Laserfiche WebLink
CITY OF NORTH OLMSTED <br />CIVIL SERVICE COMMISSION <br />NORTH OLMSTED, OHIO <br />MINUTES OF CIVIL SERVICE MEETING JUNE 30, 1988 <br />Present: Commissioners: Robert Wendt, Tom Stroh, Madeline Brookshire. <br />City Service Director., Richard Noble. NOMBL General. Manager, Ken Mues <br />along with Tom Terbracht. NOMBL• Employees Committee members, Donald <br />Livingston, Tod Dagy and Jim Bierman. <br />Fire Chief Van Buren was also in attendance. <br />Minutes of the May meeting approved as submitted. <br />The business portion of this meeting was set aside to hear the question <br />of the NOMBL. <br />Mr. Wendt stated the commission reviewed and documented the re- <br />classification within the bus department i.e. those persons within the <br />bus department covered by.civil service. Mr. Wendt stated that, after <br />much cnsideration and investigation-, was satisified with this list. <br />This list was distributed to bus personnel and did show that certain <br />classifications were not covered under civil service established <br />guidelines. The commission has again been visited by a group of <br />employees, laborers a/k/a hostlers or servicemen, claiming they do more <br />than the commission feels they do. Mr. Wendt related that the <br />commission was working from a job description that seemed satisfactory; <br />however the bus committee personnel brought with them another job <br />description which they distributed to the commissioners. According to <br />the original job description given the commission it was their feeling <br />this group of employees were not covered by civil service. The reason <br />for the.employee group to appear before the commission was to petition <br />for civil service protection. Thea -employee group -declared that because <br />of the various jobs they are assigned and some of the duties they <br />perform they assume more responsibility than shown on the original job <br />description. The commissioners agreed, after reviewing the job <br />description the employees group presented, that some of the duties <br />performed were above and beyond those of a laborer or serviceman. <br />Service Director, Noble, felt this confrontation was all predicated by a <br />letter circulated some months back erroneously that laborers be covered <br />by civil service. Messrs. Wendt and Stroh declared they were unaware of <br />the contents of this letter at the time. This letter was officially <br />retracted. Mr. Noble further stated .that he had people in the Service <br />Department doing various duties over and above their job description as <br />laborers, particulary, operating backhoes and bulldozers. Mr. Noble <br />stated he did not feel the serviceman classification falls within the <br />seven categories as set forth in the civil service manual. If the job <br />required some degree of certification or training he would see some <br />justification for this request. Mr. Noble related that, as far as he is <br />concerned, it was basically an entrance labor field position and should <br />be considered in the labor area. Mr. Livingston injected that by the <br />original job description vs. the one sumbitted by the employee group <br />