Why Complaining About Town Staff to Council Doesn’t Actually Fix the Problem

Every municipality—no matter its size—runs on a simple structure: Council sets the direction, and administration carries it out. When those roles stay clear, the community gets steady, reliable service. But when the lines blur, things get messy fast.

Here’s a situation that happens in almost every town.

A resident walks into the municipal office feeling frustrated. Maybe a bylaw ticket felt unfair. Maybe a service took longer than expected. Maybe a conversation with a staff member didn’t go well. Instead of speaking with the CAO or the staff member’s supervisor, the resident goes straight to a councillor. It makes sense on the surface—councillors are elected, visible, and easy to approach. Many people assume Council oversees every detail of municipal operations.

But here’s the part most people don’t realize: taking staff complaints to Council doesn’t fix the issue. In fact, it often makes things harder to resolve.

Council’s job is to set policy, not manage employees. Council decides what services the municipality provides, what the budget priorities are, and what policies guide the organization. But Council does not supervise staff. That responsibility belongs to the CAO, who is the only employee Council directly oversees. When residents ask Council to step into staff matters, they’re asking elected officials to take on a role they’re not meant to play. That leads to confusion, mixed messages, and even legal problems.

Staff also deserve a workplace free from political pressure. Imagine trying to do your job knowing that any interaction with the public might end up in front of elected officials. That’s not fair to staff, and it doesn’t help the community. When complaints go directly to Council, staff feel undermined, the CAO’s authority is weakened, and decisions can start to look political instead of professional. Municipalities function best when staff can do their work without worrying about political influence.

Municipal government is built on a clear structure: Council governs, the CAO manages, and staff deliver services. Staff need to make decisions based on bylaws, policy, safety, and professional standards—not on who complained to a councillor. When councillors start directing staff or weighing in on HR matters, staff may feel pressured to treat residents differently depending on who they know, change decisions to avoid upsetting elected officials, or worry that their job depends on politics rather than performance. That’s political interference, and it shifts with every election. When Council manages staff, decisions can become tied to personal relationships or political considerations, which is not a stable or ethical way to run a community.

There’s also a legal reality many people don’t know.  In Manitoba, Council has only one employee—the CAO. Everyone else reports to the CAO, not to Council. If councillors start telling staff what to do, approving or denying leaves, disciplining employees, interpreting HR policies, or investigating staff complaints, they are acting outside their legal role. That’s political interference because elected officials are inserting themselves into operational decisions, they have no authority to make.

Here’s the heart of it: bringing staff complaints to Council doesn’t solve the problem. It creates new ones. Council isn’t allowed to manage staff. Staff deserve a workplace free from politics. And the CAO is the person with the authority and responsibility to address staff concerns properly.

If something goes wrong, the CAO is the right person to contact. They can investigate the issue, follow the proper process, and make sure it’s handled fairly. A well‑run municipality depends on clear roles, respectful communication, and a structure that protects both staff and residents. When we follow that structure, the community gets better service and a more stable local government.