04/17/2000 Minutes - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

suggestions and opinions. Rule III: Section 2 (c ): Firefighter Promotions: Chief Bak indicated this section concerns promotional more so than entry level. There is a risk that an entry level can advance up to Captain if there aren't two eligible candidates willing to apply for the position. Mr. Thomay questioned why this wasn't consistent with the Police Department having this clause as well. Chief Bak indicated it might be more prominent in the Fire Department. Mr. Thomay and Ms. Zolar indicated there needs to be consistency between the two departments. Mr. Thomay suggested checking with Chief Ruple for his opinion. Rule III: Section 7: Tie Score Promotional: Mr. Farrell indicated this section is again where the Chiefs should be involved. Chief Bak questioned if the total score included total score from exam, seniority and efficiency score. He indicated that the Police have a different efficiency rating than the fire dept. Mr. Thomay indicated that the section should eliminate "same mark" to read "the same total score." Chief Bak suggested making the tiebreaker the hire date, since the seniority points are based on "yearly" service, and not broken down by the month. Mr. Thomay indicated it should possibly read "days of service shall be the determining factor, should the two had been hired on the same day, the coin toss would be the determining factor." Rule III: Section 8 (d) Extra Credit for Seniority - Mr. Thomay questioned why the scale ends at 14 years and not more. Chief Bak indicated that 10 points is the highest amount of seniority points a candidate can receive, so they didn't go higher in years. The Board agreed to leave this section alone. Rule III: Section 8 (c ): Evaluation point credit: Chief Bak reviewed the fire departments suggestion for change of this section. Instead of an applicant being evaluated for over the past six months, they would like to see it be 3 years. He indicated that evaluations aren't done every six months and each Captain may evaluate differently due to the different shifts. This way over 3 years, a fair evaluation is much more obtainable. Mr. Thomay suggested the section read "an average over the last three years" for evaluations. Mr. Thomay indicated in this section it reads "his/her supervisor" when there are actually three supervisors over time that evaluate. The Board agreed with Chief Bak's suggestion. Rule III: Section 8 (e) needs to be discussed with Chief Ruple to see if the figures need to be adjusted due to the latest contracts. Rule III: Section 8 -ft. Chief Bak suggests changing the present figures in the handbook to his suggestions since the suggestions he has listed are what the fire department is presently using due to the contract. The new rate is to ensure a more sure rating. The Board was in accordance with Chief Bak's suggestion. Mr. Thomay indicated the Board is trying to be uniform between the two departments. Mr. Thomay indicated he is going to pull out old notes from last year. Mr.Thomay reviewed seniority points obtainable from other municipalities. It was decided seniority points would be from North Olmsted only. Mr. Farrell questioned if there could be seniority points for living and working in North Olmsted. Mr. Thomay indicated "no." Mr. Thomay indicated he would like to see that done. Mr. Farrell indicated he would check out a residency requirement. Mr. Thomay would like to talk to Chief Ruple before coming to any final decision on any of the Rules discussed at this meeting.