Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutCity Council Committees - Civil Services Commission - 11/16/1995 CITY OF KENT CIVIL SERVICE COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES November 16, 1995 Members Present: Mike Pattison Ron Banister Callius Zaratkiewicz Others Present: Chief Crawford, Chief Angelo, Captain C.E. Miller, Lt Shepard, Dave Santos, B/C Scott, Acting A/C Robertson, Mary Ann Kern, Debra Leroy, Lt Cline, Captain Jim Miller, others present. Chair Pattison called the meeting to order at 8:00 a.m. I. COMMISSION BUSINESS: II. HEARINGS III. OLD BUSINESS A. Accept into Record 1. Chair Pattison moved to approve and accept into record the minutes from the October 24, 1995 Civil Service Commission Meeting. Seconded and carried. • 2. Chair Pattison moved to accept into record the letter dated September 29,1995 to Mr. David A. Toney removing him from the Entry Level Police Officers Eligibility List due to failure of the background portion of the selection process. Seconded and carried. IV. NEW BUSINESS A. Approval and Accept into Record 1. Chair Pattison moved to approve and accept into record letters dated October 26, 1995 from Chief Crawford to Mr. Ronald C. Rasmussen, Mr. Greg W. Duffin and Mr. Robert A. Constant confirming their appointment as Probationary Police Officers effective December 1, 1995. Seconded and carried. 2. Chair Pattison moved to approve and accept into record memo dated October 26, 1995 from Lt. Cline clarifying that the order of hire for the three probationary police officers is Rasmussen, Duffin and then Constant. Seconded and carried. 3. Chair Pattison moved to approve and accept into record the memo dated October 31, 1995 from Chief Crawford announcing the selection of Debra Leroy to the position of Records Supervisor. Seconded and carried. Page 2 November 16, 1995 Civil Service Minutes 4. Chair Pattison moved to approve and accept into record the letter dated November 8, 1995 from the Civil Service Examiner to Russell S. Osterhout acknowledging that he has accepted employment with Thurston County Sherrifs Department and notifying him of his removal from the Entry Level Police Officers Eligibility List. Seconded and carried. V. Action Items for Discussion 1. Chair Pattison opened for discussion the Certification letter dated October 26, 1995 from the Civil Service Examiner establishing the Eligibility List for the position of Police Records Supervisor for the Police Department. The Chief Examiner said that City Attorney Lubovich had stated that it need to be under this particular section. There being no other input for discussion regarding this list Commissioner Banister motioned to accept it into record. Seconded and carried. 2. Chair Pattison opened for discussion Resolution No. 8 regarding Rule XII, APPOINTMENT PROCEDURE. He also stated that the Commission had received two letters regarding this. One dated October 18, 1995 to the Commission from Attorney Steve Dijulio regarding Certification for Special Needs, and the other letter received November 6, 1995 from the Kent Police Guild regarding the proposed change to Rule XII. Captain C. E. Miller stated that the Resolution had an additional proposed change made because the first one did not fully address the needs of the Corrections Facility. This was done after the Commissioners had received the first Resolution Chair Pattison asked if the Resolution was different from what they had in their packet. City Attorney Lubovich: "I'll explain it. Changes on Section 1.5 page 2 is highlighted, it is the new language that has been substituted. The sentence originally stated 'For purposes of this provision, a gender specific appointment requirement shall occur when an appointment of a female corrections officer is necessary to ensure that all shifts at the Corrections Facility consist of one female corrections officer per shift.' The language was changed to read 'for purposes of this provision, a gender specific appointment requirement shall occur when an appointment of a female corrections officer is necessary to ensure a minimum of three corrections officers per squad unless special circumstances as approved by the Civil Service Commission require otherwise.' The issue was really the coverage of female corrections officers at the facility and the way it was originally worded apparently did not provide enough coverage and I'll let Captain Miller speak to the changes." Page 3 November 16, 1995 Civil Service Minutes Captain Miller: "With the original proposal it was allowed that there be one female officer per shift. If she were to take a holiday or a vacation day or comp day, sick day or any other form of leave other than her regular day off, I would not have any coverage as far as a female officer. This then puts me in jeopardy of going against Jordan versus Gardener which is the Federal Rule saying that only female corrections officers may search female prisoners. It also doesn't address things like female officers being in training or any other time they might be away. That special provisio at the end is that I might need to come to you for the ability to hire somebody on a temporary basis for a long term due to injury and/or medical reasons. I discussed this with John Pagel the Guild resident and he is not here today as he is out of town. John was in favor of the original resolution. He in essence is in favor of saying you can have nine female corrections officers, but he is not in favor of saying that I could have a minimum of three female officers per squad. I definitely need to be able to hire three female officers in order to comply with the intent of Jordan vs Gardener." Chair Pattison: "Intent?" Capt C.E. Miller: "there is also a side issue on it also. Their union contract says that they have the right to bid for their shifts and days off. Under the existing conditions, the first two female • officers whether its a line officer or a sergeant, once those first two bid all the rest of them just have to bid whats left over and they don't get to bid. Therefore, although there has been a decision that its not my fault that it violates the contract, therefore there is no problem. I don't think its fair to the female officers that have to take the leftovers because we can't comply with the bidding process. Those are the two issues, coverage and we have to comply with the Guild contract." Dave Santos: "Representing the Guild. I was not privileged to that particular conversation between John and the Captain. My understanding was that the Guilds position with regards to this is to not allow the administration to go beyond what is required under the Supreme Court Ruling. I believe that Administration has the ability to hire back vacation scenarios or sick leave scenarios whereby they can hire a female officer to comeback on an overtime basis. With regards to the shift bid, as long as I've been involved with the Guild, which has been a year, the Guild has never been formally approached that this is a problem. So we would not like this to be brought in as a justification carried further when we have never received any type of formal complaint that it was a problem to begin with. Basically that is the Guilds position as of right now." Chair Pattison: "So is the Guild against adoption of the Resolution in its entirety?" Dave Santos: "We're in favor of it as it is worded by Roger in the first draft." . Capt Miller: "If I might respond to that. It is correct, I could bring people in on overtime. But as a responsible manager of a Division I have to try to stay within the budget constraints and I can Page 4 November 16, 1995 Civil Service Minutes do that by not paying overtime and hiring at the proper levels or proper numbers, then thats in the best interests of the department and the city. As far as no formal complaints, he is correct. But there have been several informal complaints or inquiries made to John and myself in reference to this issue. The only reason that it has not been brought forward as a formal complaint is that a few years ago, Mary White brought that forward. It had been heard and the Guilds position at this time was that it was old." Chair Pattison: "Is there other discussion of this resolution?" Commissioner Banister: "I would ask you how often does it happen that you are without female personnel on duty at the time?" Capt Miller: "Right now the staff I have down there. They average thirteen days a year vacation. Multiply that by seven. They each have eleven holidays a year off. There is another seven times eleven thats 88 shifts. If I start multiplying this out there is a tremendous number of shifts." Commissioner Banister: "So you're definitely at minimum is what you're saying?" • Capt Miller: "I'm below minimum. Right now I am at minimum." C/A Lubovich: "Can we ask Captain Miller if there is another position that might satisfy both the Guild and his minimum needs?" Chair Pattison: "Okay?" Capt Miller: "Unfortunately without going to three members per squad I can't guarantee that I'll always have a female officer there. The Guild did indicate that they might be willing to go with the minimum number of nine females. But then again thats just another way of saying three per squad, as we have three squads. That was the only other alternative that John suggested to me." Chief Crawford: "In respect to the Guild, I don't understand the position of the Guild in terms of the damages to the Guild. I don't see it taking away from any employee. I don't see anyone excluded from the Guild. I don't see any issue here other than Management issues trying to staff the Correctional Facility with the appropriate gender ration that allows us to operate in an efficient and effective way. I there were anything that I could think of as I'm listening here today that would affect the Guild members in any way then I would absolutely say lets go back to the drawing board. But I see this as the Commanders responsibility to try to manage that facility in a way will sustain all the difficulties that we have nowadays and to jail operations. I certainly will go back to the table if there is anything I could see that would affect a Guild member. But what I see is nothing more than making sure that there is an appropriate ratio between men and women in the facility that by law is required to have that ratio and they are still all Guild members and no one will be treated in a disparate way." Page 5 November 16, 1995 Civil Service Minutes Capt Miller: "I might add one more comment. There is no intent to lay anyone off and hire female corrections officers to remedy the problem we have right now. The intent is as vacancies occur then we would implement this resolution." Commissioner Banister: (To Dave Santos) "Is there anything you can see from the Guild. It sounds like you haven't been involved with it as much as John has." Dave Santos: "Yes, that seems to be the problem. The comment made about 9 positions being okay by the Guild. I don't know in what realm that was figured out but I was always told that it was six. Six was the minimum to cover all shifts and have the people you require on days off. The figure nine, this is the first time I've heard of it so I'm at a disadvantage because I don't know exactly what John and Chuck had spoken on regards to this issue. My suggestion is that it be tabled for another month until Guild President Pagel is back and the Guild and the Administration can get together and maybe discuss this a little further. Obviously to me there is some kind of agreement that nine is a sufficient number. Under what criteria these nine people are going to work into this scenario I don't know so I would not be able to put in a suggestion one way or the other. " • Commissioner Banister: "Does that create a problem?" Capt Miller: "It might. We have an existing eligibility list of Corrections Officers and that may very well expire before the next meeting. If it does then we get into a process of not extending that list and going for another testing process. If this resolution isn't passed then I am going to be asking Roger to draft another resolution which allows us to have two different list. So we will be addressing this issue one way or the other. In the long run for the Citys preventatives of cost I'd like to be able to move forward on this issue." It was ascertained that the list could be extended but Captain Miller did not wish it extended unless he could hire from it to meet what he perceives as their needs. Chair Pattison: "Normally I would want to move forward but the reality is that we just got this new resolution for the first time this morning so I'm more inclined to table it and come back to it next month." Commissioner Banister: "Would it create a hardship? Is it something we can live with if we do?" Capt Miller: "I can live with whatever?" Chair Pattison: "I did notice that this case was 1992 and we've been fine for three years. Do we need a motion to table it?" C/A Lubovich: "Just move that it will be on the next Agenda, that both resolutions be brought forward on the same Agenda. You can do anything you want" Page 6 November 16, 1995 Civil Service Minutes Chair Pattison: "I would prefer if there was some agreement and we just brought forward one." C/A Lubovich: 'There are two resolutions here and we'll bring them both forward." Chair Pattison: "I would preferjust to see one if we could get some consensus and bring one forward that would be best for us." C/A Lubovich: "Alright, so my understanding is that if there is no consensus we'll bring them both forward. If there is a consensus we'll bring a new resolution forward?" Chair Pattison: "Yes, so moved." Seconded and carried. 3. Chair Pattison opened for discussion the memo dated October 31, 1995 from Captain Dave Everett notifying the Commission that Officer R.E. Miller was made a provisional sergeant effective October 15, 1995 to fill in for Sergeant Emerson who is off on Medical Leave with a tentative return date of January 1996. The Examiner stated that Officer Miller met the minimum requirements for filling the Sergeants position. There is no current Sergeants Eligibility List. . Commissioner Zaratkiewicz motioned to approve item three and place it into record. Seconded and carried. 4. Chair Pattison opened for discussion the memos dated November 7, 1995 from Lt. Cline and Captain C. E. Miller requesting permission to begin the selection process for Accounting Services Technician and to consider modifications to the testing process for this and the Word Processing Technicians selection process. Capt C.E. Miller: "I have asked for an opinion from Roger regarding the Accounting Services Technician in order to move it forward. Closed testing vs open testing for what most of us would consider a lateral move in the department not a promotional. Our Civil Service Rules don't address some of those issues so based upon the States intent, they talk about an open competitive exam. Based on that decision it depends on how we want to move forward or we request the Chief Examiner to move forward in the testing process." C/A Lubovich: "If I may I didn't have time to get back to Captain Miller but did respond to Catherine. I think that this could actually be a transfer under Rule XIV, transfers consist of changing an employee from one position to another position in the same or comparable rank. Then it goes on to suggest what a demotion and a promotion is...The Chief may at any time transfer an employee from one position to another within the same rank under his jurisdiction. It is my understanding that the Police Department may want to fill this slot from within and I don't know if there is interest from others or enough within, I'm not sure of the exact issue. If that is the issue I think that it may be done as an internal transfer because it is not a promotion or a demotion but a straight transfer. Page 7 November 16, 1995 Civil Service Minutes I may be incorrect on that but that is my understanding of it." Dave Santos: "I'd like to speak to that. I polled the bargaining units and at this point in time I do not have any interest in the Accounting Services Assistant position from in-house. I do not have anyone interested in applying for that position." H.R. Director, Sue Viseth: "If I may also speak to that. There is potentially interest in other departments throughout the city where this could potentially be a promotional opportunity for lower classified employees in that career field. I just wanted to bring your attention to the fact that it has been our intent whenever practical to open what could be perceived as a promotional opportunity to all the employees to give everyone an opportunity for transfers or promotions. I think this would be a good opportunity as well." Capt Miller: "If I may add to that. That is probably where the open-competitive exam comes in. When we have a promotional opportunity within the department it is closed within to members of the Department who are within that job classification, whether you're talking Record Specialist being promoted to Records Supervisor or someone who meets the qualifications within the department from another job category. Or, as in a promotion to Sergeant, Lieutenant and Captain, etc. When we don't have people to qualify, we open it up to the outside. What Sue is suggesting is that it be opened this much just to the City. My question to Roger is when it says 'make it an open competitive exam', do we have to open it up to everyone or can we restrict how far it is open? Our Rules do not address that. There is some language within the State Civil Service Rules that talk about open-competitive exams but again it requires somebody with a little more knowledge to interpret what the intent of that is." C/A Lubovich: "I haven't read that. I haven't responded to that question yet. I don't know if I have an answer to that yet." Chief Examiner Guiguet: "My understanding regarding the transfer issue is that we couldn't transfer someone from the City side that would pertain to the Classified Services. We would have to do an open exam." C/A Lubovich: "The question is can you open it just within the City? I suspect that you could but not having read the statute we probably could." Chief Examiner: "It has been done previously." C/A Lubovich: "I know that there is a question if you could do that and at the same time run a full blown open exam. I don't think you can do that. You can't have simultaneous types of open exams. So the question is whether or not it can be limited to the City employees. I suspect it could but I would have to verify that." Page 8 November 16, 1995 Civil Service Minutes Chief Crawford: "If I might make a suggestion. Now we're talking about getting clogged up. If there is any opportunity, because we really need this position. We need the supervisor to move into her supervisory position. We are going into a lot of other transition issues with annexation. If there is any opportunity at all to open the testing process to the employees of the City for this position I would certainly appreciate it. I don't understand how anyone can argue that it would have to be open to the world because people don't have a standing. Its up to you. Our position in this is that we are starting to get bogged down and can't move forward. I would certainly appreciate anything you can do." Commissioner Banister: "There should be no reason, Roger, why they can't do that, should there?" C/A Lubovich: "No, I can't think of any reason why they couldn't do it. I just haven't read it. " Commissioner Banister: "I would like to make a motion that we go ahead with the testing for the City employees." Commissioner Zaratkiewicz: "Seconded." • Chair Pattison: "Is the language on our Agenda sufficient to meet the Chiefs' request or does that speak to your motion properly?" Commissioner Banister: "I think that we should word it that it be open to City employees." C/A Lubovich: "The definitions don't really speak to it much. Closed exam means a promotional exam open only to qualified permanent employees of the department. Open exam means a promotional exam open to all applicants who meet the qualifications as stated by the Civil Service for the position. It doesn't say whether it is limited or not. I don't see why you couldn't declare it limited. I don't think the Statute is going to say you can't do that." Chief Angelo: "You may want to make it an open competitive examination inside unless there are not sufficient candidates and give the police the opportunity to have an open examination. Otherwise they would have to come back if they don't have enough applicants inside and have to request permission again." Commissioner Banister: "I make the motion that we open it to City employees as long as there are qualified people available. If they are not available then open it to general public application." C/A Lubovich: "What determines qualified or not? Do we get sufficient applicants?" Chief Examiners: "It would be the minimum qualifications that are set out in the position description for that particular position." Page 9 November 16, 1995 Civil Service Minutes C/A Lubovich: "So if we get one applicant who meets the minimum only in the inside exam is that satisfactory?" Chief Examiner: "In the past we have set the number at a minimum of three. That number was set simply because of the Rule of Three." C/A Lubovich: "That needs to be determined so that it is not confusing." Dave Santos: "If I understand what we are doing, are we covering both portions? The Word Processing position too? Is the wording that you are using now is going to apply to that position? With regards to that position I have at least two people right now who have expressed an interest." Chief Examiner: "No, we are talking about the Accounting Services Assistant position." Dave Santos: "Right, thats what I mean. I just wanted to clarify that we are separating the two positions out here." The Chief Examiner confirmed with the Commissioners that was their intent. • Commissioner Banister: "That is now the motion." C/A Lubovich: "That is also as we discussed, a minimum of three qualified applicants?" Commissioner Banister: "Yes." Chair Pattison: "There is a motion before us, it has been seconded. Those in favor say aye. (All Commissioners voted Aye) Motion carried. The next item is the Word Processing Technician Selection process. There is a request that there be modifications to the testing process. Is there any conversation specific to that at this point?" Chief Crawford: "I think that this is where were going to have another discussion. Mr. Santos just stated he believes there are two applicants who would like to apply for the Word Processing position within the Department. I think that as a failed type of testing system and my personal request is that we open it again to the City so that employees from the City can compete for that position. That doesn't mean that the person internally doesn't have an opportunity to take the position because the Chief still has the Rule of Three and that is what that Rule is for, to take someone that is performing well and is still in a position to take it say if they came out number three. • al Page 10 November 16, 1995 Civil Service Minutes By locking positions up like that what you are doing is excluding good applicants, one and two, by setting a standard say of three portions, you are getting people to apply that really, quite frankly are not going to take the position if they were selected. Just so they can fill the function of three. I can tell you where that has happened but I would like to think that we as a City, the argument on the other side is that on the civilian side of the Police Department people would like to have opportunities to either change jobs or promote up. I think we need to take a wider view of that. People on the civilian side of the Police Department should receive the same opportunities to promote up and to transfer City wide for their upward mobility as anyone else. Instead of blocking one agency up vis a vis the other agencies. The Police Officers are a different group they can only promote up through the police ranks. They can't transfer to other departments, people can't transfer in. On the civilian side of the house people can move to higher portions and move up the ladder on the merit system function. I would prefer that we start and not get locked into having to always promote or change jobs in house because it does cause us some difficulty." Dave Santos: "I am in agreement with the Chief with regards to having a qualified pool of people to choose from. I'm also in agreement with sometimes in the past where individuals have put in for tests to keep things in house. The question I have is primarily for Sue. Are there other Bargaining units in the city that keep their promotions closed. I've heard rumor that • ASFME does do that." Sue Viseth: "Not anymore. We were successful in negotiating that one out of the contract this time around. That contract involves our Finance personnel as well as administrative support staff throughout the city in a number of departments. We now will open all of those positions city wide so that every city employee has an opportunity to compete for those portions. It was a tough battle but we made the same argument the Chief was talking about. That we don't want to have a closed shop. We want employees on the civilian side to have the opportunity to transfer from the Police Department to another city department or from a city department into the Police Department. The only contract right now that does still have that language is the Teamster contract within the maintenance worker personnel." Dave Santos: "I'd like to say I'm going to make a Guild decision here but I am just going to voice my opinion and I think that it is probably the opinion of the rest of the Guild. In the past that has been the problem, is that the other bargaining units have not opened up those positions to other city or Police Department employees. If that is the case, then I perceive the Guild not having a problem with opening this type of testing city wide at this time." Commissioner Banister: "I make a motion that it be opened to city employees with the three qualified applicant minimum as required by the previous motion." Chief Angelo: "I need to ask something quite different, because then we start overlapping the uniformed service in other issues. It would seem to me that the department and the Chief Examiner get together and make sure that they set the minimum. It may be desired in certain situations to set a higher minimum. I don't believe that there is anything in the rules that says a minimum has to be three. I think that there is nothing wrong with the suggestion that the Page 11 November 16, 1995 Civil Service Minutes minimum be three or greater. Each department needs to evaluate that on different positions on the need of number of candidates necessary for testing." Commissioner Banister: "Well, I think we're saying just three on this one." C/A Lubovich: "Right". Commissioner Banister: "Its not a rule from here on forward, it is just for this position." C/A Lubovich: "For this exam it is established at three." Chief Angelo: "Thank you." Commissioner Banister: "And mainly because if there are two people within the department who would apply for the position right now you need to open to the city employees. I made the motion." Commissioner Zaratkiewicz: "seconded". Chair Pattison: "Those in favor of adoption say Aye. (All commissioners said aye) Carried." 5. Chair Pattison opened for discussion the memo dated November 9, 1995 from Chief Angelo informing the Commission of the Provisional appointment of Battalion Chief Dale Robertson to the rank of Assistant Chief, effective November 13, 1995 due to the upcoming disability leave of A/C Jed Aldridge. There was no discussion. Commissioner Zaratkiewicz: "Motion that it be approved into the record." Chair Pattison: "Those in favor of adoption say Aye. (All said aye) Motion carried. Is there any other business to come before the Commission? Lieutenant Cline: "On the last item regarding the Police Department. We might, after looking at this and seeing how it is going to be within a group of employees that are already a known commodity, that we might want to change some of the aspects of the testing that we normally do for entry level. We would like permission that we be able to work with Catherine if we see that there are some reasonable changes to the process, we might screen by them." Chief Examiner: "I think that with regards to minimizing numbers if we get large numbers in regards to going forward so that we don't have to have a large Oral Board or typing tests or any of the other areas of testing." Page 12 November 16, 1995 Civil Service Minutes Lt. Cline: "We want to make sure that the minimum requirements for that position are tested for. We might not need to test to the extent that we would with regular hiring when we go to the outside for those people we know nothing about. Within the framework of the Civil Service Rules the testing and selection process is listed 'take an appropriate examination'. We would work with the Examiner to determine what would be the appropriate testing because it might not be exactly the same as what we would do for entry level people that are off the street and we don't know anything about." C/A Lubovich: "When we do the exam we don't really give you much detail of the exam do we?" Chief Examiner: "Both our Entry Level Police Officer and Firefighter process had already been set. There is an actual process that we do use. With regards to the Support Staff that tends to be governed by the position descriptions." C/A Lubovich: "They can submit recommendations but it is up to the Civil Service Commission to approve and establish the exams and process. It is up to the Commission if you want to see it yourself or if you want to give the Examiner..." Chief Examiner: "It states within the Rules that the Commission does. The last time we carried out the Word Processing testing we carried out a written test, typing test and Oral Board. For the Accounting Services we carried out written test, typing test, adding machine test and an Oral Board. That is the previously approved process." C/A Lubovich: "The Rules say, Rule IX, Section 1: All examinations shall be approved by the Commission before the examination is held. To an extent you'd grant approval if we have basically a standard exam for a standard types of examinations and then a precedent. That probably has standing approval, but if you make modifications I think that the Commission really needs to either get pre approval of that under certain conditions or have it reviewed at the time. The Commission approves the examination. So if you want to give pre-approval to different examination scenarios based on certain conditions then thats approval, but have them submitted to you at a subsequent date. You do not have to sit there and have them presented to you thirty days from now and make an approval if you know what you want to do with it. It does say that the Commission approves the examination before its held." Commissioner Banister: "I would not have objections to making it an adjusted exam. But I would like to know what the adjustments are." C/A Lubovich: "You don't know what the adjustments are so you can't really give pre approval unless you know what they are." Chief Examiner: "Were you thinking of actually changing it after the point that you had the number of candidates?" Page 13 November 16, 1995 Civil Service Minutes Lt. Cline: "That was a possibility. If we ended up with just three candidates. It might not be necessary to do an Oral Board. It might be something that we'll just have an interview with the Chief and Commander for that particular position. So, depending on the number of applicants and instead of using the exact same examination as we have in the past, the,Examiner might do something geared more towards the position understanding that these are people that we already know about that have a level of proficiency within the city. Within the Rule. I'm not saying anything outside the Rule. If it is something that is already authorized by the Rule, but that Catherine would then create a test that would be more geared towards the position and the circumstances we have for this testing." Chief Examiner: "It is pretty much governed under Rule X, that we could use a combination of any of those criteria. In actual fact you could do that." Cpt Miller: "You might want to take into consideration is that we are constantly updating and the job descriptions as well as the skills, knowledge and abilities. Thats another reason we may need to recommend a change in the testing process is to meet the new qualifications as established within the job classification." Commissioner Banister: "Could we actually make a motion that the test be modified to meet the requirements of the time?" C/A Lubovich: "I don't think that meets the intent of the Rule. You don't even know what the exam is going to be. We're getting to a point where these job descriptions are getting more complex and specific. My recommendation is that when you look at each exam a little more carefully as approval rather than just have the standard exam. You can't use the same exam over and over when the jobs are changing all the time. To give a blanket approval on something that you're not even sure what its going to be. My point is that under one testing scenario you're going to use written and oral test for this and if it doesn't meet a certain condition then you will use written and oral, psychological and evaluation through a Police Officer questionnaire or something. Thats a pre approval. To say modified based on 'you really don't know what the exam is' its not rally a good approval." Capt Miller: "Might I suggest that after we receive approval to go forward with the process and by the time Catherine makes up the Announcements and its open for a period of time and we evaluate the applicants to make sure that they meet the minimum requirements of the job we're probably going to be back at another meeting and by that time we can work together and actually present to the Commission the actual test process. I think that we can get this process rolling and not violate any rules." C/A Lubovich: "What do you tell the applicants about the testing process?" Chief Examiner: "Normally I'll put the testing process and dates on the back of the Job • Announcement so they know what to expect." Page 14 November 16, 1995 Civil Service Minutes Capt Miller: "We have a wide range in the Civil Service Rules of what we can test. Can't we put in the announcement - may consist of a written test, a typing test etc. Its up to them to prepare for it. Its no different than a promotional exam that says ' we may gather materials from this area, this area and this area." C/A Lubovich: "My caveat is that you want to make sure that you don't have the announcement say that you are going to have a written and oral test and then when they come down to test you have a whole different litany of exams." Chief Examiner: "Rather that list my dates I'll just state that they may consist of any number of items. I can do that." Commissioner Banister: "His request was just to modify it and that is all we would react to and not how until its done right?" Chief Examiner: "We can do the announcements and everything and then once we have the cutoff we can come back to the Commission with the requested test process for that particular position at that point in time. It would be more timely." Chair Pattison: "Do you need anything from us?" `• C/A Lubovich: "No." Chief Examiner: "I'll put this on the Agenda for the next meeting that they will come back to the Commission with the testing requests." There being no further business to come before the Commission Chair Pattison moved to adjourn. Seconded and carried. Adjourned at 8:50 a.m. The next Regular Meeting will be held on Thursday, December 21, 1995 at 8:00 a.m. in Council Chambers West. Respectfully submitted, CAV,14. W , Catherine M. Guiguet Civil Service Secretary & Chief Examiner Appro�/ed: .0 Mike Pattison, Chair