Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1987-03-30 SPECIAL SESSION CIVIL SERVICE COMMISSION March 30, 1987 CALL TO ORDER The special session of the Civil Service Commission was called to order by Chairman Bill Wagner at 9:07 a.m. PRESENT Mr. Bill Wagner, Chairman ' Mr. K. B. Fuller, Civil Service Officer Mrs. Mary Balsinger Ms. Anniece Vargas, Personnel Technician Mr. Frank Douglass I. APPROVAL OF MINUTES Mr. Douglass made the motion to approve the minutes of the Civil Service Commission's meeting of July 10, 1986, as written. Mrs. Balsinger seconded the motion, and the vote is as follows: Ayes: Mr. Wagner, Mr. Douglass, and Mrs. Balsinger Nays: None Chairman Wagner declared that the minutes shall be approved as written. II. REQUEST OF RICHARD PLUCKER FOR A HEARING Chairman Wagner stated that the purpose of the meeting was to determine the validity of the appeal of Richard Plucker, a Maintenance Worker in the Public Works Department. After reviewing the Employee Warning Notice that Mr. Plucker received on February 9, 1987, it was agreed that Mr. Plucker would receive suspension from duty for three days, without pay, upon issuance of a second warning. Mrs. Balsinger noted that the employment date on the February 9 warning notice should be corrected to read: "4-14-86". Mr. Fuller explained that the purpose of the Employee Warning Notice of February 23, 1987, was that Mr. Plucker did less than $500 worth of damage to the spotlight area on one of the City trucks. Because of the incident, Mr. Plucker received a one-day suspension without pay. Mr. Fuller went on to say that on February 27, Mr. Plucker had made a written appeal to the City Manager. Mr. Plucker stated that he felt he was being discriminated against due to the fact that he was the only employee who had been reprimanded in this manner. Civil Service Commission - March 30, 1987 - Page 2 Mr. Hart, Acting City Manager, responded to Mr. Plucker's appeal by stating that he felt the disciplinary action was warranted and upheld the decision. On March 23, 1987, Mr. Plucker appealed this decision to the Commission. Mr. Douglass raised the question as to why the vehicle was being backed into a parking place instead of heading into the parking place. Mr. Fuller remarked that Mr. Plucker felt that the pumps prevented him from driving in. Mr. Douglass felt that the "fish-eye" mirror that Mr. Plucker alluded to would not have been able to help him in this backing situation. Mrs. Balsinger added that you should not back up if you cannot see behind you. It was Mr. Douglass' opinion that Mr. Plucker received a lighter disciplinary action than was promised on a second offense. Mr. Fuller stated that the City has no policy regarding the backing up of vehicles. He added that Mr. Plucker believed that speeding and backing are two different offenses. Mrs. Balsinger remarked that Mr. Plucker could have easily gotten a traffic citation for the speeding offense. She agreed that the one-day suspension was a light sentence. Discussion then centered around the negligent damage to the vehicle. Mr. Fuller added that the City was in the process of writing a policy for driving of City vehicles. Mr. Douglass asked if the employees have to take any tests before they are eligible to drive City vehicles. Mr. Fuller answered that they don't as of this time. The employee must prove that he can operate the vehicle. Mrs. Balsinger asked if "fish-eye" mirrors had been installed on other pieces of City equipment. Mr. Fuller responded that there had not been. Mr. Fuller further added that if the Commission denies a hearing, Mr. Plucker can appeal to the City Council. The general consensus was that Mr. Plucker had been given fair treatment, and the punishment was lenient. Mr. Fuller added that other employees had gotten letters of reprimand. He felt that tenure and the situation involved may have affected the decision of the supervisor. He added that other employees had received more severe penalties for their offenses. r Civil Service Commission - March 30, 1987 - Page 3 Chairman Wagner commented on the fact that if the Commission granted a hearing, the Commission could increase or decrease the penalty Mr. Plucker sustained. Mr. Douglass made a motion to agree with the supervisor's decision, and to deny a hearing with the consensus that in view of the facts as they were presented, the penalty was not unduly harsh compared to the warning that Mr. Plucker received. Mrs. Balsinger seconded the motion, and the vote is as follows: Ayes: Mr. Wagner, Mr. Douglass, and Mrs. Balsinger Nays: None Chairman Wagner declared that the motion carried. II. NEW BUSINESS Mr. Fuller referred to a written request from the Police Department to increase the probationary period from six months after schooling to twelve months after schooling. Discussion centered around the difference between probation for police officers and firefighters. Mr. Fuller mentioned that police officers are enrolled in an academy after hiring, while firefighters immediately go to work. He further added that if the Commission approved this request, the decision would apply to new hires to the police department. Due to the nature of the job as a police officer, Mrs. Balsinger made the motion to accept the recommendation to change the probationary period for new or reemployed police officers from six months to twelve months. Mr. Douglass seconded the motion, and the vote is as follows: Ayes: Mr. Wagner, Mr. Douglass, and Mrs. Balsinger Nays: None Chairman Wagner declared the motion carried. ADJOURNMENT There being no further business to discuss, Chairman Wagner adjourned the meeting at 9:45 a.m. APPROVED: -tip � � n Mr. Bill Wagner, C#'airman , / 1