Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutCity Council Committees - Civil Services Commission - 12/15/1994CITY OF KENT • CIVIL SERVICE COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES Thursday, December 15, 1994 Members Present: Michael Pattison Ron Banister Callius Zaratkiewicz Others Present: Sgt. Lutz, Officer Thomas, Sgt Weissich, Debra Leroy, Lt. Shepard, Sgt Stone, Sgt Knapp, Chief Crawford, Chief Angelo, A/C Aldridge, Lt Cline, Sue Viseth, others present. Chair Pattison called the meeting to order at 8:07 a.m. COMMISSION BUSINESS: REPORTS City Attorney, Roger Lubovich- No report. Fire Chief, Norm Angelo- No report. Police Chief, Ed Crawford- No report. • Human Resource Director, Sue Viseth- Pleased to announce that a settlement has been reached with the Police Management Union, the first contract for Captains and Lieutenants. Settled the 1994/95 contract. Ratified by Council December 13, 1994. In addition have also settled a wage and benefit reopener with the Firefighters for 1994 and an extension of that contract for 1995. Also settled an Unfair Labor Practice with the Fire Department for Firefighters and the Assistant Chief. Hiring of a Battalion Chief is part of that resolution. III. HEARINGS None IV. OLD BUSINESS A. Accept into Record Chair Pattison motioned to approve the Minutes from the November 17, 1994 Civil Service Commission Meeting. Seconded and carried. B. Action Items for Discussion Chair Pattison opened for discussion the proposed Resolution for an amendment to Rule XVI Section 4, relating to reinstatement following resignation. City Attorney Lubovich stated that this was a continuation from the last meeting.. Civil Service Minutes . December 15, 1994 Page 2 Lt. Cline stated that he would still like to have consideration regards to the individual who returns requesting reinstatement is not able to find a position equal to the rank they left at that consideration be equally looked at to allow them into the lower rank to which they would qualify. Chief Angelo stated that he had no opposition to that: " but the change that we proposed to the rule would basically clarify the area about what would happen to the person who went on the list say the last part of the year and the list was ready to die. How do you continue that? What therefore is the difference between reinstatement and continuing on the list as relating to the continuation of their seniority? Those are the areas we tried to clarify and I think that what we proposed basically clarifies that and does not change anything else about the rule. I think what Lt. Cline is talking about is something additional, and thats fine. One of the questions that came back to us after we heard that question is: "Okay now I come back as a Battalion Chief in the Fire Department, there are no openings. I go back down to a lower level. Have I tested for that Lieutenant's test before? Do I go back down to the Entry Level? If I go back to that level Civil Service Rules state that if I held a permanent position I could be eligible for the next vacancy that came up. So if I tested for Battalion Chief does that person go to the top of the list without testing?" I think that there are a multitude of questions. I think that it might be worthwhile to separate the issues and then deal with some of those complexities and then go back and do the Rule Change at that time." • C/A Lubovich: "The only question I had on top of that is the Seniority aspect. Seniority Benefits or Rights. I don't know if that has to be clarified or if there is a problem with that also." Chief Angelo: "In what way?' C/A Lubovich: "Can there be some confusion in different positions if you are taking a lower position, what that would do to your seniority rights." Chief Angelo: "I don't know what the answer is. I can envision somebody grieving it." Sergeant Weissich for the Police Guild: "We oppose the idea of somebody resigning and in other words waiving all their employment rights, leaving service and being placed back in the position from which they left. We have no objections to return at an entry level but we do have an objection to coming back to the last position held." Chair Pattison: "I tend to agree with you on that. Thats where I'm leaning. I haven't really made up my mind to be perfectly honest." Commissioner Banister asked if there was anything in the revision referring to 'cause for leaving'? Commissioner Zaratkiewicz stated that the only thing he could rind was if they went off for specialized training or a program. 0 • Civil Service Minutes December 15, 1994 Page 3 Commissioner Banister: "But to take a year off to go play and then come back and go into the same position, I don't see that." Commissioner Zaratkiewicz: "Well you're jeopardizing someones promotion is what you're doing." Commissioner Banister. "Because what you do is come back and take that position. Maybe that position is open when you get back. What happens to the guy who has been sitting there waiting for that promotion.?" Chair Pattison: "Has this been done elsewhere? Are we the first City? C/A Lubovich: "I don't know what other cities are doing, I'm assuming its not a very common practice. Maybe someone else might know?" Chief Angelo: "There are some instances. Chief Kerns is on the record. He is off on City related business or benefit to the Service on a Leave of Absence. We also have had people come back it is a matter of State Law. If you are a LEOFF I or II individual and you are on a disability and you overcome your disability you are allowed to come back to work and will then cascade down to whatever open slot is available. • Commissioner Banister. "I understand that Norm. My question is, and maybe I haven't untangled it out enough in this report. Those kind of things are very legitimate. But what happens to the guy who says 'Hey I want to take a year off and go play' and then come back and want his job back and want to be right back where he was, and that positions open and he gets it. But the guy who has been waiting in line for that position for God knows how long and has been a good worker and done what he's supposed to do loses the position to him." Chief Angelo: "I'm losing track here, are we talking about Entry Level or Promotional Level?" Commissioner Banister. "I'm talking about Promotional Level." Chief Angelo: "The only thing we addressed, and I have no dispute with what you're saying at all. The only thing that we addressed was the old rule which talks about coming back to your former position if there is a vacancy. From my perspective that is a concern. If we make it that they can only come back to Entry Level I would ask the Commission if they would address the subject of what that means. For instance let me use Brian Renner, if I can. If he were to come back in his former position as a First Class Firefighter. An entry position to me, is a person who comes in as a Probationary Firefighter and starts the JATC program. So whichever way the Commission goes we need for you to clarify it for us." C/A Lubovich: "So basically the Rule allows currently them to come back with approval on a vacant position and this is just adding to the eligibility list in the event that there is not a vacant position and reinstatement back on another list if the list expires. So if that is the change, in the event that there is not a vacant position." Chief Angelo stated that the current rule currently reflects that. • Civil Service Minutes December 15, 1994 Page 4 Chief Angelo: "I think that it is important for the Chiefs to take a look at it and say' Where are the advantages to the Service on the Entry Level', which is where I'm looking. That is the investment that has been done in training, the ability for productive use, and then last cost. They have to be evaluated." C/A Lubovich: "There is a resolution presented for your action, you either need to move to approve it or defer it or talk about it or whatever instructions that you want or reject it." Commissioner Zaratkiewicz: "I think that we should defer it until we can get more clarification as far as people leaving on their own accord, such as 'Fun at the Beach', or whatever, or we should reject it until that part is cleared up." Chair Pattison: "We could just reject it and have them come back to us with something that is clear to us." C/A Lubovich: "You might want to give some directions to what it is you're asking them to come back with. There are a couple of issues that have been presented here." Commissioner Banister: "I think that there are too many places that have been left unfinished right now. Table it. Clarification is what I'd like" • I make a motion that we table it and ask for more clarification on the items that are left open- ended. C/A Lubovich: "Can I ask for clarification on that as to what specifically concems the Commission has so that staff, Union, Police and Fire Departments can respond to specifically. What issues we should be talking about. Chief Angelo stated that when the Fire Department initially looked at the rule they were thinking specifically Entry Level. He stated it might be best for the Commission to reject it for now and have Fire and Police come back with another proposal. Commissioner Banister: "I motion that we reject the proposal as written and ask that they be rewritten." Chair Pattison: "All those in favor say Aye. (All Commissioners voted Aye). Motion passes." V. NEW BUSINESS A. Approval and Accept into Record Chair Pattison motioned to approve and accept into Record the position descriptions for all Represented Police Support Staff to be approved and accepted into the record. Seconded and carried. • Civil Service Minutes December 15, 1994 Page 5 Chair Pattison motioned to approve and accept into record the memo dated November 22, 1994 from Corrections Lieutenant George Burke to Captain C.E. Miller notifying the department of his retirement, effective January 1, 1995. Seconded and carried. Chair Pattison motioned to approve and accept into record the letter dated November 28, 1994 from Chief Crawford to Young Woo Lee confirming his appointment as a probationary Police Officer effective December 1, 1994. Seconded and carried. Chair Pattison motioned to approve and accept into record the certification letter dated December 13, 1994 from the Secretary and Chief Examiner establishing the Fire Departments Entry Level Firefighters Eligibility List. The list will come into effect on December 24, 1994. The current list will expire on December 23, 1994. Seconded and carried. Chair Pattison motioned to accept into record the letter dated December 12, 1994 from the Chief Examiner to Mr. Brian R. Renner notifying him that his reinstatement request will go before the Commission at the December 15, 1994 meeting. Seconded and carried. B. Action Items for Discussion Chair Pattison opened for discussion the memo dated November 17, 1994 from Lt. Cline requesting a Rules Change to the current "Rule of Three" (Rule XII) , and giving his comments • regarding the reinstatement proposal. Lieutenant Cline stated that the reinstatement proposal had already been addressed. What the Police Department is asking for is that for Police Entry Level and Lateral Entry Level that the rule of three be amended for Police Department Entry to be a rule of three or 25% whichever is the greater for the hiring list that is certified by Civil Service. Chair Pattison: "How come you want to do that?" Lt. Cline: "We're looking at a potential Annexation coming up. We haven't done a Lateral Testing for a long time, this will give us a better opportunity if we have a large list to go down and get the best candidates for the position." Lt. Tom Shepard, Firefighters Union: "I'm wondering what the difficulty is with the testing process that the top candidates would not come out on top and why we would have to go down 25%. " Lt. Cline: "Sometimes part of the problem is that we have people on the list that we cannot outright disqualify and they end up sitting on the list. Civil Service does not have an option in their rules to after passing them over a certain number of times, removing them from the list. This would allow us more opportunity to have more names to chose from." Lt. Shepard: "Doesn't that circumvent the intent of Civil Service of 'Fair Process'? If they can't • be removed for cause, and they finish that high on the list, then probably they should be hired." Civil Service Minutes December 15, 1994 Page 6 Lt. Cline: "Not necessarily. I think there are things that do not necessarily disqualify a person but it may not be appropriate to hire them. I don't think that there is anything magical about the rule of three. Other Agencies have Rules of 5 or Rules of List. I think that a little latitude in the testing and hiring process would be good for us." Lt. Shepard: "I have one last question. Would that be used to pick up more minorities if you're allowed to go deeper on the list?" Examiner Guiguet: "I'd like to address that from the statistics I've compiled. We lose most of our minorities at the written portion of our selection process. My answer would be no." Chair Pattison asked for any other discussion. City Attorney Lubovich stated that the resolution affects only the Police Department and Entry Level and Lateral testings and not promotional. Rule of three is a common rule. Most Cities use it. Follows State Mandate. With the annexation coming up the Police Department will be looking at a lot of Laterals and Entry Level positions coming in. Chair Pattison motioned to pass the rule change and adopt it. Seconded and carried Chair Pattison opened for discussion the letter dated November 22, 1994 from Brian R. Renner • requesting reinstatement into the Kent Fire Department under Rule XVI, Section 4.1 and Section 4.1.1. Chief Angelo stated that the Fire Department would be creating a Battalion Chiefs position. They have the authority to backfill the vacancy created by the promotion. The Lieutenant will be promoted to BIC, a firefighter will be promoted to Lt. and there will be a Firefighter hired to replace that person promoted to Lt. There is a vacancy. Vacancy will be available in March. Additionally, he proposed that for the position there be a years probation period and second that there would be a method by which the Department could evaluate Mr. Renners readiness to return to shift. Evaluation to be decided on by the Fire Department. He then justified why Mr. Renner should be given the vacant firefighter position and what the conditions should be. Chair Pattison asked what the conditions would be? Chief Angelo stated one years probation and satisfactorily meeting department review of his readiness to return to shift. Chair Pattison asked if the department would prepare a letter of stipulations. The Examiner stated that the department usually does so. Chief Angelo stated that he mentioned it to the Commission as a point of record and if the Commission approves the reinstatement a letter would be prepared reinstating Mr. Renner for March 16, 1995. 0 Civil Service Minutes December 15, 1994 Page 7 Commissioner Banister motioned that Mr. Brian Renner be reinstated as requested with the stipulations as stated by Chief Angelo of one years probation, effective March 16, 1995 and that retraining be carried out by the department. Seconded and carried. Chair Pattison opened for discussion the memo dated December 1, 1994 from Lt. Cline to the Commission requesting: a. Approval for a Corrections Lieutenant's Promotional Examination: Lt. Cline requested that it be a two part test. The first portion to be a take home test and the second an Oral Board. Must have a 70% pass to proceed on in the process. Weightings Written portion 40% Oral Board 60% b. Approval for a Corrections Sergeants Promotional Examination: Lt. Cline requested that it be a two part test. The first portion a written examination and the second portion an oral board. Weightings Written portion 40% is Oral Board 60% Civil Service Examiner Guiguet asked the Commission for clarification regarding the definition of a Corrections Facility in order to facilitate screening of candidates. After much discussion it was decided to follow past history with regard to screening the candidates. Sergeant Stone questioned why there was to be no Assessment Center for the Sergeants Exam. Chief Crawford responded that it was because he wanted the process this way. c. Approval for an entry level examination for Police Records Specialist: Lt. Cline stated that the testing process for Police Records Specialist would be the same as previous years. Lt Cline asked that item d, the request for a Rule XII Rules Revision to reflect a Rule of 5 or 25% be deleted as it was already addressed and item e, request for revision to Rule XVI include the ability to be rehired at a lower rank if there are no openings at the rank last held prior to leaving service, be deleted as it had also been addressed. Chair Pattison moved to approve the memo dated December 1, 1994 from Lt. Cline to the Commission encompassing parts a, b and c and deleting d and e. Seconded and carried. Chair Pattison moved to incorporate Lt. Clines suggestions regarding the testing procedure. Seconded and carried. LI Civil Service Minutes December 15, 1994 Page 8 Chair Pattison opened for discussion the memo dated December 2, 1994 from Lt. Cline requesting a Revision to Rule VI Section 2.1, that the college requirement for Lateral Entry Police Officer be deleted. Sergeant Weissich from the Police Guild stated that they had no opposition to the proposal. Lt. Cline stated that the Entry Level position does not require college. The department would like to carry that over to the Lateral position. Lt. Cline felt that if the college requirement was dropped there would be a larger pool of qualified candidates. Commissioner Banister moved that it be accepted into record. Seconded and carried. Chair Pattison opened for discussion the memo dated December 5, 1994 from Fire Chief Angelo requesting authorization to conduct a Battalion Chiefs and a Lieutenants test in the first half of 1995. Chief Angelo stated that the department would be making a Provisional appointment in both Battalion Chief and Lieutenants rank probably around February. Planned to tentatively set up the Battalion Chiefs Promotional Examination in March and the Lieutenants in April. Will work with the Examiners schedule. Both promotionals will be formatted as they have been in the past. He then Thanked the Examiner for her help in the recent testing. Commissioner Banister moved that the memo be accepted into record. Seconded and carried. Chair Pattison opened for discussion the memo dated December 5, 1994 from Lt. Cline requesting approval for an Entry Level examination for Police Data Entry Specialist. There being no discussion, Commissioner Banister moved to accept the memo into record. Seconded and carried. City Attorney Lubovich suggested that the Resolution changing Rule VI to reflect the deletion of the College requirement for Lateral Entry Police Officer be entered at the time of the next Civil Service Meeting. There being no other business to come before the Commission the meeting was adjourned at 8:57 a.m. 0 ` Civil Service Minutes December 15, 1994 Page 9 The next Civil Service Meeting will be held on Thursday, January 19, 1995 at 5:00 a.m. in Council Chambers West. Approved Mike Pattison, Chair .10 _0 Respectfully Submitted, M \� Catherine M. Guiguet Secretary & Chief Examiner