A series of payroll and timekeeping changes at the Department of Public Safety have frustrated many student guards, most of whom said they believe DPS has not acted openly and fairly in dealing with their complaints. Guards complain that the timesheet process recording their hours of work is inaccurate and flawed, the wage rates detailed in the Student Guard manual are not followed and that a confidentiality agreement effectively silences any complaints.
Some student guards blamed the timesheet procedure recently implemented by Student Guard Coordinator Sylvester Jones for payroll discrepancies. Under the old system, as a two-year veteran student guard explained, “Every guard had an individual timesheet, and each person was responsible for turning it in.” Now, however, each guard location has its own timesheet rather than individual guards maintaining their own.
Rovers, who temporarily relieve stationary guards for short breaks, are now responsible for picking up these timesheets from each location and delivering them to DPS. Additionally, a guard’s pay must now be calculated from multiple sheets, instead of tabulating payroll from one sheet. “Payroll under the old system took three to four hours per week and could be completed in less than half a day. Now it takes the new coordinator two days [Monday and Tuesday] to calculate payroll, with less accuracy and accountability,” a source at DPS who wished to remain anonymous said.
Despite complaints from student guards, Director of Public Safety William Tucker said the new changes will force accountability into the student guard program. “There was no accountability under the old system, and we are working to bring more structure to the program,” he said. Rovers are now required to punch a time card at the student guard office before their shift begins and after it ends, instead of filling out a timesheet by hand following their shifts.
Student guards maintain that they do not mind more structure, as long as they are paid and treated fairly. “I was shortchanged for six hours,” said one guard who wished to remain anonymous. Mary Nagle (COL ’05) said that for the most recent pay period, she was paid for 24 hours of work, despite having worked 31 hours. Equally upsetting, she said, is when “[coordinators at DPS] don’t respond to e-mails.” Another guard, who wished to remain anonymous, agreed, saying “DPS is very unresponsive to complaints.”
Tucker admitted that he is aware of several pending e-mails regarding pay discrepancies and said, “We’re moving to correct them. We’re going to pay them.”
Student guard Max Taves (SFS ’05) suggested that guards should be able to verify their hours. Under the old system, guards kept a carbon copy of the timesheet they turned into the student guard office. “I’m not sure how many hours I worked; the checks should include that info,” he said. Student guards also have claimed that they are not being paid by the salary guidelines detailed in the Student Guard Manual. The starting hourly wage for stationary guards, as outlined in the most recent manual, is $8. Pay is increased by 50 cents per hour after 29 weeks and again by the same amount after 43 weeks. The hourly rate for rovers is 50 cents more than stationary guards. Several veterans of the program have claimed that they have not received their raises following the requisite 29 or 43 weeks.
“I’ve worked here for over 45 weeks, and I’m still being paid $8 per hour,” one guard in Village C said. A rover in Darnall Hall said that she was also still receiving her wages based on an $8 per hour rate when, according to the manual’s pay scale, she should be receiving $9 per hour. When asked what recourse they have, one guard said, “[Sylvester Jones] has taken down my name, but I don’t know what he’s going to do.”
“We work a lot because we need the money,” one student guard said. She said she had not been paid for at least six hours of work. She also said that, in the past, she preferred to work weekends for the SafeRides program administered through DPS. Although it is not specifically outlined in the manual, she and other guards said that they used to be paid time and a half for working SafeRides on Thursday, Friday and Saturday nights, when demand for the free escort service increases dramatically.
That practice has also been curtailed, according to a student guard who has worked at the department for two years. In terms of the extra pay for weekend SafeRides shifts, “We could never find it put down in writing anywhere,” Jones said. The previous Student Guard Coordinator, Andrew Guillen, who held the position until May 2002, was unavailable for comment.
Tucker said that he had no knowledge of this practice, and suspects it was implemented without his authorization. “I’ve never heard of that,” he said. “That’s the first time I’ve heard that.”
The student guards have not heard any official statement from DPS explaining an alteration of the pay scale. “They change procedures and don’t tell us,” Nagle said. Tucker said he currently is investigating the pay scale, as he said he believes the pay and benefits that have been published for the last year were implemented without his authorization. As director, Tucker controls the department’s budget. Tucker gave no timeline as to when the department would complete its investigation or release a new pay scale and student guards said they had no knowledge of an investigation.
Several student guards said that a new confidentiality agreement as well as the confusion over payroll has severely lowered morale in the guard program. Over the last several weeks, guards have signed confidentiality agreements that prohibit them from talking to sources outside the department. Based on what was said at a recent staff meeting, one guard said he believed “anyone who tries to rock the boat would be fired.” Nagle also expressed frustration with the department. “When we ask logical questions, they argue with us . [but] we’re not trying to cause trouble.”
Almost every guard who talked to The Hoya wished to remain anonymous in this article for fear of losing their jobs. Tucker insisted that the confidentiality agreement is routine and professional. “We are a police department here,” he said, “with sensitive information.”
One student guard, however, questioned the need for confidentiality. “We’re just student guards. We just check I.D.s,” he said. Beyond the confidentiality agreement, at least three guards said they felt there were unwritten rules that prevented them from publicly addressing even minor issues such as payment or inefficiency within the department.
Tucker encouraged student guards with pay discrepancies to speak with him. “Have them come to me,” he said. “They are welcome to come in . no one is going to be fired.”
