06/09/1997 Minutes - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

should be added. He stated this matter was resolved, as the person that filed was satisfied with the final decision. Mr. Vance agreed section b clarifies exactly when the extra points are to be added. Mr. Vance noted section c, at the top of page 12 is an addition. This suggestion states "Seniority and evaluation points are added in when the assessment results are received from the respective department for which the promotional examination is being held." This verbiage was not included on page 9 of the current handbook. Mr. Wilamosky advised that this is included in the current regulations page 10, section 6-d. It was noted there is a slight change as the handbook says "assessment for police/fire promotionals" and the suggestions states "assessment results from the respective department for which the promotional examination is being held." Mr. Vance did not have a problem with this change and noted he has reviewed the document thoroughly. Beginning with page 16, the commission continued to review the suggestions. The specifics on the agility for firefighter has been removed as the components could change with time. Although it was not included under Disqualification and Notice, if an eligible secretarial candidate fails the typing test they are removed from the list under Rule VII, section 2-d. It was noted anything that makes a reference to three names should be changed to five. Rule VIII of the administrative suggestions was comprised mainly of Rule III, sections A and C in the current regulations. Rule IX, Section 1, is similar to section B-1, page 16 of the current regulations, however the subsections are new. Mr. Wilamosky explained subsections a through d explain under what conditions an Emergency, Provisional, Temporary or Exceptional appointment can be made. Under the current regulations, temporary appointments may only last thirty days. Mr. Wilamosky noted on occasion there is a definite need for a temporary appointment to exceed thirty days as a sickness or illness could last longer than 30 days. He advised procedures have been established in these proposed revisions that develop steps the appointing authority must follow when attempting to fill a position. The commissioners agreed 30 days may not be long enough when filling a temporary position. The provisional appointment language had several changes. Under these suggestions a provisional appointment is permitted `Whenever the Commission is unable to create an eligible list for a position consisting of a sufficient number of persons, after a competitive examination or the Commission does not have a valid eligibility list for the position (Rule IX, Section 1, b)." Section 3 of Rule IX, administrative suggestions, creates a procedure for making a provisional appointment. Under this proposal a provisional appointee employed in a position covered by a collective bargaining agreement is subject to competitive testing if employed less than 12 months or a time period equal to one half of the probationary period listed in the union contract, whichever is a lesser period of time. This means if an employee, according to contract, has a 12 month probationary period the individual would be required to pass and rank among the top five candidates if a test is given within the six month period after the appointment is made. Under section 3-c, Rule IX of the suggestions a provisional employee, under a collective bargaining agreement, that has not completed the probationary period, but has been employed provisionally for more than half of the probationary period must merely pass the test. Mr. Wilamosky explained at one time there was a ninety day probationary period in one of the collective bargaining agreements. The civil service rules, however, required that a candidate pass and rank if a test is given within one year of initial appointment if employed provisionally. The commission scheduled a test after ninety days, but within the year required. The provisional appointee was terminated because he did not score among the top three candidates. Mr. Wilamosky advised the union argued, under the contract, this individual was only subject to