Polk County commissioners review personnel-rule updates tied to Oregon leave laws; bereavement leave expanded

Polk County staff on Tuesday told the Board of Commissioners that personnel rules must be updated to reflect recent changes in Oregon’s paid-leave and family-leave statutes, including a broader definition of “family member” and an allowance for longer bereavement leave.

“Today is a time set for a meeting that we need to hold before adopting the new personnel rules,” said Mr. Hawkins, addressing the commissioners. Hawkins said most changes relate to protected leave required by law after recent changes to Paid Leave Oregon and the Oregon Family Leave Act. “The majority of the changes that you'll see in the personnel rules are around protected leave, that's required under the law,” he said.

The board was told the county circulated draft rule changes to department heads, unions and supervisors and received little feedback. Hawkins said the changes are being brought to a public meeting because the county must hold such a meeting before ratifying the updated rules; he told the board the ratification is scheduled to appear on the consent calendar at the board meeting next Wednesday.

Hawkins read the state’s OFLA family-member definition into the record: “spouse or domestic partner, child, parent, sibling, grandparent, grandchild, or an individual related by blood or affinity who has a close association with the employee considered equivalent to a family relationship.”

He also described a recent change to bereavement leave: “It is up to 4 weeks per death.” Hawkins clarified that the four-week allowance is measured within a 12-month period and staff referred to it as a rolling 12-month period in the discussion.

Hawkins explained that OFLA provides job protection but not guaranteed wage replacement: “OFLA gives them job protection, not paid leave. They would still be using… it does allow them to use sick leave for the death of a family member.” He added employees may also use vacation or paid leave banks, and that some union contracts include paid bereavement leave (three days) that has not changed.

Commissioners asked for clarification about the family-member definition and how many times bereavement leave may be taken in a year. Hawkins read the state definition to the board and reiterated the policy’s interaction with employee leave banks and existing union contract provisions.

Commissioner Gordon McGahn (referenced during the meeting) requested that elected officials also be asked to sign an acknowledgment that they have received the personnel rules. Hawkins said the signature requested of employees is an acknowledgment of receipt and the county keeps records of employees’ acknowledgments when rules are changed. Some commissioners said they did not believe elected officials historically signed those acknowledgments and expressed reluctance to do so personally; no formal action to require signatures from elected officials was taken during the meeting.

Separately during general announcements, staff reminded the board that a resolution to advance a fairgrounds operating levy would appear in regular session the next day. Staff outlined next steps as staff would provide required information to the county clerk for publication, there would be a period for objections and the county would then take follow-on steps to place the measure on the ballot if allowed to proceed.

Public comment at the start of the meeting included a lengthy allegation from a resident, Albert Greenway, who accused the district attorney’s office and the police department of wrongdoing in a matter that led to his arrest; Greenway said charges were later dismissed. Those remarks were presented as his allegation and were not followed by further board action during the meeting.

Votes at a glance: the board approved the meeting agenda and approved the minutes of the Jan. 14 meeting by voice vote during the session. The personnel-rule changes were presented for the required public meeting and were scheduled for ratification on the consent calendar at the board’s next meeting; no final vote on the rules occurred on Jan. 21.

The board meeting continued with routine business after the personnel-rule discussion; staff will bring the finalized personnel rules back for formal ratification on the consent calendar next Wednesday.