04/17/2000 Minutes - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

Mr. Farrell indicated what the handbook is looking at is uncorrected vision and they will not penalize a candidate as long as the candidates corrected binocular vision, which are both eyes. Mr. Thomay indicated that a candidate might wear contacts as long as the vision is correctable. Chief Bak indicated that the problem with that in the fire department with breathing apparatuses there is air pressure of that could force the contact off the eyes. If the firefighter were to lose his contacts, his vision would be distorted. Chief Bak indicated there is a device that is placed in the breathing apparatuses for glasses. He is concerned why there is a waiver for contacts but not for glasses. Mr. Thomay indicated that when the State upgraded the qualifications for examinations he had questioned at that time whether the City's regulations met or made reference to this standard. He suggested finding any notes regarding the vision standards and to check with Donna regarding the Pension Physical Standards. Mr. Thomay suggested referring to this requirement and incorporating those standards into the Civil Service Handbook. Rule III: Section 4: Contact lens waiver: Mr. Thomay suggested a policy for contact wearers to have yearly check-ups and wear the contacts regularly when on the job in order to stay on the job. Rule III section 5: Refractive Modification Waiver: Mr. Thomay indicated there is no reference to laser surgery. He questioned if the recommendations would be the same if the procedure were Laser. Mr. Thomay questioned who performed the eye exams. The Clerk indicated Fairview Eye Center. Mr. Thomay suggested talking to Fairview Eye center to review the Civil Service Handbook. Rule III: Section 7 (b) - Acquirement - Mr. Thomay questioned if it is considered age discrimination for the oldest age of 35 at the time of appointment. Mr. Farrell indicated that an age limitation was verified by the courts due to the physical activity of the different age capabilities. Mr. Farrell indicated he would check into this issue. Rule III: Section 7 (d) - Chief Bak reviewed the fire suggestions regarding the candidates who would be attending school and in the process of receiving certification be allowed to take the entry level exam with the stipulation that the candidate will not be hired unless they receive the certificate. All of the Board Members were in accordance with Chief Bak's suggestions. Rule III: Section 10: Entry Level Clerical: Mr. Thomay questioned what the difference was between a proficiency evaluation and written exam? He suggested eliminating "pass a written exam " and say "applicants must pass a proficiency evaluation". Chief Bak indicated a stipulation should also be that the job applied for should be what the candidate is tested for. In the past, he indicated, he would receive candidates from other areas of the City who didn't have the right experience for the position offered but received the job due to seniority. Rule III: Section 3 (a): Chief Bak indicated that the fire department would like the change to read reach the maximum pay over 5 years instead of 3 year. The problem comes in when someone who has been with the City for 3 years become a lieutenant when it takes 5 years to reach top pay. Mr. Thomay questioned Chief Bak if three years wasn't long enough. Chief Bak indicated that they are looking at how the contract reads, so they need to meet the needs of the contract. The Board is in accordance with Chief Bak's suggested changes. Mr. Thomay indicated they would need to address this issue with Chief Ruple for his