My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
06/04/1984 Minutes
Document-Host
>
City North Olmsted
>
Boards and Commissions
>
1984
>
1984 Civil Service Commission
>
06/04/1984 Minutes
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
2/15/2019 8:42:47 AM
Creation date
2/12/2019 5:49:06 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
N Olmsted Boards & Commissions
Year
1984
Board Name
Civil Service Commission
Document Name
Minutes
Date
6/4/1984
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
2
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
Show annotations
View images
View plain text
U7 <br />0 <br />p� a <br />CITY OF NORTH OLMSTED <br />CIVIL SERVICE COMMISSION <br />NORTH OLMSTED, OHIO <br />a� <br />MINUTES <br />June 4, 1984 <br />A specially scheduled meeting of the North Olmsted Civil Service <br />Commission was held on June 4,1984 at 7:35 P,M. In attendance <br />were Commissioners, Phillip Huffman, Dean McAay, Chief Van Kuren, <br />and Secretary Patricia Bahas. <br />Approval of Minutes <br />Minutes of the April Meeting would be approved at the next meet- <br />ing. <br />Old Business <br />Mrs. Bahas read a letter from Mr. Schroder regarding the length <br />of time it took for the results,`of the promotional test to be <br />finalized and the statement that the test was not available for <br />review for the five day period. Mrs.-Bahas commented that the test <br />was indeed available for inspection and for a longer time than <br />required because of the time required to substantiare the challenges. <br />Due to the review of the Commission, the schedule conflicts of b <br />both the tester and the Commission and the time for the grading, <br />the.time period was longer than usual. The Commission denied both <br />complaints of Mr. Schroder since he had not requested a re- <br />view of the test within the allotted time frame and that the <br />Commission had followed the spirit of,the law and had observed all <br />measures for the security of the test. Moreover, a second review <br />of the test answers which reflected the substantiated challenges <br />did not jeopardize the standing of any of the can-dida�es since no <br />score was affected adversely. <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.