10/21/1996 Minutes - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

:11 with the Firefighter Promotional Qualification on page 15. Mr. Vance, a firefighter, clarified that the suggestion is to keep the language uniform or consistent. Should the data in parenthesis be changed, eliminated, or remain the same? 6) The following paragraph on page 20 was confusing, "Candidates will be rated for each category in the various sections as specified previously (i.e. Superior, Thoroughly Competent, Acceptable, Marginally Acceptable, or Unsatisfactory). The scores will be tallied for each section and then divided by the total number of categories to come up with the total section rating. The total ratings for each section will then be tallied to obtain the total number of section ratings. The total number of section ratings will then be divided by six or the total number of sections. The result will be the Final Adjective Rating of Total Performance, which is the score the commission will add to the candidates raw score after the completion of the entire examination (i.e. written, oral and any other portions which may be offered)." Mr. Powers believed that the number of categories depends on the responsibilities. He noted that if a firefighter is scored on Non -Emergency Work, Fire Fighting, and Squad Work than it appears that number is divided by six to obtain the total score. He explained there are firefighters that do Fire Prevention Work, therefore the four scores can be divided by six. Mr. Cummings questioned if a firefighter would perform each one of these duties through the course of employment. Mr. Powers noted firefighters are rated per the Ohio Revised Code, which indicates the firefighters are rated for the six months prior to the examination. He explained in a years time a firefighter may not perform all the duties indicated in the handbook. He believed, if a firefighter only performs three of the sections during the year, three should be the divisor instead of six. Mr. Powers pointed out that the fire department rating scale is far different from the police department rating scale and believed the commission is favoring the police over the fire. The commission needs to review whether or not any changes are needed in the efficiency rating guide. 7) On page 22, Section F-4, the handbook. states "Seniority and evaluation points are added in when the results are received from the assessment for police and fire promotionals." Mr. Powers explained this is addressed on page 18-D of the handbook. Mr. Cummings explained that page 22 addresses tie scores. Mr. Powers believed section F-4 on page 22 should be eliminated as it is repetitive. The commission needs to decide if section F-4 of page 22 is necessary. 8) Finally page 29 under promotional appointments letters B and D indicate a firefighter/paramedic classification. Mr. Powers reiterated that the word paramedic should be eliminated when it pertains to promotional examinations. The commission agreed to adress the above questions at a fixture meeting date. X. ADJOURNMENT: The meeting was adjourned at 9:50 P.M. E. Cummings, Chairman I - Civ n A. Cornish, Assistant Clerk of Commissions