Laserfiche WebLink
ft <br />IV. OLD BUSINESS: <br />A) The certified list for Radio Dispatcher has expired, we were unable to get the funding to administer <br />that examination this year. A full time dispatcher has quit, therefore there is an urgent reason to <br />fill this position. At the last meeting the commission received a letter from Chief Viola outlining <br />this problem (Commission: Included in packet). The commission requested a legal opinion from <br />the Law Director outlining whether or not Tammy Farris will be required to be tested <br />(Commission: Included in packet) Chairman Cummings agreed at the last meeting, to discuss the <br />possibility of removing the probationary period with the law department. Per the commission <br />request, the secretary discovered a probation period is mentioned on page(s) 15, 26, 28, 29 33, <br />and 42 of the handbook. <br />Mr. Cummings had a question for the law director regarding this portion of the handbook. He <br />explained a Radio Dispatcher has been appointed without taking a civil service examination, as <br />there is not an existing list. Mr. Cummings stated, according to the handbook, for provisionary <br />appointments, candidates may be tested within six months or the probationary period, whichever is <br />longer. Mr. Cummings asked the Law Director if the civil service commission can eliminate the <br />probationary period verbiage and just say that, for provisionary appointments, candidates must be <br />tested within six months of the appointment. Law Director Gareau responded that the commission <br />should work with each department as union contracts vary. He elaborated, there is an 18 month <br />probationary period in the police department. Mr. Cummings stated the civil service commission <br />has no say on the length of a probationary period, and questioned its necessity within the <br />handbook. Mr. Gareau explained, after a candidate passes a probationary period, he/she becomes <br />a permanent employee automatically. He noted, the commission should also be concerned about <br />the possibility of someone being discharged during the probationary period and requesting a <br />hearing. Mr. Gareau believed there should be some consistency with regard to the time frame <br />established within the union contracts and what is in the civil service handbook. Personnel <br />Director Wilamosky noted, if a probationary period has not been collectively negotiated there is a <br />need for the six months mentioned in the handbook. He explained, if the probationary period has <br />been collectively negotiated the civil service commission cannot change it. Mr. Wilamosky <br />believed the language should be 18 months or that which has been collectively negotiated within <br />the collective bargaining agreement. Mr. Cummings reiterated, the handbook now reads in the <br />case of provisionary appointments, employees must be tested within six months or the <br />probationary period, whichever is longer. He explained, in the case of this dispatcher appointment, <br />the probationary period is longer. Mr. Wilamosky responded, in the past the rule has been <br />interpreted to read: if a test is given within six months of employment the provisionary employee <br />must pass the test and rank in the top three. He elaborated, if the provisionary employee was not <br />tested within the six month period, that individual would only have to pass the examination. Mr. <br />Cummings noted this verbiage does not appear in the handbook. Mr. Wilamosky explained, a <br />while back the commission waved the typing test, because a couple provisionary appointments <br />failed that test. Mr. Gareau elaborated, at that time, the union contract specifically provided that <br />there was a 90 day probationary period, whereas the civil service rules and regulations had a six <br />month probationary period. He believed, because of the fact the handbook was in conflict with the <br />union contract, the civil service commission modified accordingly. Mr. Gareau noted that the rule <br />was previously written to require testing within six months of employment. He elaborated, <br />provisionary appointments had to pass and rank if the test was given within three months of <br />appointment. The provisionary appointment only had to pass the test, if the examination was <br />administered after three months, but within the six month period. If a provisionary appointment <br />went longer than six months, without a test being offered, the employee was not required to be <br />