The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink AboutItem #02 - Discussion ItemRESOLUTION NO. A RESOLUTION URGING THE CIVIL, SERVICE BOARD TO CONSIDER THE ADOPTION OF AN AMENDMENT TO THE CIVIL SERVICE RULES SO THAT WHEN A DEPARTMENT DIRECTOR BYPASSES THE HIGHEST RANKING ANGLO MALE TO PROMOTE ANOTHER ANGLO MALE, OR BYPASSES THE HIGHEST RANKING BLACK TO PROMOTE ANOTHER BLACK, OR BYPASSES THE HIGHEST RANKING LATIN TO PROMOTE ANOTHER LATIN, OR BYPASSES THE HIGHEST RANKING WOMAI TO PROMOTE ANOTHER WOMAN, THAT THE WRITTEN RECORD CONTAIN LEGITIMATE NON-DISCRIMINATORY REASONS .FOR THE CHOICE. WHEREAS, the City of Miami and the United States of America have entered int �a Consent Decree in 1977; and WHEREAS, th� purpose generally of the Consent Decree was to overcome the present\effects of past racial and sexual discrimina- tion in the City's wo\kforce; and WHEREAS, on April 17, 1978 the Justice Department wrote to the City expressing the view of the United States that the Consent Decree required systemic, institutional changes in the City's employment procedures; and �. WHEREAS, this Commission has adopted those systemic, institu- tional changes when it revised t�7e City's Civil Service Rules; and WHEREAS, the revised Civil\Service Rules require the Depart- ment Director to consider for promotion the names of the five (5) y persons who stand highest on the elicj\i\ le register plus three (3) members of the affected class as pres ribed in the Consent Decree; and WHEREAS, in the implementation of tie Consent Decree there may exist the opportunity for abuse of discretion by the Department Directors; and WHEREAS, it is necessary for this Commission to announce a policy that when adopted, will prevent abuses of iscretion; and WHEREAS, due process requires that when an \ dividual is bypassed for promotion the written record contain legitimate, non- discriminatory reasons for the choice. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE COMMISSION\OF THE CITY OF MIAMI, FLORIDA: 0 l ti� 0:4 a"j`s"_'�':,`T�•NRiv'.t.i .:�'.�!rr '.3, '.i Zi'"r'..i' .}•,ice:. '_; .gip. �J.,ePA�y�.:��',�'�..{.. - �3�:,_�•"��I :K._ " �.: •.•- _a Mlle .�. i '� rS:.�4..��¢#r ,ya�.�♦ .,L - r ,W,,.S, +V ��.�vd eC>` £e- '�4i` qi«�,. �j� `: ••_ _ .;�. .z�5,: _ �4 to �_*,..s. -'y 'f � . '-ff`i 2.'-:-%.�k'-.S�`ix:' �Y%Sr��.�..1 ...;j:.i .!t"� _ slt ♦Ih:a);'}. .-.i±t% - =' - .r J.• n� ' %T! �x - _ _ _ r li` i.....�.�11 _..1 r i�!' �'.a�.. ifA - i+.'<. _ '%l. - 3 �h aa Bey °Y� j � � • _ X�F. Civil Service Board fe hereby ur+led } y4 �t ider an amendment to its rules to require • that when a bepfirt■► M n►ent Director bypasses the highest ranking Anglo male to promote 4' another Anglo male, or bypasses the highest ranking Black to promote another Black, or bypasses the highest ranking Latin to promote` another Latin, or bypasses the highest ranking woman to promote �. y another woman, that the written record must contain legitimate non- discriminatory reasons for the decision to bypass. PASSED AND ADOPTED this day of 1981. ATTEST: RALPH G. ONGIE, CITY CLERK PREPARED AND APPROVED BY: RONALD J. COHEN ASSISTANT CITY ATTORNEY Is 9A ,3; z:`, TNESS: 2! M A Y 0 R ✓�' ��.3�3( '.1t=ix:,: E: ti`,�?;,,.-_' 4C:r .` N�Y<a"f-,r. 'r•'-�y"C.n..'r ''C'�"F��n y. �. 1�1�: .^•�f .°F.R�".,. �'.t1',c,,�{�w { A, ,','Cv,•.'+:^at'5fY ,Frr^'"'%�• t�3yy�yy�y ,• �„� ;t', i`iCJ�. O': G1i to b1 ky WiWItlD3.V� City : �ttdthey , oafs duly 210 1981t}° REFrRUICE5 ENCLOSURES; One (1) me.µ �. . L Pursuant to your instructions at the meeting held on July 9, 1981, concerning promotional policy, the attached tesolution is submitted for your consideration. Please note that we have prepared a Resolution instead of an Ordinance because section 63 of the Charter provides that the Civil Service Board shall amend its rules and regula- tions, subject to approval by the City Commission. Thus, it is necessary for any change in the Civil Service Rules to have its genesis in action by the Civil Service Board. GI'K;RJC:sec cc: City Manager Executive Secretary, Civil Service Board J i:'. M. 11 i"M' n a r1f - "f - iiK„ _,. .•'�._ :' '.,''r' ��, � :' rt-�-j.0. `t'-',t, Z; ,tNT ". s+, ••T_ �.' s, iS c v ''�'Yd_' i • }t .3.. ,-Ft•..a w "4f' �. fe }aA� YY ` V' p l}• 4 t w ;�X YN �� • l w `F �•Y y is yy��*,ate.:., • y h"• ' e !- t+ �'f.'xa' rit �� h..w it.•ir .�,v - 4 , 44 r .. ,._ Alw^te. '•r.- .*"'..yf,.:,'s.,,,,,t.T,_, '#'i.F�iEr,.td .`Y``i., =r;J+, -- -,�;;':w': .:.... �.t�t: .. ,'t,2'- .h. .,-ti+'6 r.h jam' ,;':�'.,. ., !t ,, .t ,r'',g?.•:: 1- S-,"^-.t'; '•,�p,;- . ,'k, =ti., >. + + w'i' x,�`t :.:y,;1- f" - :�: .�?ti;` `'�f.�.' ;�-•�_, "L',, `•4.g R /-.;•�'�"','. - 'aY� '1:. ,Jew "SI: - _ .'l+ ,�i5. - .. °,t,`�': }. ' i •a �} r r,. .. - _ wf •rink f:; e.'yt �. l;- per"-: " :i•�=` ,,.•_ n .'¢" +",r-. w.f{•• t Sri .:f r T, .i r.`•7.. ,t :ay'x a F >4 '� • r,3 • ' r � 4v ••�, '�4, �:»i' 't E'. t.'qr ,S. i.l ,,,t t2'-v".• •ti��x i'm-: �1E. w�, .4'- - - .is. tT. �. L'r t�'. �-„!.r t,>r' t;u:" tt••_,F�, ;C;; t..,,. ..CFr''t .+'i': , ..., , _ 1.: .,. .- :'4 'Ji.`.;'.y. d -edit. � �.Y'��r--av3"�•; n :. '. ..-.. .. .. .-... ..� :.. ...( ... _ .r .. -. .".-.a.:,.-., •3V •�hf�:• ..:f •b, .i1 =�• ..i`'' Y�y:�,�.e,,," ,. �1+''� .2".B.t`, tt ., .r: _. ..,-,, ... ,.:.. ..,c, .r ..„. , .,. ;,�. _' :' i- ,:_}- '-it:';,'i•,,.°i':r' .-`fi�f'"�. .k' _kr'• ::Y..,r `�r.'tY..,:a ..t •G ;,'.F,r �£ �u' -r .... . , _ _.-?a .... f-, ......., a..ka-' . .....�.. : ;•..: ra � Y�f" �-a: -�' �e;•'�.'r � z� „✓•f.� •tYs` :k•' r.. `��'' . 4 ter+. - t t6: ..:` _.��^�'.f>• 4'44 %::^ ' r:= ,. �,•- �:�� .,�.+, �. � , -.<. _. �F .. �{. x... ". _. Ss'" 1't.. .i:':� ...U. ti -''d,. „kaai: w:r,.p,'}. W `:'r{'t'�'^."�:j- <f .�•.:c. � *. A' r. Zz .: R.. 1ti a' uy j : . j `: t. ' �� 3�. •,t k.r!"`:'_+_.: 1.=�t•ii - .J; L.h' t i- _ 74.T a "4. ?- ,p_ r � _'9'�' ` +)y '' '° '• ,i d+: i.. �;+.^Si::" r, PF r'."(-: - q;, 1 ` :'+#.: r t t ' T', _ t• . 'f .i 7 i - P�s,. -', -�,< ; _ - 0 t •• _. 'f:+� -- r. - "�:h_1'�r�'+!y'i`)k e+a a••+re+�>Ak;� +r ?x',^4 i< 1t'w. +� k, ,�_z`'3f". ��."e'i— r r}: III" OP MIAMI. n.6*1614 IW' 9ft- i►P'MCR MIM0I01ANDUM ' .'lWard V, gory of ty Marr446r Kenneth 1•. Harms Chief of Police bAft- July 21, 1981 out suiutet: Promotional Policy Iitf[R[Nt[!s [NCIOiVRtl: The promotional policy of the Miami Police Department rests on the premise that candidates who successfully compete on a written examination are, equally eligible though not equally qualified. To resolve the variances between candidates, an assessment of each Individual's ability is undertaken to determine the best qualified candidates for the available positions. Objective information is evaluated to assess the ccmpentency of.each candidate. Since police work is not an exact science and often entails the intangible tasks of inter -personal relationships and skills, a limited number of criteria in addition to the written test must be considered to assure an acceptable quality of community service. A candidate's ability is evaluated in terms of the following considerations: PERFORMANCE FACTORS These include the employee's semi-annual evaluations, commendations, reprimands, accident record, and court attendance record. This information is an objectively gathered numeric representation of the employee's performance. PHYSICAL CAPABILITY A candidate's ability to physically perform the responsibilities of the position to which he or she aspires, will be determined by the City Medical Clinic. Such an evaluation will take into consideration all applicable taw and policy. PERSONAL INTEGRITY A police department's greatest responsibility to a community is the enforcement of the law by individuals who perform reasonably and equitably. Constitutional abuses of a citizentry at the hands of uncaring or irresponsible police personnel cannot be condoned. As such, the Internal Security records of each candidate will be evaluated to determine any patterns of misconduct, intolerance, dishonesty, criminal involvement or #dministrative violations. w:• �-•s:e�y%S.f�:iAr70�+�lAist,*,s`7llr�.tlir.�.•?Pf�'tr,7''.ttw: •«,tr.-.....� , . "*t• � ;ram r ►. •e!�Xsirt�•ii .t':xyivr' f`.y .. i�'! 'i• J• _ ... _, s ?. J- q.. Promotional policy July 216 1981 .. ` a a „rile cshd i dates otherw i s �';ppear equal, consideration may be given to those Irldfivlduals who have damonstated special ski 1 is or abi i i ties obtained through participation in community activities, educational programs or through Jot related training and experience. In every case, consideration will be given to minority and women candidates an the certification list in order to assure that the Department achieves its promotional goals under the Consent Decree and the City's Affirmative Action Plan. No candidate will be rejected on the basis of a single factor unless the factor in that case is deemed critical to successful performance. The normal procedure will be to evaluate candidates on the basis of all factors and to select those who are judged best able to perform the Job and to help the Department achieve its promotional goals. In no case will any extraneous factors, such as personal favoritism or life-style, be considered in the promotional evaluation. Upon completion of the evaluation process and the subsequent selection of individuals recommended for appointment, those candidates not chosen, will be provided with an explanation of the Department's decision. The names of candidates recommended for promotion are forwarded to the City Manager, or his designated representative, who, as the appointing authority, can reject the Department's recommendation and make relevantto the Department's decision. Police work involves a multitude of skills and capacities which when demonstrated by thc,« r:e supervise enhance the fibre and credibility of a police agency. Many attributes and deficiencies cannot be readily identified in a written examination. it is essential then, that we seek to staff our Police Department with those who lead by example, demand nothing less from their subordinates and perform within the bounds of community standards and Departmental policy KIH:sw ' Pr'.*•'."Oy s I Y.. 46 Cl" 61• MIAMI. IPWOUDA INTRO -OFFICE MIMbpANDUM 7,1 Howard V. Gary City Manage DATE: July 21, 1981 VILC= SUSJECT: Police Promotion Policy Robert D. Krause Director ,,/��"' FROM• Department of Human Resources REFERENCES: ENCLOSURES: I have reviewed the memo from Chief Harms to you concerning the re- vised Promotional Policy of the Miami Police Department. In reviewing the Policy, it is important to consider the professional and legal requirements that apply to the selection process. . The first of these is Miami Civil Service Rule 8, especially Section B.S. That "cc,,-' on provides that promotions must be made from a list of certi- fied eligibles, "except as otherwise provided in these Rules, or approved by the Board." The Policy statement provides for promotions from the certified eligibles. Selection guidelines and interpretive information issued by the Equal Frn,�ln�rnronf- onportunity Commission and other Federal agencies emphasize &...«.L r.aLiuns of written tests. One provision states: "Paper -and -pencil tests of effectiveness in interpersonal relations (e.g., sales or super- vision), or of physical activities (e.g., automobile repair) or ability to function properly under danger (e.g., firefighters) generally are not close enough approximations of work behavior to show content validity." The written tests for police promotions cannot adequately test for the types of factors cited by EEOC. The Police Department Policy provides for an evaluation of these factors on an objective basis in order to supplement the results of the written test. It is a premise of psychology that past performance predicts future per- formance. Written tests have been used to provide an objective method of selection. Such tests normally do not provide an accurate measure of past performance. The Police Department Policy appears to use past per- formance as a means of supplementing the paper and pencil test. Perhaps even more important are the legal requirements concerning permitted and prohibited activities to achieve Affirmative Action objectives. The publication, Equal Employment Compliance Update, June, 1981, notes that employers must comply with the Supreme Court decision in the Bakke case, which was construed "to prohibit quotas and allow goals only where race and sex are simply one factor taken into account as part of an individu- aiizea consideration of candidates." The Police Department Promotional Policy permits race and sex to be considered, without excluding members. . .. - ...iw.+: :s '�.„.`J+T+,Z.ff.te�••.:lara....,.esrv.:. ,,.�w.r y.: �... �.. •f r ��. } i' x:- bf he Gig is a for ipian 2. aapsin�t hhats proe not lead .� Uty Affirmative Actin vouid s = b ras and �iaAbla use the of race or BOX an a :basis for Promotions. Policy co�npliaer�re OS the promotional �� beat of my knowledge r �a the if applied, t�ii <.F. and professional and profs standards and, properly that the Policy of the City. It is significant authority Manager as the appointing authority of the city 'approval the city Mar,agar.� . Charter Ch Andby provides an opportunity for review 11nit 4b ' ! t ?'�'r.^i.ri: ec_ :._ _ _ -c;fia";.` p h�,t`,--��•'�df't�t„ c�4n2• ` 't��",`t `.d, �"`•�'-� met memo* _ l4 f`8t �d it fit . i8i &Af: ► �, i �,1 ` Promotional poll ,; _6461 '= M" orge P 6 Knox # 11r. r i' City Attorney One 11 t Pursuant to your instructions at the meeting held on July 9, 1981, concerning promotional policy, the attached Resolution is submitted for your consideration. Please note that we have prepared a Resolution instead •, of an Ordinance because section 63 of the Charter provides that the Civil Service Board shall amend its rules and regula- tions, subject to approval by the City Commission. Thus, it is necessary for any change in the Civil Service Rules to have its genesis in action by the Civil Service Board. G: ; r% C: sec cc: City Manager • Executive Secretary, Civil Service Board m .N h: a IV WFi rn X - • - - - k 7 . A� rV �,, r nr s »+ •r. �%'b,�;"�1`p`"��; '4 �,ty" k-}:� ; S,+it ;' �' ... L r t. � Ni��':a .r�I�'L -, "b+,� •. s§,5�1" .(��f� C"'"•�. �JH # ��•'^ Y - � � i +i �5".�S' I T' > +Y � ��"'1✓::1T lyr_R5 � 1 �§'ifs �ti. irt y�. ' �+.• ui.r: _ s .i*,•D•; "j.3`i"v' Er'- s'� '+.y`�„ : 4 '. l 4 «. ,� - +•s: �, Yfi Tdtb' wiKx� -i ti 4;?�. 1 �� c.�F=' w. S.'S•� - t, A14 - i'a _ ... - 'rt i `: �'!k '� r at?_rri�rt�•1:Y�Y.�'�.i+.9� .r. _�.4�..:"Y Or RESOLUTION NO. fit: ,.- A RESOLUTION URGING THE CIVIL SERVICE BOARD TO CONSIDER THE ADOPTION OF AN AMENDMENT TO THE CIVIL SERVICE RULES SO THAT WHEN A DEPARTMENT DIRECTOR BYPASSES THE HIGHEST RANKING ANGLO MALE TO PROMOTE ANOTHER ANGLO MALE, OR BYPASSES THE HIGHEST RANKING BLACK TO PROMOTE ANOTHER BLACK, OR BYPASSES THE HIGHEST RANKING LATIN TO PROMOTE ANOTHER LATIN, OR BYPASSES THE HIGHEST RANKING WOMAN TO PROMOTE ANOTHER WOMAN, THAT THE WRITTEN RECORD CONTAIN LEGITIMATE NON-DISCRIMINATORY REASONS FOR THE CHOICE. WHEREAS, the City of Miami and the United States of America have entered into a Consent Decree in 1977; and t WHEREAS, the purpose generally of the Consent Decree was to overcome the present effects of past racial and sexual discrimina- tion in the City's workforce; and WHEREAS, on April 17, 1978 the Justice Department wrote to • the City expressing the view of the United States that the Consent De,;. ee required systemic, institutional changes in the City's employment procedures; and WHEREAS, this Commission has adopted those systemic, institu- tional changes when it revised the City's Civil Service Rules; and WHEREAS, the revised Civil Service Rules require the Depart- ment Director to consider for promotion the names of the five (5) persons who stand highest on the eligible register plus three (3) members of the affected class as prescribed in the Consent Decree; and WHEREAS, in the implementation of the Consent Decree there may exist the opportunity for abuse of discretion by the Department Directors; and WHEREAS, it is necessary for this Commission to announce a policy that when adopted, will prevent abuses of discretion; and WHEREAS, due process requires that when an incTividual is bypassed for promotion the written record contain legitimate, non - reasons for the choice. ,*4 THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF MIAMI, FLORIDA: �T �At��,C Z w ix ved t6 it hereby Ur I. "at tM civil setvLft Board L amiddet an aawds6rit to it* rules to require that when a DOPlitt" Uetkt Director bypasses thii. highest ranking Anglo male- to PrOMOU nking Black to promote Anglo male, or bypasses the highest ra Al-i another Slack, or bypasses the highest ranking Latin to promote another Latin, or bypasses the highest ranking woman to promote another woman, that the written record must contain legitimate nonce. discriminatory reasons for -the 'decision -to bypass. PASSED AND ADOPTED this day ofTr A Y 0 R ATTP.,-*T-. RALpH--G. ONGLE, CITY CLERK PREPARED AND APPROVED BY:. RONALD J. COHEN ASSISTANT CITY ATTORNEY. I