The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink AboutCity Council Committees - Civil Services Commission - 06/22/1989 MEMORANDUM JUNE 22, 1989 TO: CIVIL SERVICE COMMISSION FROM: JED ALDRIDGE, ASSISTANT CHIEF KENT FIRE DEPARTMENT SUBJECT: SUCCESSFUL PASSAGE OF FIRST CLASS TEST ----------------------------------------------------------------- Please be advised that Ron Sweigard has successfully passed his First Class Exam with a passing grade. This promotion is effective on June 16, 1989 . cc: B/C Weatherill personnel file payroll Local Union 1747 KENT POLICE DEPARTMENT UNITED STEELWORKERS OF AMERICA,AFL-CIO-CLC LOCAL UNION 1088 P.O. BOX 1549 KENT, WASHINGTON 98032 (2W 859-3315 June 22 , 1989 Mr. Bob JARVIS, Chariman Kent Civil Service Commission 220 South 4th Avenue Kent, Washington 98032 Dear Mr. JARVIS, On June 15, at the monthly Kent Civil Service Commission meeting, a written proposal to adopt specific rule changes that largely affect members of the Kent Police Department and Kent Police Union was made by Mr. Stephen DIJULIO, attorney hired by the City to accomplish this task. The purpose of • this letter is to address those proposed changes, and offer input, in an effort to assist the Civil Service Commission in adopting new, fair, and consistent rules. This letter is drafted pursuant to a memo published by Candi FAUPELL, requesting that any comments regarding these rules be forwarded to the commission prior to the morning of June 27 . Upon review of the proposed rules by the Kent Police Union, feelings of dissappointment and general inadequateness prevailed. We feel that Mr. DIJULIO certainly has the resources available to him that would assist him in drafting stronger, fairer, and more complete rules, but for reasons unknown to us he failed to do so. The rules presented are clearly slanted to circumvent the purpose and process of the Civil Service Commission, and will inevitably foster and encourage poor management practice in handling personnel matters. The following are outlines of proposed rule changes that we would encourage the Civil Service Commission to review, amend, and return to Mr. DIJULIO for additional development. We will outline those rules that we view as deficient, supply input into our rationale, and recommend changes that we feel add consistency and fairness to those affected rules. • PROPOSED RULE CHANGE: Rule 3 . 1 Section I- SUPERVISORY POSITION". . .and such other positions as are from time to time designed as supervisory positions by the commission. " RECOMMENDED CHANGE: Include in addition to the proposed language " . . . .means a Sergeant, Records Shift Supervisor, or higher in the Police Department. . . . . . . . " RATIONALE: Records Shift Supervisor should be included in the listings of specific supervisors for at the present time they are not identified as Sergeants, but are identified and copensated as supervisors. This will hopefully assist in alleviating any potential ambiguity during future promotional examinations for this position. PROPOSED RULE CHANGE: Rule 3.2 Sections 4 and 5 QUALIFICATIONS FOR POLICE (CLERK) PERSONNEL: " . .Qualifications for police personnel, other than law enforcement officers and corrections officers shall be those qualifications set forth in current classification specifications maintained by the Personnel Department. " " . . . .Qualifications for Correction Officers shall be those qualifications set forth in current classification specifications maintained by the Personnel Department. " RECOMMENDED RULE CHANGE: We feel the same diligence should be extended when defining the qualifications necessary for the positions of Records Specialist, Records Supervisor, Records Manager, Corrections Officer, Corrections Sergeant, • and Corrections Lieutenant, as has been extended to all other positions currently covered by the Civil Service Commission. RATIONALE: These proposed rule changes offered by Mr. DIJULIO are probably the most blatant example of an effort to circumvent the Commission, than any other rule change proposed. Without question the Civil Service commission should at all time control the qualifications necessary for positions under its control and authority, and not the City Personnel Department. As proposed the Personnel department can change and/or alter and qualification to suit city managements need . . .without ever consulting with the Commission. With rules as liquid as these qualifications, there is no check or balance of proper management practices, therefore defeating the purpose of the Civil Service Commission. PROPOSED RULE CHANGE: Rule 3 .3 Section I "PROCEDURE" "The amendment shall be in effect thirty (30) days after day of adoption and shall be (mimeographed) made available for public distribution. " RECOMMENDED RULE CHANGE: "The amendment shall be in effect thirty (30) days after day of adoption, and shall be forwarded to each department and conspicuously posted in the work areas of those affected personnel. " • RATIONALE: By merely "making available for public distribution" amended rule changes, the commission risks the chance of some "affected" personnel never becoming aware of the change thereby creating possible inherent jeopardy for that employee. By posting the rule changes in work, areas of affected employees, it removes the likelihood of a person being unaware and will promote compliance and knowledge of the rule. PROPOSED RULE CHANGE: RULE 3 .3 SECTION 2 "EMERGENCY ADOPTION" **Entire Section** RECOMMENDED RULE CHANGE: Strike Entire Section RATIONALE: The Police Union has serious concerns over this proposed rule change. Upon initial review we are questioning the motive of Mr. DIJULIO in drafting this rule, when it is obvious that Section i of this rule adequately covers adoption of all rules. If he is attempting to accommodate the police and fire chiefs during times of staffing: emergencies, then clearly this concern is accommodated under the "PROVISIONAL APPOINTMENT" rules set forth in section 4 . 1 of existing rules. Civil Service Rules that affect such a large number of people should not be adopted in a "rush" . We feel that if a true emergency exists, a special meeting can be requested by the chiefs and the emergency outlined to the Commission. By adopting any rule in the manner • described in this section promotes poor management and erodes any integrity and good faith established by the commission. We feel that the procedure for adopting new rules, currently in place, is fair and complete. Rule changes should not be taken lightly and considered in expediency, without soliciting input from all parties affected. We would therefore encourage you to strike this entire "Emergency Adoption" section, and promote any new rule adoption under criteria already set forth in the current Civil Service Rules and Regulations. One other area of concern by the Kent Police Union is the manner in which correspondence between Mr. DIJULIO and the commission is handled. It is our feeling that any correspondence, either generated by Mr. DIJULIO or the commission, between each other should be channeled via the Civil Service Secretary. Clearly, the commission is not an arm of City Management, and by involving parties associated with management certainly taints the integrity and intent of related correspondence. We are confident that you will consider the ramifications associated with our proposal, and promote a much more sanitary line of communication. In conclusion, we hope that the suggestions offerediin this letter are helpful in future development of rules and • regulations that will affect the careers of all employees of the Kent Police Department, and the Kent Police Union. We are encouraged by efforts made by the commission to date, including the postponement of review of these very rules, until all parties affected could adequately review and comment on them. We trust that the Commission willinot be overcome by the alleged "expediency" needed to adopt these rules at present, and will take the necessary time to fairly and thoroughly review the changes that will inevitably impact all employees of the Kent Police Department. If any other correspondence is requested, please don't hesitate to contact either myself or any other representative of the Kent Police Unions Executive Board. Representatives of the Kent Police Union will be in attendance at the Civil Service Meeting Scheduled for June 28, 1989. Since ly, tic ael S. AINTER, President Kent Police Union, Local 1088 USWA CC: Mr. Rob DREBLOW, Commission Member Mr. Alex THORNTON, Commission Member • i • PUBLIC NOTICE A SPECIAL MEETING OF THE KENT CIVIL SERVICE COMMISSION IS SCHEDULED FOR WEDNESDAY, JUNE 28, 1988, AT 8: 00 A.M. IN THE SECOND FLOOR CONFERENCE ROOM OF KENT CITY HALL, 220 4TH AVENUE SOUTH, KENT. THE MEETING IS SCHEDULED FOR THE PURPOSE OF AMENDING THE RULES AND REGULATIONS PERTAINING TO EXTENDING CIVIL SERVICE COVERAGE AND EMERGENCY RULE ADOPTION PROCEDURES. CIVIL SERVICE COMMISSION • Candi L. Faupell Secretary and Chief Examiner