02/28/2005 Minutes - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

decided that list of criteria is not necessary to the handbook. It was decided that Mrs. Kilbane will send an inquiry to the police chief and fire chief to ask how often evaluations are completed and to find out the rating system that is used. When the responses are received, the secretary will then draft a revision for the handbook. The board members went back to discussing seniority and efficiency points. Mr. Ubaldi said they need to go back to Section 8c and it shall read, "Time considered for seniority credit shall begin on the date of hire to the respective department for which the promotional examination is being held, and end on the date of the examination." Mrs. Giesser asked Mrs. Kilbane to send a note to the Police and Fire Chiefs as soon as possible and then put together a draft of the rule changes made tonight. Mrs. Giesser asked that they address Rule IV, Section 2 at the next meeting. Mrs. Giesser said her recommendation is they have the promotion rules all set so if they are suddenly informed they need to promote, they do not have to re -address the rules. The protest period needs to be looked at (Rule IV Section 2) in relation to O.R.C. 124.45. Mr. Ubaldi said they can finish up with Rule III, then move on to Rule IV and Rule IX at the next meeting. ➢ Discuss and determine the job classification of the Clerk of Commissions and Assistant Clerk of Commissions as unclassified or classified Mrs. Giesser pointed out the board members received a memo from Kimberly Wenger, the Director of Planning, and Cheryl Farver, the Director of Personnel & Administrative Services at the start of the meeting. She asked Mrs. Farver if she and Ms. Wenger are both saying the positions should be classified. Mrs. Farver indicated she would agree with that and a question remains as to whether the positions are classified/competitive, or classified/non-competitive. Mr. Ubaldi asked if either of the directors have an opinion on whether they are competitive positions. Mrs. Farver said Ms. Wenger is asking for a recommendation from the Commission. She said her concern is that the process be respected and followed when anyone gets a job with the City. It has been tested in the past and should be tested in the future. That determination rests with the Commission. She added that her role was to provide input as to whether the position is classified or not. Mr. Ubaldi said from what he read in previous minutes, non-competitive is almost a "one-off', almost like an exception category. Mr. O'Malley said that wherever practical, classified positions should be competitive. He added that when non-competitive positions are mentioned, it is the exception; it is the temporary or provisional appointment. Mrs. Giesser asked if there is a test out there that would be appropriate for the position. Mrs. Farver replied there is a provision in the collective bargaining agreement for the Clerical/Technical unit that provides a test for Secretary II's. They are tested to advance to Secretary I in terms of compensation but not in terms of a job change. They just get more money if they pass the test. The OPAC program tests those individuals and it is designed for testing computer skills, editing, and spelling, etc. Mrs. Rote asked if it is a testable position and she has held the position for eight years, would she be held to take the test to keep her job. Mr. Ubaldi indicated his understanding of the rules is that she would only have to face a competitive exam if she were a provisional hire. There was a brief discussion about Rule II, Section 10 relating to an entry level clerical examination. The discussion continued about how secretarial tests had been administered and how and when it could be done in the future. Eligible lists and scoring of clerical tests was also part of the discussion. Mrs. Rote provided some background on previous secretarial tests, and provisional hires, and described her job duties. Mr. O'Malley said the positions have to be looked at to see if they would fall under entry level clerical, Section 10, or if there will be some subsection that will address those positions differently. They need to find a place for it to fit into the rules. He said the Commission should be establishing the criteria and administering these examinations. It should be done through the Civil Service. Mr. Ubaldi said he is comfortable in deciding the positions are classified/competitive. There was further discussion about the differences between a Secretary I, Secretary II, and the position of clerk. Mr. O'Malley said there is more to learn about the positions in order to establish the requirements for the job. Mrs. Farver indicated she has a job description that was provided by Mrs. Rote and it may help the Commission in its determination. Mrs. Giesser reviewed the description and asked if there is something that details the Secretary I and Secretary II positions. Mrs. Farver replied the descriptions can be found in the collective