10/15/1980
, '"
n
" :
h'(7)':'
t:':~ "
~~ ':" \~. .. -: . ,...
t-{t:':'::~~',~~. :,
i,I,.1 ~ . ~ '
:~:;:"':\~::~,::~: ::
If" ",.,
t' ,~::/ ,:" : : '
f~J\;;:r: ·
~[,r:p:
'oi,. -, ~ "
"" . '.
,
F....'.".
1~;'? "
!' .", ,
K/S'
,~:;,<, " '
'~:!";'{i.
'"
v/'
Proceedings of the Civil Sorvice Board Meeting held October 15, 1980.
Members Present: Alex Finch, nelen Herman, Hary D. Kane, Tom Chenoweth nnd
Chairnmn Jeanne Wilder
Others Present: Frank Kowalski, Keith Crawford
The Civil Service Board met in session on October 15, 1980 at 10: 00 A.M. in the large v
conference room, third floor, City Hall, 112 S. Osceola Avenue, Clearwater, Florida
for the purpose of reviewing and acting upon It Recommended Order of a lIeartng Officer
in case number 80-1025 (City of Clearwater VB. Jaime Fernandez.)
Mr. Finch moved that the Board approve the minutes of the meeting of May 14, 1980.
There being no changes, additions or deletions, Chairman declared minutes approved
as written.
Chairman noted that, in the Order of the Hearing Officer in the Fernandez esse,
the first page contained an error in that it states that the "...notice of hearing
was) issued July 7, 1980. n and that it should read August 7, 1980.
Mr. Finch moved that 'the three-day suspension of Mr. Fernandez be upheld. Motion
was seconded by Mrs. Herman and passed unanimously.
Board Members proceeded to discuss several concerns. Mrs. Herman indicated that
employees should be entitled to a speedy hearing, noting that the length of time
involved in the Fernandez hearing was exceedingly long. It was noted by Mr. Kowalski
that the timing of the Fernande~ hearing was directly impacted by the employee's
desire to postpone the hearing as long as possible, and in fact, submitted a motion
to continue the hearing after it had been scheduled. It was generally agreed that
hearings do involve more time than seems appropriate.
Mrs. Herman indicated her concern that the City should have the right ,to dismiss an
employee who is unable to adequately perform job tasks. It was indicated that an
employee who is incompetent should be dismissed after a certain period of incompetence.
The Personnel Director indicated that in the Fernandez case, the Department, City
Affirmative Action Office, and the "System" were not effectively coordinated in such
a manner as to provide the proper documentation of disciplinary action. Mr. Finch
related that the Board should not be concerned with those things that are a Department
Director's responsibility in managing their functions. Mrs. Kane expressed her
concern ,that it takes so long to effect disciplinary action against an employee and
that she is aware of instances where it has taken 90 days or more to get a suspension
processed.
Personnel Director advised the Board that a recent meeting was held with the City
Manager relative to the problem of timeliness in effecting disciplinary action and
that, the Affirmat1..ve Action Officer' is developing a proposal which will place time
limits at each point of review in the system to insure that disciplinary recommenda-
tions of'the Department Directors arc spedily considered and acted upon.
Mr. Finch asked why the Board would even hear an appeal of a three-day suspension.
Director indicated that the verbage in the new ordinance did not limit appeal rightB
on suspensions of less than 10 days as did the original Civil Service Act. Mr. Finch
stated that he had read the Ordinance and Rules and that he did not see provisions
, for such an appeal. Frank Kowalski stated he would look into this question.
'.'>' ,
, j,I.,
M 2 -
Civil Service Board Meeting
\
October 15, 1980
Mrs,.:,Herman also commented on employee ratings and the City's Uniform Guidelines for
Disciplinary. Action. Mrs. Wilder indicated that training of first-level supervisors
'in the disciplinary proce6o was a most important segment of carrylngout an,effective
and fair disciplinary process.
,Director indicated he would provide the Board with a copy of any ne~ time process ,that
might be dev~loped and lmpl~mented by the Manager relative to disciplinary action.
Healaoprovided members with Q'CoPY of memo relative to the proposal for a new
Executive Pay Plan. This memo, being distributed to all departmental employee
organizations, references a proposed policy ,change and requests notice from any
;'affected party who desires a public hearing on the matter.
There being no f
her business, meeting was 'adjourned.
, ,
'::1
Secretary
" '
;'1
'" .Ii
~\ :
"')'" I
>' I. J "'.c
':!
I
d
"'. '
. .' . ~
,:~~a:nn~ WiJ.,der" Chairman
, ,
",
" ,
, I
.'\,
.r)
> '.'i
. ;.
. ~> ..
. -,
'. . '::
: \
.', '
':
",' ',i' ,
, '