apply broadly across departments. The Human Resources director said the situation is “unique” in Wausau because some department heads—specifically the HR director and the City Assessor—are on the same tier and the HR director has oversight related to compensation for the assessor. The director said, “I would say this is unique in that we have, policies that are direct relationship and this is a department head that has no reporting, oversight over another department head.” The committee accepted the new language by unanimous vote after a motion from Killian and a second from Martins.

A committee member expressed appreciation for bringing the change forward and for handling the matter in a way intended to avoid negative optics. That member said, “I just wanted to say that I appreciate the fact that this was brought up to you and it could have made many people uncomfortable And you never got defensive, and you just forged ahead and did what was necessary to make this appropriate so there'd be no bad optics. And that was the right thing to do.”

The meeting concluded with a motion to adjourn by Killian, seconded by Tierney; the committee adjourned by unanimous vote.

Votes at a glance - Approval of June minutes — Motion by Killian; seconded by Martins; outcome: approved unanimously (individual vote counts not recorded in the transcript). - Revision to employee handbook policy 4.03 (replace maintenance-specific reference with Community Development Authority) — Motion by Tierney; seconded by Martins; outcome: approved unanimously. - Addition to employee handbook policy 3.04 (HR director carve-out requiring second, nonbiased oversight when HR director could influence compensation/promotions) — Motion by Killian; seconded by Martins; outcome: approved unanimously.

What happened next: The committee adjourned after approving the items listed above. No follow-up tasks, effective dates, budget implications, or implementation assignments were specified in the meeting record.