Loading...
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.
Home
My WebLink
About
CC 1975-10-15 Minutes
CITY OF MIAMI • COMMISSION MINUTES OP MEETING MELD ON October 15. 1975 • PREPARED BY THE ORRICE OIL THE CITY CLERK CITY HALL 1 •it ! ty` ll,;i .-'' {',i A'4:) dr, 11—L RLA ;'JnY oFFICIALS of, City (vnil V) 'rri .4.aa..t'L I J." U ;iL.L1.) on ric t03 ? if : e„:11) )) l J✓ P../.ANC trerS, Chairman PREs UT RLPR"-.SritriN'1 JJ z r1(r 1)rPARr'ENTt SUM VADGEti pNDA JAMrESON RE i�tsENt1l1G RLA o? DEPA; TMIENT: 3 � � 7 w ,RIEwV1;� REPPESE14TTr;r, THE CITY or MIAMI ! qo,i�; S, LLQYD 1W)2'0 R. ,;Pouch IN ADDITION, REPRESEi;rAT i V S OF sE'r1:RAL CRGA;ii ZATio,rs Ai;J E';PLOYt E GROUPS WERE IN ATTENDAncC, IN SESSION: 3 :10 P M. Mr. Andrews, city Manager: `Ir. Padgett, 1 :sm going to carry you through this real quickly to brine you up to date as to where we ,!stand and hopefully outline a procedure in truing to arrive at a conclusion with reference tc' stipulation. We received the Justice Departments version cf the stipulation which was dated Seprtemher 17th. That stipulation was reviewed. Meetings were held in reference to that particular stipulation and as a result of those meetings, and other meetings that were held here in Miami, Mr. John Lloyd, the City Attorney of Miami, produced a City of Miami version of the stipulation which was dated 10/1(1/75 which 1 believe you received in the mail and 1 understand you have some comments in reference to this and that may he our point of beginning. 1 want to inform you and the other members of the .justice and Treasury Departments that the City Commission had an all -day meeting yesterday. The object was to review both the stipulations you presented and the stipulation that was developed by the City Attorney: and myself and to receive comments from the public and employee groups, individual employees, and organizations of the public that are particularly interested in this matter. to receive their comments and take their advices under consid- eration so the City Commission could arrive at a policy as to what they believed should he contained In the stipulation. There was a great deal of input at that meeting and very frankly the city attorney nor 1 have had as yet. the opportunity to take all of this information and generally understanding the city commission's position in this matter, have that dileneated into a document which we could hand to you at this time. 'That T hope now will occur is that you will respond first as you have indicated you wished to do. to the document that was furnished to you by the City prepared by Mr. Lloyd and dated 10/10/75 which was the citv's original proposal for the stipulation. After you have imparted your thoughts in relation to that document. then 1 want to go through page by page of the document and indicate to you areas where we want to make adjustments to that document and after we have taken into consideration what you say here and that which we will express to you as we proceed through this process. then T hope that you and the Treasury Department are tolerant of the fact that we will attempt to put a document in final form so it can b• delivered to you approximately nctober 22. We will do the best we can to get it to you by that date with the understanding that shortly thereafter if everything is inorder. that we would then be prepared to enter into the stipulation. The City Commission will certainly want en opportunity to review that final document and other public organizations and the city employee organisations will undoubtedly wish to do so also. 1f you caw be tolerant of that timetablis•. we think that we are very active in this over the past 6 weeks and particularly ssore*o over the last couple of week* and 1 an optimistic that we enter fat() a stipulation that will compliment the city:. affirmative action program in addition fulfill those desires that the Justice and Treasury Departments have. After Mr. Padgett has gone through the 10W) version of the stipulation. then as we go through the process page by page. Those of the audience who want to make a contribution. with reference to the particular matter that we will be dtscueelli. 1 would hope that you would tr./ to ltett yourself to the actual area that we have under conetderatton because T hops everyone appreciates that this is 4 very complex process to try to resolve a stipulation which is very specific by going through a committee process. Its not posaibls to satisfy svegyose's request and someone bag gat to wake a deciston. OCT 1511f5 r in order to come to a conclusion in behalf of the city so we can present it to the Justice and Treasury Departments. if you will proceed Mr. Padgett and express concerns if you have any in that area, we will move forward from there. Mr. Padgett: tt is obvious that the City has discussed a number of things subsequent to the time they sent us the document dated 10/6. In order to give them a response, Miss Davis i Jamieson and I find a number of problems. We indicated to the City that we would like to negotiate on the goals and this kind of thing and the City sent back to us a document as opposed to the 702 that we stated, they indicated they would be willing to hire 55% minorities as police officers and fire fighters and in various other. departments. We aren't saying that it is far off but we will continually ask for rational basis for coming up with a stated percentage and the city is 152 off of every category that we had stated. A rational basis for it and we think we have problems with it. I think we might start with paragraph (6) on the GOALS where it says for entry level, official and upper level administrative, we had asked for 20Z and the City said they were willing to 9d10Z and we looked at the turnover statistics and we don't think that would be any more than 2 or 3 people a year. t don't care what yardstick you use to measure - we just don't think you are getting anywhere. And for every one of the other categories, other than paragraph 1. With 60/55, we have no problems. We thought the others were reasonable requests initially. We will be satisfied by cutting it down 15%. Another example of something that we see is in promotional goals. We had indicated that we were interested in something on the order of either population or based on the percentage of employees within a particular department. The City wrote back and said they will promote blacks, females and latins as vacancies occur and as their names are reached on the eligible register. Now, after looking at that, you couldn't come up with anything and you are going to keep doing what you are doing now. Maybe somebody can explain it to me but we don't think that is a response to what we were talking about. We don't think its even an alternative. The other thing. in yours its paragraph 5B. (Reads paragraph) yours says, you will promote blacks, latins and females as their names are reached on the eligible list. We just don't understand what you are going to be doing different. The other thing is that we don't see any difference to any position that you have offered on the Police Dept. There is just no movement whatsoever there. As a point of information, we have also suggested to the city that we would be willing to settle this document without resolving the issue of back pay and we would be willing to take that to Court and resolve it and bring it before a tribunal at that particular time. We think that provides the city the opportunity to do 2 things. I- they indicated they didn't think the back pay was required under the Florida Constitution, they can address that issue and 4110 any of the individuals we put forth that we think are deserving of say, monetary relief, you will have a chance to challenge them at that time. Mr. Lloyd: Mr. Padgett, one question I have in mind. I would want to re4erve the right to address au issues. Mr. Padgett: Okay. Mr. Lloyd: Not limit it to those. I would not want to be pre-cluded from raising any issue to be appropriate to be raised is court. Mr. Padgett: okay, but I thought if we did that, there wouldn't be any necessity for us to attempt to settle - I think. Nr. Lloyd: I a• talking about the issue of back pay. Solely with respect to the issue of back pay. t would vent to have all the fames I can have. 2 OCT 151175 Mr. Padgett: I think that those are the subs you suggested to us and 1 think I have addres major ones. I apologize, the City was going to furnish us changes involving Sanitation Department. Mr. Lloyd: They are in there. itive changes that sed myself to the with some suggested Mr. Padgett: 1 apologise for that oversight. They sent us something prior to and subsequent even to this - I can sum it up by saying we hope the City is going to indicate something different than what we see on the items I discussed. Mr. Andrews: This is difficult to respond to in that this is a judgment factor in the goal we have established for the City and to establish a goal that will be difficult, if not impossible, to meet, perhaps is not realistic. We had hoped that the SSX, using that as an example, would be acceptable. I hope we can achieve a percentage higher than that but there is no way of assuring that that will be accomplished. What concerns me is what kind of position will the City be in if it goes about the process of removing restrictions wherever we can and demonstrates good faith and demonstrates that we have the kind of recruitment that you hoped we would have in various positions and we still not achieve not anywhere 701. What are the consequences of that? Mr. Padgett: I am not arguing for 707. - no. I said 5 no problem but the rest of the reductions is where we major problem. i think, not the proof of the pudding example when you knock 15% off every paragraph except even you thought 157 from 20% was just too low. Even are talking about 2 or 3 people a year. or 5 years. 5 or 60% was have the but for paragraph 6, at 10%, you Mr. Lloyd: Well I think that this understanding could be that we will have to present that and we will present it to the governing body for their decision eventually. Mr. Padgett: And on that, if you're going to say that I wish you would tell them that 201 in a city that is 75% or very close to that minority is just not, there just isn't any give in 20%. Mr. Paulks Excuse me. I'd just like to offer this comment and it is something that has been provided to the Justice apartment, to the Treasury Department en prior occasion in writing if I'm not mistaken. And it is something that is very germain to this problem. Yost I recognise that under the census the City of Miami is made up ethnically of about S© or better percent of Latin population and 27-2S1 black and the balance of others. What t think also is very important is the tact that, and in speaking to the Latin community not to them parse but to the issue of the Latin community, is that up until October of 1972 that those people who were not citisens, and that did not just mean Latin people that meant anyone who was not a citieen of the United States was not elgtble to apply for work with the City of Miami. That provision was stricken down in 1972 late its 72. other than that from that very first notification in 1974 the Justice Dsp+nt- msnt that we had not proper representation of Latin asks up in the city's work force there was about two years from the restriction with regard to the eliminat- ion of citisenship requirement and obviously there are many Latin peopie in this community whether they are from Cuba, South America or whatever that are not citisens and they are not elgible for that. t want to make this a strong point because it is a strong point in the diminishment of the 701 that you speak of. Mr. Padgett' A11 right, I'd like to speak to that before you... As close as we've been able to determine from the census figures at least even disregarding the straight up and down citisens requirement as close as we may determine that 14-201 of the people in 1970 were citisens and that does not include, ... of the Latin population ems close as we've been able to determine. I Man it is a very taproots', figure that at least one of the parents which would pretty closely indicate what the household vas like - at least 2045► of these people were cit- isens and that doss not even include the nuMber that were being natuuraltaed and a lot of other factors that were involved in this. So we are still talking about anywhere tree 30 to 401 of the people being elgibie for jabs within the city. 3 Nris117s Mr. Paulk: I'm saying that's not true and I'm not saying that it is true. Mr. Padgett: I understand what you're saying but what we continually hear is this myth about there available or who have either citieenship problems I'm saying that to clear up not being Latins who were or something else. UNIDENTIFIED SPEAKER! I want to address the question of goals. is this the right tine to do it? Mr. Andrews: Your nave for the record and if you'11 make your statement very short because we're going through a process here or reviewing the first draft that was submitted to the Justice Department, not the draft that was reviewed, the same draft but there were other matters that were taken into consideration in relation to that draft that the Justice Department does not have... UNIDENTIFiED MAKER! I think my comments would be valid to either of the drafts because... my name is Miguel Gonzalez-Pando, Affirmative Action board of the City of Miami. i think it was Mr. Lloyd, he mentioned a thing about the good faith of the City of Miami in trying to comply with the goals that would be agreed upon. I think the time to show good faith is right now first of all and then we can worry about good faith later. but let's have some realistic goals that reflect good faith at this point. i just want to put this whole thing in perspective at least my per- spective. I'm really very disappointed with either draft. For example, I'm just going to address myself to the point 5 when we are talking about professional posit- ions. Let's see what we're talking about here in terms of real numbers. Mr. Andrews: Excuse me, I don't want to cut you off in any way but will you pick out one of the specific areas and make your comments directly in that area so we can come to some conclusion and appreciate what you're... Mr. Pando: Ok, I'tz going to address myself to page 13 paragraph S: for entry level professional positions, 1St minorities is a revised figure. It used to be 20 in the old draft and i have problem with... Mr. Padgett: Well, you're talking about paragraph 6 used to be 20. Mr. Pando: Yes, paragraph 6 that used to be 20. That's the one I want to address myself. Thank you, Mr. Padgett. Mr. Andrews: What we're discussing now is the draft that was submitted on 10-10, page 13, item SS... Mr. Pando: six, I was confused. I just want to put this question into perspect- ive, Mr. Padgett, so that we can understand the dissensions of what we're talking about. At that level the best statistics that we have available, since we're still waiting for the report from the City Manager on this - the latest one anyway, is that positions earning $25,000 or more; and more or less they correspond with what we're talking about here, official and upper administrative positions, at that level we find that 98• of city employees are non -minority and that only 21 are minority. Two percent, that includes women, blacks and Latins in • city that only the blacks and Latins composed 74s of the total population. Now, we're talking about 20% In the old draft and 10% in this one. Now it just so happens that at that level the turn over rate is so insignificant between 2 and 3% a year. lls're not talking about 20% in the old or 100 here as a goal in terms of numbers, absolute numbers but Ln terms of new positions, new entry level positions. Right? Ok. What that would mean taking into consideration that '2 or 3% turn over rate which I'a over estimating so that there can be no questions about it it would mean that even full compliance with a decree, assuming 201 not /0% but 20% over the full pas o covering this Consent Decree of S years the total net effect that it would have is that 95• of entry level officials and upper level administrative positions would still be Anglos and only about 05 would be minorities, black, Latins and women - St in 5 years assuming full compliance with the law I think that is not enough. I think that the law covering Affirmative Action is very clear and it has as I see it two aspects. One is the removal of barriers and obstacles that have an adverse affect upon minorities. That is one aspect of it and the second ens is to redress the adverse affect of past discriminatory practices. I don't think that really you're aawiny hseo and trying to find an equitable and fair solution. And i think if all you can accomplish at that level, and that's where the decisions are meads, is to have St of minorities. blacks, Latins and women over a period of S years to as it is ridiculous. Mr. Padgett; let me partially respond because I agree with basically the state- ment that you're masking and that's why I wade the statement that i did that we don't think that there is any give there. The other thing is that we've been 4 OCT 15 b1D trying to say and we'd like the people to keep in mind is that whatever goal we're talking about is Ainittnams. If there are more qualified minorities than 20% you know, and they have been applying we think the city has to really justi- fy it with some kind of strong convincing proof that these people were discrim- inated against when they did not hire them. So what we're talking about here is minimums and we clearly want to see them attain the minimswn at the worst and much more at the best. Mr. Pardo: Ok. My view based on past esperience,and the Cohen issue makes it very clear, is that what seems minimal turns out to be unaccomplishable, almost an impossible dream. And as we have heard hers. So I would like to see some realistic goals and i would appeal to the city to show good faith at this point. Mr. Andrews: Alright, we understand what your conditions are for this and we'll take that under advisement. Mr. Lloyd: Mr. Andrews, with all due respects I suppose now we've started this but i don't think we're going to get anywhre by having the public speak at this time. Mr. interrupted and I'd like to hear what Mr. Padgett has to say. Mr. Andrews: I want Mr. Padgett to finish first, Mr. Fannatto and than I'll make a decision whether I'll open this up for general discussion before we begin to present this item by item. Mr. Ernie Fannatto: Mr. City Manager, I don't think Mr. Padgett has a clear picture of the City of Miami and that's what I'd like to give him and also their quests, Mrs. Davis and Miss Jamieson. Mr. Andrews: Mr. Fannatto, I'm going to rule you out of order. I'll call upon you a little bit later. Please. Mr. Fannatto: I think you're doing an injustice. I think they should know the true picture of why there hasn't been the quota of minorities on file and taken care of in the manner that they wanted to. Mt. Andrews: I'll give you an opportunity to make a 3 minute statement a little bit, in a few minutes, Mr. Fannatto, but let Mr. Padgett finish, please. Mr. Fannatto: ...and not we're getting the Latins and I think we should.... Mr. Andrews: Mr. Padgett, then your main concern at this time is in the areas of to goals and in reference to the documents that we sent to you. Are there other areas? Mt. Padgett: It's more than just the goals. For example... I thought I tried to cover them. One is the hiring goals and the other is promotional goals. That would be paragraph 5 (b) in yours and it would be the same in ours. On yours it is 13 and on ours it is 13... I'm sorry, it is 12. ... Mr. Lloyd: This is what you propose and you feel this is a fair proposal? Mr. Padgett: Yes, and what you proposed is... Ok? Do you understand what the difference of your language and ours is? Mr. Lloyd: I understand. Mr. Andrews: This is part of the problem that we're going to have all afternoon now is, and please you all must recognise that there are not only the Justice Department draft but the City of Miami's redrafting and then the employee organ- isations. Mr. Jessie Mc Crary supplied us with additional comments in written forms the Fire Department has: the Police Department has and the sanitation Depart- ment has supplied us with some information this afternoon. Mow once again I want to state the object of all of this is to copes to an understanding in the very ser- ious areas and maybe it won't be even possible to core to uadsrstandinq but cer- tainty I and Mr. Lloyd will take into consideration advice" and oonosrns and then try to drstt a final document from the city's point of view which vitt be 'Omitted to the Justice Department and will be mods to the commission and all the employees and public representatives and the advisory committee simultaneously cad hopefully we will et that point in time have closed any of the real serious gaps that we have and be down to some final language that can bs arrived at for the sttpulatton. bit. Padgetts I on.... eglae. On the 9/17 draft it is paps 12. That's what Vs ping 5 OCT 1511175 Mr. Mc Crary: Which draft are you vx eking oh? Mr. Padgett: 9/17. Ok? ... Mr. Andrews: Excuse me. 9/17 is a draft from the Justice bepartmeht. Just a minute, 1er. me finish. Mr. Lloyd: it is paragraph 5 (b) in either draft. Mr. Andrews: Let me announce once again the two drafts that we're working with. One is the draft originally prepared by the Justice Department and the only date identification is on the front page and it is 9/17/75. If you'll look at that there is only one date. Then the second draft is the same page except up in the left hand corner of the page it has, "Proposal by City of Miami" dated 10/10/75. Those are the two drafts. We took the 9/17/75 6 OCT 151915 Mr. Andrews: Draft dated 10/10 of that original those are the two. how we got many other amendments to this 10/10 but that will only cost confusion if we start dealing with those other drafts so you want to stay with these two drafts. Mow we are relating to page 12 of the original draft in item B-promotion and that's the Justice Department promotion version for that paragraph versus the city's rewriting of that which is found on page 13 of the 10110 draft which is also identified as promotion. Mr. Padgett is now discussing the difference between those two approaches. Mr. Padgett: All I think - Mr. Lloyd had asked a question. I think 1 explained what our differences were. ok. Then the next is we agreed in terms of effective class we would leave that (open) as it may relates to the question of specific relief. Ok I see the city added some language. And the other one except for (c) which is still open. Now the next paragraph is promotion and transfer pool yes as it relates to the question of specific relief back pay that type of stuff and as it specifically relates to paragraph (c) of that which the city objects to. Next would be government -page 13, the city- page 14, paragraph (7).Promotion and/or Transfer Pool. The city has offered some suggested language . We have no problems with changing the language. The way we read the city is what it does open up (it open up and transfers for everybody and we think we what will happen is we will end up frustrating the opportunity for minorities, unless the city can show us something different than that. Mr. Lloyd: Well,like can you give me a suggestion to what you would will an ideal Mr. Padgett: It says the city will --- it starts off, it says we say the City shall compute the seniority of each member of the affected class interested in this provision. The City starts off saying , the City will expand the existing career opportunity program program to include all entrance level classifications thereby allowing an employee inter- ested to make an application for selection. So that's an open transfer, that in- cludes everybody that's hired by the city. Mr. Paulk: That is correct. That is everyone that is employed all incumbent. Mr. Padgett: What we are saying is either lend up that would delude or frustrate the opportunity of what has been identified as the effective class ------ We are not saying that we won't accept that but we are the saying the city has really got to explain that to US. Mr. Paulk: Then I think you have to go back to the original indication here promotion subject to the availability of qualified applicants, promotional goals shall ---reading from page 12 of the original draft as I understand--- with each department having as its yearly goal, until the long term goal has been met for a period of one year, either parity with the Miami City workforce population statistics or the percentage of minorities current ly employed in the department, whichever is smaller. Priority opportunity for promotion within a particular department shall be provided to qualified persons who have indicated a desire or interest in the promotion, transfer and assignment opportunities created by this decree. Mr. Padgett: Mr. Paulk, can I say something else? The problem is the way you are reading that is that you are reading from our version and in your version it doesn't con- tain that. Mr. Paulk: I understand that completely and that's why I want to go back to this section to give you some rational as to the reasoning for (7) as it was proposed by the city because in effect as i would construe the section (b) on page 12 of the original raft that was submitted by the Justice Department that in effect would establish quotas setting up priority and I think we've been caution that if quotas should evolve that »e can expect the suit. Mr. Padgett: No we didn't say that that were a quota. I think it's far back as - 1I believe the specific person that objected to the original language let me me finish until I can tell you why he said that was not a quota. In fact I believe the specific person insisted that we change the language we had before this draft vas Mr. Weston. if I'm not mistaken. Perimeter on paragraph involving promotion and transfer and promotion, he indicated some objection to some language because he had said that it was a quota and he had problems with it and we changed it to this language at his specific request. Mr. Paulk: That may be I can't say that he gave you the language to provide. be may have raised that question at that time in Washington. but I don't knew that he dratted this language for you. And what I'm saying to you is that probably in the second sentence which reads: Priority opportunity for promotion within a particular department shall be provided to qualified persons who have indicated 4 desire or interest in the promotion, transfer and assigamsat opportunities created. Each person reepoodtng to tide request shall be promoted or transferred pursuant to the provisions of paragraph 7 below. Which takes is the affected clans and ldeatiftss people i:bo mill be promoted. I'm saying that 7 OCT 1511T5 to effect presents itself to be as a quota. now you may disagree. Mr. Padgett: Our attorney disagree, but I view it as that. The only people that were being concluded here under our language are people who are defined in terse of the "affected class", those people who we say have not been provided opportunity to be promoted and/or who had been using the word "discriminatorily assigned". We don't use it but even if we don't use that word we are still attempting to accomplish the ease thing. These are people who we think if we were pushed to proof in court we could show had been discriminatorily assigned,hired or denied promotional opportunity and the law says that it is not unlawful to say provide these people with opportunities to be promoted, transferred or hired. Mr. Paulk: Let me ask you a question? In your definition of assignment takes into consideration the initial in hiring, am i correct? All right. Now people that are employed by this city have applied for the job that they were employed in and I don't believe that you could allude to discrimination in those people having been hired for something that they sought. They truly sought the position that they were hired for. Mr. Padgett: Ok, I beg the difference with you but we can discuss that at some other time. All right once again I guess the Sanitation Department is the easiest place :o start. Mr. Paulk: I wouldn't say that. Mr. Padgett: Ok, --- I guess you pay your money and take your chose. That's the easiest way 2 can answer it but the point is this. As we view itle VII that a black hired in the City of Miami until very recently had a better than 75% chance if you were hired at all was being hired into the Sanitation Department. I don't care whether you say he went there by chose, chance or somebody sent him there or sent them there, that's the only place they were getting hired. Ok? Now, in Title VII doesn't worry about intent it worries about effects and that's clearly the effect of this city's hired policies that blacks has had such undesirable jobs. Females by enlarged or concentrated in clerical or secretarial positions now whether they applied there or was sent there or somebody told them it was an opening there regardless of how you cut it that's where they are. Mr. Paulk: I understand your analysis. I don't agree with it. Mr. Padgett: Ok, fine. Mr. Lloyd: Let me make one brief comment. Thia comment was made to me by a member of our staff. We have a lady lawyer on her staff who I think was the first lady police sergeant of the United States and she saw I believe paragraph (e) and said, well this means that if I wanted to tranfer back co the police department "I could transfer back to the police department with my salary of $24,000.00 a year and get it and be a sergeant when get (I don't know what they get in the police department) and they'd have to pay me that and in addition to that even when I got promoted to lieutnant, I would still get .: t .ite higher than either three times". And if that's the case I don't believe that we give clearly that we can live with that because of not only morale problems but legally we got a charter provision that says that everybody in the same class allot . Mr. Padgett: We don't disagree with --I think we strongly disagree with her analysis of the paragraph but it clearly was not our intention. Mr. Lloyd: Maybe it's not your intention but that's what it appears to say. Mr. Padget.: Ok. And Ell we are saying on the basis of rate retention is this, that if a person transfers from say a clerical position into say ----let's say an entry level Executive Administrative position -say a female transfers from a secretary position or a clerical position into ---- all we are saying is that that person not have to take a pay cut in order to seek this job opportunity. We don't say that well if the person desires to be transferred continually downward they are going to forever get there Kr. Lloyd: That isn't what I said. That isn't what I said. In the first place what you ars saying is that just what I said. If a lawyer in my department wishes to transfer back to being a sergeant of police, she will have to get $24,000.00 instead of $16,000, or $13.000 •• or $17,000, or 514400 -•- or whatever it is a police sergeant gets. tlr. Pa4getts All right. Ok. Mr. Lloyd: Well it says no camber of the affected class who makes a lateral or downward transfer for the purpose of encharctng promotional opportunities, AMU be paid at a lower rate than the rate for the job from which the person transferred,. W. Padgett: All right. but there is a part that you aren't using and that's this, 8 OCT ID that we are saying that the people who are takeaunder this were people who have been identified in traditional female jobs. In all deference to you t don't think being lawyer to the City Attorney's Office is what we classify as a traditional female job. Mr. Lloyd: No I don't think so. Mr. Padgett: And if you look at the jobs that are traditionally black or ttsil- itionally female you would end up in the lower paying or usually the lowest paid jobs in the city even though the Sanitation Department isn't necessary the lowest paying job. It is considered an undesirable job and you don't find many people wanting to transfer there. Mr. Lloyd: Yea, but the principle is still the same. Mr. Padgett: But if you look at it in terms of "affected class" and then took at this I don't think you will come out with that explanation. Mr. Andrews: What Mt. Lloyd is getting at is the actual mechanics and applications at a right of the individuals who choose to exercise them right under this stipulations because it affects every single employee in the city. Mr. Padgett: Well, let me answer in terms of this City Attorney. She would be ineligible for the transfer right off. Mr. Lloyd: Fine. But I was just using that as an example, but somebody in a lower thing wouldn't be ineligible for a transfer. Supposing a secretary wanted to get trans- ferred to a lower level Executive position that the secretary if you happened to be making more than the lower level Executive would continue to get the secretary pay. Mr. Padgett: That's right you understand it then. Mr. Lloyd: Well, we can't do that. That's the problem: That's the problem: Mr. Padgett: But we are saying is that we don't think they should lose any of the rights that they have in order to be able to take advantage of the opportunities that are provided here. Mr. Lloyd: We have a legal problem, that's the problem. L'd like to study it first. But there is a problem on this one.It isn't the question of individuals it's the problem of the entire situation. Mr. Padgett: Ok, well we now understand why we have a difference. Ok. Mr. Lloyd: Let me ask you this are you adamant on this,do you insist that this be this way? in other words, we can't say that we are flexible and not be flexible. Mr. Padgett: Let's put it this way. Mr. Lloyd: L'd like to tell the Commission this is it or else, one way or another. Mr. Padgett; Let's put it this way we may not be cement but we are steel. Mr. Lloyd: Well- you're saying the sass thing. You are saying thts is it. Mr. Padgett: We are pretty rigid on that. This we are extremely rigid oe that. Mr. Lloyd: I understand. Ok. Mr. Andrews: Now, let's get back to the initial question that was raised to the paragraph (7)---- Mr. Lloyd: one more question.---- On the entire---- there are several sub paragraphs on (a,b,c,d, and e) that's far as paragraph (7) goes? Weil, I was going to say are you rigid an all of the sub paragraphs under paragraph (7) or just on (e)? Mr. Padgett: All right. Part of what is going on here -lot me say w are being rigid in this way is that it is very difficult to except the position that you have taken in your draft if you exclude ail of the prior language to concerning promotion and what- ever else that you sight have, ok? Because all of it's kind of inter related. It say not Look like it from reading individual paragraph but tt you read the paragraphs as a Male they are related. Hr. LLoyO: Well I understand that paragraph (4) with respect to your "affected cIa..TM, as related to paragraph (7) that's what you are talking about. 9 OCT 1511175 Mt. Padgett: Exactly and also paragraph (b) of 5 is related to prctfotion .and transfer. Mr. Lloyd: Yes. Mt. Padgett: Ok, they are all in the twine. Mr. Lloyd: Yeas. I understand. Mr. Andrews: The area that began this particular discussion began with the introductry paragraph of promotion and/or transfer pool and that perhaps is even the more serious area because I want to make sure that we all have an understanding of what it is that you are requesting and I'll state it so that I make sure that I understand completely and you correct me if I'm wrong. When we re•drafted this we re -drafted it in such a way that that provision was applicable to all employees of the city and it's your position and I want to know if there's any flexibility in this area because this is a very concerned area for the city. Mr. Paulk you comment if you have any different feeling and I want to hear an expression from you because this falls within the Civil Service area and would drastically change that area if it is finally embodied in any stipulation that we would enter into and I'll read it so the audience can hear it those that do not have the original submission by the Justice Department. Seven(7) on page 13 is Promotion and/or Transfer Pool - (a). The City shall compute the seniority of each member of the affected class. (I'm going to stop there to indicate that the affected class is described as paragraph (6) which identifies the minorities, including women. So I'll re -read it. The City shall compute the senirrity of each member of the affected class interested in this prov- ision based on the total seniority of that person within the City. The City shall maintain a last of people signing up under the provisions of this paragraph 6. Now, all the other sub sections that fall under :hat,that pertain to only that body of people that are identified the affected class in the stipulation and what it means, if I could an illustration. That a black, latin or a women in the Sanitation Department who would have the opportunity (first a list is devised and they are placed on this list based on seniority provision according to their capability to perform certain work. Now as job opening occurs in another department they would be given first priority to move from the Sanitation Department to some other department over the balance of the employers in the city and as I understood the rational for that is expressed by Mr. Padgett is the fact that he believed that these people have been discriminated against that they have not had the opportunity in the past to fill these kind of positions that now they should be given a priority position. Mr. Padgett: We are saying that they should be offered first preference. Now the reason it isn't a quota as Mr. Paulk is saying is when we enter consent decree we are not asking that you say that you discriminated against anybody you know for the only tine that the actual say results of what we have identified has been the problem comes up is with people. Mr. Andrews: (Someone wishes to speak)--- No, I'm not going to recognize you. We to finish this process first. I am not going to recognize you at this point. Other- wise we won't get through. It's already 4:00 o'clock. : But you said you wanted contributions on specifics and I want to address he question of hiring. Mr. Andrews: When we go through the city's version of this page by page you'll have :<<. opportunity to do that, but right now we having an exchange between understanding the •wo drafts that were transmitted so that we understand clearly the differences between the .:rafts prepared by the City Clerk and the draft that was submitted to us by the Justice Department. When that process is finished then we will begin the process of going page by page to the city. When we get to that portion I'll recognise you. : Mr. City Manager, I just wanted to verification on the language of this. When will hav• the opportunity to get this clarification? Mr. Andrews: You can have that an raise questions when we o back poise b��Y e t city's version , which I'm sure you have. I'm not going to dents anyone e oPp�un� y to speak but if we don't have some order as I precede it. I say not be right but at least as 1 preceivc it we won't finish. You're right: Mr. Paulk: Excuse me. With regard to that that's what t was saying that I view it as being a quoits?though it exceeds what a quota would indicate in my estimation, because it definitely $�ferenttai priority consideration to those people that you identified, as the effective class. llr. !adieus Rut to Title VII that's logical. I's saylag wider the Largest developed 1V OCT 15/1ts under Title Vil. Mr. Lloyd: 1 understand. Mr. Padgett: Probably want us to furnish you so>:ne sites we don't have thee. Mr. Lloyd: No, no. Mr. Andrews: Mr. Paulk, do you have anything else you want to add? Mr. ?sulks Yes, primarily -•-- I understand what you are talking about as far as computing the seniority. Seniority from the very beginning of that person becoming employed. Stegardly of what they were employed in. When they make a desire this becomes apart of the consent decree to move into a position. They would be given the most ... Mr. Padgett: What that does is give you some basis of choosing two things. Choosing among employees when you say two employee's say of equal ability. The employee who is more senior in this particular situation would be the person who would be allowed to transfer or be promoted first. Ok. Mr. Lloyd: You mean senior with regard to totality of employment. In other words a person having 12 years no matter what he had it in would be senior to somebody having 10 years. Mr. Padgett: Exactly. Mr. Lloyd: However, Mr. Padgett: In terms of being promoted. Mr. Lloyd: In terms of being promoted. Not regardless of qualification. You could have a situation where a man could be having worked for the city as a clerk for 10 years and suddenly want to be a swimming instructor or a life guard and he doesn't know how to swam. Mr. Padgett: Yes we understand that and I say it and I qualified it initially by saying that every other -if they were equally qualified the seniority should ---- Mr. Paulk: Well it goes a little further than that Mc. Padgett. Where the person is a senior applicant who needs or could reasonable be expected to meet after exact probation- ary period. So it goes by seniority --- Mr. Padgett: And qualification. Mr. Faulk: Well. who meets or can reasonable be expected. So it doesn't go by necessarity qualifications if you expect that they can obtain to achieve that within a period of probation. yr. Padgett: Yes and I can tell you something just as ---- what the language is driving at is employees vho are all under the same classification to do essentially the same thine and are etieibie for promotion tato another classification. For example one of the things we are talking about in the Sanitation Department was the sanitary inspector. Did you want to include that job within the promotion structure of the City Sanitation Department. I would assume that are a number of people who are qualified for that position u choose among the qualified people we think the seniority should be the determining factor if all other things are equal. Mr. Faulk: That's within a given department and I can reasonably understand that and that is contained within --- Mr. Padgett: Scow, it gets more complicated if we are saying all the people who are is the eligible promotional pool if it crosses quality ----if it crosses ------ Say if its a position that people is the Sanitation Department are conpetiting against people is the lecreation Department say it's a driving job they want to be promoted --- to (ve think the some criteria') it's the most objective criteria' you can use. If they both have skills of driving than the determining factor should be who has the most senior- ity with the city. Mr. Faulk: I understand your positions. With regard to -- well you are not talking about Sanitation Inspector? Mr. Padgett: No I's not. I said it it was a differsst position sod tbs psopis wino are caepetitia$ tor the jo% were is the Sanitation Dspartmest and the Iscreatios apartment. 11 OCT155 Mr. Andrews: But the critical area in this paragraph is the "affected class" and the definition of the "affected class" is a very critical area. Mr. Padgett: Five, six, and seven, you can say they should be read together. I don't think you !should say that one paragraph is ultimately more important than the other. That's the reason I can't storm the thing, but we are very, very firm on wanting to include something of this concept within the relief of the proposed consent order. Mr. Andrews: All right. Is there other areas. Mr. Padgett: The other major one was the police department. We have not agreed on almost anything involving the police department. Mr. Andrews: WEIl, I think we have to come to some understanding or some conclusion as to that which was stipulated in reference to the Cohen case and this stipulation and from an administrative point of view. If there was some way of arriving at this stipulat- ion which would permit the Cohen case remain as it stands without further adjustment that's the provision I think the city would try to achieve in that particular area. Mr. Padgett: Ok. Let me say one thing before Mc Crary stands up because I think that --any time you mention the Cohen case it peculiar related to an interest that he has and we recognise that. But the point that we are making is the Cohen case and I have to use a legal term is not race-adjudleata against the United States Government Title VII case and by that I mean the Cohen case was brought under a different statute and they were addressing theoretical different problems and the other point of it is that a suit brought by the government is not brought ---the government as an individual entity and what goes on in those law suits are not necessarily a problem involving the government ok. I can't say it any other way. Mr. Lloyd maybe ---- Mr. Lloyd: Well no I don't intend too. I assume if we get that far we'll argue theft without the court. But one of the problems that we have with respect to the police department is are we going by the Cohen decree or are we going by this decree? Now, which is which --- Mr. Padgett: I think the thing that you should think about is and I think ( you talked to Mr. Mc Crary on that) is that the questions that we're addressing are very broad face questions they include not only blacks, but Latins and females. The only issue that was addressed directly were the only class that was addressed directly in the Cohen case were black, even though there was relieved to some extent included for latins we realize that. Ok? Mr. Pauik: Let me pose a question to you yr. Padgett with regard to six, seven (five. six and seven) in transfer pool discussin the possibility of placing people in the police officer positions. Obviously there are no experience requirements. The only requirements are age, physical. medical. high school graduate, above some few other minimum things which many many people will meet, which many people in an "affected class" as described in here could very logical be expected to meet. Now taking into consideration the affect of the court suit in which an independent testing agency has been contracted with to develop a validated testing procedure for the selection of police officers and that is in the process of being validated right now. Are you suggestion that this consent decree here through five. six. and seven could cause one who meets those minimum requirements to be eligible to apply for police officer could by virtue of the fact that they would like to be a police officer. become a police officer without having to participate in an examination which is now being validated for the selection of police officers. Mr. Padgett: Ok. I can add the hest answer to that. We are if they Met the qualifications and the qualifications means screening. Mr. Paulk: But does it include the test? ?U. Jamieson: I! it's a valid test then that's probably one of the qualifications that certainly is a umething ---- !!r. Paulk: Well yes. but you are saying "if". "it". and certain. I'm wanting to be absolut Ms. Jamieson: Well your qualifications for police officers are axes. education. and teat and a successful performance: on a written test. Mr. Paulk: You are not scpini then that -- MA. Jamieson: to, I'm saying that's what your qualifications are and if someone setts teas qualifications and happens to be is the affected class. y 12 OCT 151175 Mr. Paulk: tf they pass the test to become a police officer. Me. Jamieson t That's one of your qualifications. Mr. Paulk: That doesn't change the selection oftSlice officer, that's whet you are stating to us at this point. Mr. Padgett: We've always stated that, but the problem is and I think you are getting to it is that we just haven't been able to almost discuss anything involving the police department. Mr. Paulk: Well in five, six, and seven it certainly doesn't relate to having to take the test --- I'm not saying you are wrong but he's says that --- paragraph 7 (h) on page 1.3, if I'm correct. 13 OCT 151171 10/15/75 Tape 3. Mr. Padgett: It says prierity opportunity for promotion within a particular department shall be provided to qualified persons who have indicated a desire or interest in the proMotion ...assignment opportunities created by this decree. And we mean by qualified persons are those persons who meet the stand aids. Mr. Paulk: Well, th*t's not what 7 (b) is saying, Mr. Padgett. "A Member of the affected class shall be given the initial opportunity to fill any vacancy in the city where the person is the senior applicant who meets, or could reasonably be expected to met after an initial probationary period, the minimum qualifications for the position." Mr. Padgett: I misread, I read a different paragraph. I'm sorry. But what you're saying is right. You're reading 7 (b). Mr. Paulkt Yes, sir. Mr. Andrews: That's the area in which you're using the example of an individual who becomes police officer... Mr. Padgett: You're saying... I guess based on the way you're reading that that you're saying do you have to let people go into the Police Department without tak- ing the teat? Mr. Paulk: That is correct. Mr. Padgett: No, we didn't say that. Mr. Paulkt I know you're not verbally stating it. Mr. Padgett: No, we're not.. Mr. Paulk: Am I correct in my perception as to what this sentence I just read to you would indicate? Mr. Padgett: Ok, Alright, maybe we should say, if we excluded the comma and just say, "who also meets the minimum qualifications for the position." Does that help you? Mt. Paulk: Well, I'm just pointing out what I see this to be. I don't agree with this whole thing. Mr. Padgett: We're not saying that if you get, let's say even if you get a person who meets, falls within the A frames let's say he is 24 years old. If that person cannot read and write, as you may have one or two people in the Sanitation Depart- ment who can't, that person is inelgible to become a policeman because that person is not qualified. Mr. P4u1k: That could reasonably be expected but it doesn't take in the examinat- ion process. Mr. Padgett: The qualification ... Mr. Paulk: It does not. As I have view this... We're not talking about just police officers we're talking about all things. .... Mt. Padgett: Qualifications will mean different things in different departments that's the reason we use the word qualifications. That's all inclusive. Mtr. Paulk: under that analogy is it sate to assume then that anyone of the affected classes identified in this particular section the qualifications to be a whatever, it might be other than a pollee officer, that it is reasonably expected that they must pass the examination also? But you're not stating that. Miss Jamieson; It's also a part of the qualifications, sir, then that's what it is. Mr. Padgett; The answer is yes in short. Mr. Lloyds Rua that past me again. I understood that better then... 14 OCT15197 t Mies Jamieson: If the examination process as far as the qualifications and they have to pass examinations then that's part of the qualifications that they have to fulfill for that particular position. We're not saying to cilium. ate any of the qualifications but they have to pass them like anyone else. Mr. Andrews: Do we understand each other's position in this matter now as far as... I think somehow that area has to be redrafted to bring forth both views of how this should be approached in the final stipulation. Mr. Lloyd: One area which the commission questioned yesterday in the goals which brought up my original question about, what about the Cohen Case. Now in your goal One regardless of what percent you use for the minorities the commission's question if I reMeMber correctly Wass you see you've got for each entry level position of police officer now we have the Cohen Case which has a particular section in it referring to goals which applies. We didn't think that it was in conflict - the commission did. Mr. Padgett: It is not in conflict and I can answer that this way. In the Cohen Case you said that you are going to have 50% of the police officers by "X" date are going to be minority. Now we're saying that 55 or 60% Whatever we agreed on of the policemen you hire each year will be minority. There is a distinction there. Miss Jamieson: It may well be because of exceedingly low turn over or something like that that you will not at the end of 5 years be able to meet the long term goal which would be population parity. INAUDIBLE Miss Jamieson: Yes, that's our long term goal but.... Mr. Andrews: Is the long term goals based on population according to the law or is it based upon the work force? Mr. Padgett: It's based on work force. Mr. Andrews; In terms of the law at least at this point. The City Commission in many of its instances in designing its Affirmative Action Program has gone beyond that which is required in the law but : want to :Hake sure in a stipulat- ion that we meet the law and not go beyond that that the commission and others have ambitions to go beyond that but you understand that the city's wish to stick to the law as far as stipulations are concerned. Mr. Padgett; One way of looking at this maybe is that we are looking at this as kind of... We'll give you various kinds of yard sticks which to meet. In the Cohen Case it is a very set situation for a very, on a specific date if I'm not mistaken. Let me not put words in the mouths... Mr. Weinsoff s Mr. Mc Crary. Isutthere: is a distinction there that is worth noting. Mr. Andrews: Alright, are there other areas that you want to bring to our attent- ion? Mt. Padgett: The other was ... I don't think the reporting provisions do all of this are going to turn on whether we agree on things we're talking about. WE basic- ally agreed on the reporting and all of those other provisions an your version is essenttally the same es ours. We have no problem... Mr. Lloyd: Exactly, as far as i know. I don't think the is any change in the report. Mr. Padgett: The only other one and which I've already mentioned is sack Pay. And on Sanitation we haven't discussed on that and we don't think we'll have any problems with that. Mr. Andrew Ok, this concludes the first portion of this review. Now I'm going to recognise various members of the audience to wake a general statement. I would hope that you would limit your statement to about three minutes. After the state - meets are concluded then we're going to begin a process of reviewing the document that the city submitted to the Justice Department and it is identified as 10/10/73 so that we can go through that ra/most page by page and then when that process is completed, as I had indicated to Mr. Padgett, we will then embody in one fine/ draft ail of the... Mr. Padgett, 1 thought we were +goi one iwinary step before that. 15 OCT 151175 it was our understanding that you'd have additional input from the City s� sign aubsequent to this that we... Mr. Andrew's It is snore than just the City Commission. The City Commission eat as a policy board in this instance to hear from the various groups and they monitored and made suggestions in certain areas as a result of that information. in some areas they left discretion to myself and Mr. Lloyd and we want to go over those areas with you to find out, and you've covered a great number of those con- cerns already in your initial comments and really the meat of the area but we want to snake sure that there are no real other serious problems that we're aware of before we finally conclude and draft a Consent Decree. So Mr. Fannatto and where is the geentlesnan that i restrained from speaking before. Will you put the timer on. please, Mr. Clerk, and limit this to three minutes. Mt. Ernie Fannatto: Gentlemen, Ernie `yar,natto is my name and I'm President of the Taxpayers League of Miami and Dade County and the Homestead Tax Exemption League. I'd like to say after hearing discussion that I think the Justice Depart sent and the Treasury Department could be a little too stiff on asking for the number of Minority peoples employed. I'd like to point out that in getting a first class up to date staff you have to hire the right people for the right job. in addition to that you've got to have outstanding people that have ability to impart their knowledge. If not you're not going to do justice to the department and the City Manager is responsible Zor that department. So }:e must have qualia fied people. However, I am in favor of minorities seeking employment but I don't think they should be pushed up in a position they're not qualified. i think they should go through a training period. that I think the city can establish in that manner. I also would like to make mention of a few things. I think you people are here because of deliquencies that occurar. Now in making up your figures t'd like to point out that the colored people might have been discriminated because they've been employed for the last 30 years but the Latins, the most of the influx of the Latins have only come here in Dadc County not too many years ago. They come as our guests. They weren't citizens. Now what did happen, and I have to blame the federal government for some of t:- s, let's be fair about it. When the Latins come in here in Dade County they should have been distributed on a proratio basis of all the States in the country so as r.de County would not be burdened with the majority of them. However they were not. But they were sent out and then they let the federal government come back and took them back here in Dade County. Now I brng this out because there wasn't a stable population. In other words they would go in and out and come back here :n Dade County because they have their friends and the climate is somewhat like they have in Cuba. They like Dade County and I don't blame them but at the same time it has put a hardship on us here in Dade County. Now I also would like to point out, and you fellows affiliated with the Justice Department and Treasury Department, they're very very strict with the FBI. In order to get good FBI personnel you have to have the right people. We're just as strict I think her with the ?olice Department. We have one of the best Police Departments in Cade County. : think the City of Miami has the best because they have the right people for the right job. Now, if you are going to say put minotities in there and you push people into jobs they're not qualified for in the Fir. Department here is what the ,affect is going to be: You have fire prem- iums. When people are not physically able you have fire premiums that's going to cost a financial burden on the taxpayers of the City of Miami and I'm going to say the same thing for the Police Department although there might be a little more rooms for the Police Department to hire more people than the Fire Department. At the same time it is a risky job, they have to be qualified, they have to be on the alert and the policies will also cause a burden when there is a lot of accidents and people are no: qualified and they can't do the job. A11 I say is I hope you folks will go over some of your figures and not be as strict to the taxpayers of the City of Miami. I thins we want to cooperate. Minorities should get a break but it's got to be done in a business and orderly manner. Thank you for letting me speak. Mr. Andrews: Mow this gentleman over here who I stopped before. A general statement and the we'll coma back maybe to the specific thing you were talking about when we go trough Page by page ir. :.lie document. So if you have any general comments we will entertain those now. ufflown= SPIAAIRs No. I'd rather be specific. Mr. Andrews: Anyone eise whc would like to make a general statement? Alright. Mr. Jessie Mc Crary; my name is Jessie llc Crary representing the N.C.P.g.A. I've got to comment because I am: involved with some of the parties. It is not the intent of the parties I ropresent for this city to hire, promote or even en ags in having peapls in jobs where they are net qualified. Mow I don't know Meat the gentlemen 1�3 OCT 15 5 meant a few minutes ago but. I certainly wanted to go on the record that we are not here talking about putting a one-armed man on the police force to fight a fire. You know if you can make that kind of an analogy. We cer• tainly are talking about able bodied men who were just deprived of the oppor- tunities but who do have the skills to do such jobs. Likewise as it relates to the Latins I think Mr. Paulk brought out that citisenship in the United States is not the necessary requirement to employment in the city. So that there is no mistake with the commission and the gustice Department we are not asking you to nuke one a policeman. I don't have the qualifications to be that. Ok? UNIDENTIFIED SPEAKS : Just a pont of clarification, Mr. Andrews. The input that we had with the commission yesterday, is that to be presented within the city's proposal? Mr. Andrews: Yes, it is and we're going to be covering that page by page as we go through it. You'll hear those kind of announcements as we go through this. UNIDENTIFIED SPEAKER: i have a quick statement and a question. THe statement is that yesterday the... Mr. Andrews: Would you identify yourself, please? Mr. Daniel Holders I'm sorry. My name is Daniel Holder. I'm a member of the Miami Advisory Board on the Physically Handicapped. Yesterday the commission agreed to include in the provisions of the Consent Decree the physically handi- capped. It is a quite long involved process putting all the provisions in and I'd like to know how you would like that done. I have prepared a written state- Inent with the insertions to include the handicapped in the Consent Decree. Do you want me to as we go along hit each point specifically or would you rather have a chance to review the provisions in writing? Mr. Lloyd: Mr. Chairman, if I may be indulged I'll answer that. I think the answer to that is in the negative because of the fact that as I understand it the Justice Department has no objections of its inclusion and we can simply with your approval, I think we can streamline some time here, we'll simply include that in there and in view of the fact that it's not part of your pro- posal I think we can save some time to just include it. Mr. Padgett: Right. Let me say like I said before we have no objections but once again I've got to state we've got no authority to enforce it. We want that understood very very clearly. Mr. Holders I've written that out under jurisdiction that the Justice Department would not have jurisdiction to enforce those aspects of the Consent Decree. Mr Padgett: Ok, and they were included at the behest of the City Commission. Mr. Lloyd: I think we can get together on that one and save some time here if you don't mini. Mr. Holder: No, that would be fine. I will have a couple of comments on some of the specific provisions but we'll go over it later. t IPENTIF1L ) ia'EAKER: As I understand it is just general comment, right? Ok. Addre nnq myself to the dialogue that I heard here I get the impression, and again it is an opinion, that we're still talking quotas. Call them what you want, a rose by any other name is still a quota. Right? I'm concerned by the preferential treatment of any group for whatever reason at this point in time. I don't think that my organization can support that in any way. I would like to point out to you I think the law is clear on when preferential, if any prefer- ential treatment can occur, that is during a period when tests arm being validated and t would submit to you that the Police Department is going through validation processes with the University of Chicago. I submit to the Justice Department that that is the only time that any type or anything that resembles preferential treat- ment can take place. Ono. a Pest is validated everybody competes on equal footing and I would submit to you that we are well along into that process. And refer you to my document and think that generally the Police Department has mid. substant- ial efforts along the efforts of minority participation at all levels and that I do take exception and raise the objection of being singled out numerous times within the Justice Department and the city's document in an effort. I Mould submit the Police Department of all the city departments has the best minority participation of any dope:ts nt within the city yet we are the ones that aro singled out consistently 17 OCT 151175 in this document and I take an exception to that and I think My organization has to oppose the dialogue that we've heard at this tifte. Mr. Andrews: Alright, thank you. Now we'll begin a process of reviewing the city's proposal of 10/10/75 and we'll follow that page by page and relate per haps not necessarily every single adjustment that we propose to add in because some of them are for point of clarification. But Mr. Padgett, what we will do, Mr. Paulk, Mr. Lloyd and myself and then contributions from methbers of the aid- ience who have a specific interest in that particular area that will come under discussion as we turn the pages that will begin with page e1 and i want to cate that one of the areas that the Police Department trade a contribution at yesterday's Commission Meeting was an expansion of this area which I identify as ordinarily under an ordinance. I don't know how to describe it under a stip- ulation but the legislative findings which set the tone and pattern of the stipulation to be entered into and we're going to expand upon that area because of some of the past efforts of the .ity so that we do get the recognition for those things which we have been able to accomplish. Mr. Padgett: Can I say one thing and I guess this is the frustrating part about negotiating and I haven't had a chance to read the F.O.P.'s suggestion and I'm not speaking derrogatorily of it or anything like that. One of the things I thought everybody had kind of agreed on that we didn't have a problem was the front page up to "It is ordered ,judged and decreed" and we were going to include about these various resolutions I thought we had kind of agreed on that. Mt. Andrews: But you have no objection if we add other language in there that clarifies... Mr. Padgett: Well, I can't say I'm Going to have any objection till I read and can fully digest but it was kind of try understanding that everything was kind of agreed on that. I'm not saying that it can't be changed but it is a little tough to negotiate if the ground rules keep changing. That's the problem we have. UNIDENTIFIED SPEAKER: Mr. Andrews, may I address that point because it was directed to my document I think... Mr. Padgett: It was not directed) to your document. All I'ri saying is we haven't had a chance to read your document. I do notice it addresses itself to several different areas. Mr. Andrews: Before you make a comment may I clarify that that which, Mr. Padgett, that which you will be reviewing is not only the submission of the Police Depart- ment but Mr. Lloyd and I are going to be responsible to the City Commission and we are going to interpret their direction and supply you with a document that now represents the city's position unless the commission alters it in some other way. So : don't slant that necessarily you review the document that the Police Depart• ment has supplied but it will be the document that we supply you in final fora:. Mr. Padgett: Ok. I was not only referring to the police Document but it came as somewhat of a surprise when you said that you were going to submit some additional changes related to this particular paragraph and whether they be from the City Commission or the *lice Department I thought that... You know and the ground rules keep changing. It makes it a little tough. Mr. Andrews: Well, you'll have to appreciate that the commission has not been and is not attempting to enter into the stipulation unilaterally in which it just gives us direction. It is really a public process we're going through. Mere lettang...the public and the employees express and they've come to con- clusions that those matters that the public organisations and the employee organ- isations had to contribute to this are important and should be considered and maybe we shouldn't have it cast so much stone that these adjustments can't be included. Ms. Padgett: Ok. And t can't sey I disagree with you but it is beginning to appear that we won't be able to reach a document. That's when it appears that the negotiating is running water. That's what I'm trying to say. Mr. Andrews: W.U. we think we've got the handle on the whole container. Mt. )Gen Narrisone I'd like to bring up two poincs. City Manager, the document that's presented is not thu? fo;ice Department's. It's from the Fraternal Ceder of Police who are the defendants in this action. At no tine have I authorised 18 OCT 151976 the City Manager to speak for my organisation. i raised the issue on our other meetings that just because I do not object on specifics does hot mean that I do not have an objection and I did not at any time agree and I made a specific point to bring it to your attention that I had Objection to cer- tain wording. All I've done, if you ready my document, I've said exactly the same thing that the Justice impartment had said in other Consent Decrees. It is exact quotes and it is exactly what is said in this document and i've just said it using different language and brought other points to bear. That's all. Mr. Padgett: I recognise you as a party defendant but that wasn't what my comments were addressed at other than the general comment that we have discussed this particular, these particular paragraphs on at least, I've lost count of the number of times that we have discussed them, and that we had thought we had reached some kind of understanding with then concerning a number of things. Mr. Harrison: With the city and I made the point each time that, point across to you that I did not like the wording in here and Mr. Padgett: The only thing 2 can say to that, and like 2 say I haven't read it and I may agree with everything you say; but the only thing I'm saying is it's a little tough to negotiate with you when you choose your time and place to negot- iate. Mr. Harrison: I would be glad to take part in any meetings you have and have suggested that when the city...is to meet with you I'd be more than delighted to be there. I haven't been offered that priviledge but I'd be delighted to do that. I got their document the same time you did, probably later than you did and I took the opportunity to go through it. My document was written yester- day afternoon after hearing input from numerous people and reading several docu- ments that the Justice Department has already entered into and I would be inter- ested if you take exception to my wording because representatives from your depart• ment wrote it. Mr. Padgett: What can I say, I cant respond to you now until I read it. t'NIDENTIFIED SPEAKER: Do I understand that these employee organizations are to be named as party defendants in the style of this stipulation? Mr. Padgett: Not other than those that are already named. UNIDENTIFIED SPEAKER: Well, who is already named? Mr. Padgett: It is the City of Miami, the F.O.P. and the P.R.A. It's obvious we're talking to a lawyer there. Mr. Paulk: I'd like to ask a question of Mr. Padgett. I'm curious to know whether or not the federal policy statement was issued by the Justice Department and E.E.O.C. and the United States Civil Service Commission has substantially changed since it was issued in 1973? Mr. T'sdgett: (INAUDIBLE) Mr. Paulk: Mr. Paulk: That is the Federal Policy Statement 4:377S. Mr. Padgett: March 23rd, 74? Mr. Psulk: Seventy-three. I said 75, I meant 73. Has there been r.o significant change in that policy statement? Mr. Padgett: No.... Mr. Paulk; Alright. I'd like to read two sections of this to you and ask for you to respond. Ary system which requires, and this is taken out of context. Any system which requires that considerations of relative abilities and qualifi- cations be subordinated to considerations of race, religion, sex or national origin in determining who is to be hired, promoted , in order to achieve a certain numerical position has the attributes of a quota systems which is dozed to be impermissible under the standards set forth herein. A goal on the other hand is a numerical objective fired realistically in terms of the number of vac- ancies expected and the nwaaer of qua:ified applicants available in the relevant job market. Thus, if through no fault of the employer he has Lever vacancies than comported he is not subject to sanction because he is not expected to displace exist., Lag employees or to hire unneeded employees to meet his goal. Similarly, if he has demewstratod every good faith effort to include permits from the group Aids 19 OCT 151175 at was the object of discrimination into the group being considered for selection but has been unable to do so in sufficient numbers to meet his goal he in not subject to sanction. Now 1 could read on but really it speaks to 5, 6, and 7 which you're putting in here which in my view once again goes right back to priority and in effect preferential treatment to someone. Mt. Padgett: No, but it's based on goals. In fact, if you look at paragraph 5 on promotion - on paragraph 5 (b). it says, and this is the language that keys us into promotion. It says, subject to the availability of qualified applicants, and I think that's what that language you read me said, promotional goals shall be established for minorities on a department basis with each depart- ment having as its yearly goal until the long term goal has been met for a period of one year either parity with the Miami city workforce population statistics or the percentage of minorities currently employed in the department whichever is smaller. Mr. Faulk: Now that's where it begins not to keep with the policy statement that is issued. Mr. Padgett: Let me explain what the policy statement covers and then that may help you some. The policy statement is an interagency agreement between the Department of Labor, the Department of Justice, E.E.O.C. and the Department of Labor. It was drawn up to cover situations involving all four of those agencies. The Department of Labor never even gets involved in litigation of this type. What they are attempting to cover, they are so it is not an unlawful quota where there has not been a finding of discrimination or even an investigation of such if an employer is seeking to overcome a problem it thinks it might have it says one thing but if it's talking P.O.C. and the Department of Justice where there has been an investigation or when there has been a lawsuit or where there is the available evidence for a lawsuit it may mean something else and what we say here is that we start right off saying based on the availability of qualified applicants and if you look at this it says 20 OCT 15115 overcomes .c problem you think it might have. tt says one thing but if it saying talking about the POC and the S)eparttbent of Justice where there has been an inveestig- aion or where there has been a law suit or where there is available evidence for a law suit it may mean something else and what ve say here is that we start right off saying based on the availability of qualified applicants and if you look at this it says that --- let me explain it because some people seem to be having problems with it. it says work force population statistics, that is no different than we have in the initial goals or the percentage of minorities currently employed in the department whichever is smaller. Now in some departments I don't care how you cut the pie fact i think this gentlemen back here told me he worked in the Zoning Department. He said there were 69 employees, 14 of whom were minority. I don't care if you promote everything minority in that department you still only is going to come up with --- now it's only going to depend on --- they only are going to depend en -- they are only going to be promoted if there are jobs available. That's exactly what that says. Mr. Paulk: I understand that too, but that's not what it goes on to say. Mr. Padgett: No all we are saying :s that the people who shall be given first consideration for this promotion are the people who are in this affected class. Mr. Paulkt And that goes right back to another section -- Mr. Padgett: All of this has to be read together. Mr. Paulk: I understand that but we have upset --- we have been found to have been guilty of discrimination. By the very feature of identifying an affected class we ate found to be guilty. Mr. Padgett: All right, let me put it this way, We are talking among rational human beings. We wouldn't be here if there wasn't s problem. Ok, and I mean we clearly aren't trying to imply guilt by entering a consent decree but regardless of how you characterize you know, we don't want to say there is a chain of guilt we don't want to say there is any guilt but by the fact that we are sitting here and negotiating we both recognize the kind of problem even though we are not stating ti. Mr. Paulk: All right I understand that but I'm saying that you're got two things tied in here trying to accomplish a great deal, "affected class" which gives priority a preferential treatment to a group of people whom you wish to identify some place else. Mr. Padgett: Ok, Mr. Paulk maybe it may be easier for me after we sit down and talk about this. Let me just sit down and cite some cases to you so you can read the concept that we are attempting to express. We obviously didn't do a very good job of it and see after we read those cases that you have the same kind of concern. Can I do that? Mr. Paulk: The only thing I'm suggesting is that I don't find any great difficulty in s;OI.s and tiu.t.rb es to try and accom?lash something but when we are incorporating in here preferential treatment for an affected class it goes right back to another section of this decision policy statement that was issued which states all of the agencies rec- ognize that goals and timetables are appropriate as a decise to help measure progress in remeiling discrimination. All agencies recognize that we are an individual person. An individual person. Has been found to be the victim of an unlawful employment practice as defined in the act. He or she should be given priority consideration for the next expected vacancy. regardless of his ability ranking at the time the new hire is made. tits because absence the act of discrimination. he or she would be on the job. ALL agencies lso recognize that it may be appropriate forecourt to order an employer to saki m good faith non-discriminatory effort to meet goals and timetables where pattern of discrimin- atory employment practices has been found. But it doesn't state in that section. that preferential treatment will be given unless it's found on he or she perse' not a group. Mr. Padgett: A11 right that's what we are saying. Other than saying I can't think of another way that we can define affected class to get at what you are talking about. The group in the Sanitation Department but the discriminates will be those individuals who ve agree or the Department of Justice puts forth as being :home people who ve think discrimination has been exhibited against and they will be considered on an individual basis and we go through all of the criteriai that we use. Say qualification or anything else. So you are considering them on an indtvtduai basis. You are not con- sidering then as a group other than to identify these. You initially identify them. Mr. Andrews: All right yr. Faulk we are going to start now with items #1 and take that up first and item #2 we'll take page for page. All right we will take item #1. 1'n going to ask Mr. Lloyd to tonporarity chair tots until i retven. its. Lloyds Molt. first let no 'matte by way of explanation, nsse items wore con scarred yesterday by the City Commission as expected and certain groups taeludtig both 21 OCT151915 representatives of police and fire .is well as others appeared and wade there contri- butions known. Wr did get a complete copy cf the proposal from the Fire Department. Now, what happened was the City Commission considered these proposals of the Fire Department and of the Police Department and of others and actually came up with their own ideas as to whether or not some of these should be accepte3 Lotherwise in addition in addition snore of the situations were the Commission 46tiulifficulttes which we have had before, so first you will recall that we did have originally difficulties with on paragraph one beginning with the second line and all persons that in act of concert or participation within the performance of city function. The City Commission has indicated an objection to this on the reason as afore stated that we don't have any control over people outside of the city government, that's the problem and I thought I'd just note that to you. Now then another one which I believe was mentioned by the the Fire Department. They have difficulty with -if you'll countdown one,two, three, four, five, six, seven eight, lines where it says employees over any applicants or potential applicant. They suggested that be removed and I believe the Commission incurred in that. No, no this is on page 1. Mr. Padgett: Ok, I understand. Mr. Lloyds So that was another area. Also at the end of the original paragraph one the Fire Department made the following proposals and I can make you a copy of this but I'm reading this cirect. This propusai was made by the Fire Department provided, however, no events shall the city be required to hire unnecessary personnel to hire, transfer, or promote a person who is not qualified or to hire, or promote a less qual- ified person in preference to a better qualified person and that and that was a proposal of the Fire Department. Now in recruitment --- one? Mr. Pando: Mr. Lloyd, before we go to recruitment can i address myself to point Mr. Lloyd: Yes. yes. yr. Pando: Ok. Last week or the week before when we had hearings I addressed myself to the question. Says here (1). The defendant City of Miami, its officials, agents, employees, and all persons in active concert or participation with them in the performance or City functions. I was wondering if that included contractors and sub contractors in the City of Miami. :'.r. Lloyd: The term agents would in basis- well no, no, sub contractors are not agents, they're independent contractors. it would not include that. However, let me state this and this we can get some agreement on this see the problem with the city as I've stated that these people are not before the court. Now the city can and I think will take care of this and other fashion see and Mr. Pando: Should that not be reflective on this consent decree? nr. Lloyd: Well I'm going solely by what the City Commission decided yesterday. -sterday the City Commission decided that they objected to all persons in active concert or participation with in the performance of city functions. I might suggest this to the justice departetent and to Ms. Davis of treasury that I think that I could possibly in the light of what you say make a recommendation to include say an independent contractor and sub contractor. You see that we do have some control over that ---in orders we already have in our contracts where there are no discrimination clause. I'■ sure you are familiar with that sir and therefore I think actually we're just saying what we are already doing. But I think that would cover what you're stating, sir and if that would be satisfactory to you I would make that recosmsendatton to the City Commission as to substitute for this and I think it's more specific all persons in act of concert. The Commissioners expressed a definite objection to that. MA. Nicol: Mr. Lloyd can we say saecifically the example of the Police Academy where twenty-seven jurisdlcations within Dade County participate and one vote --- Mr. Lloyd: Well that doesn't --- we could except we've trot that covered. Ms. Nicol: No, what I'm saying is we've the edification of the people here nationality--- where we have one vote .'ut of 13. Mr. Lloyd: Yes, yea we'viv covered that. I agree with you but I think we've covered Out before and I'm sure they understand that and I think the position of the city is c ear on that one. If we can't gat what we want with the •-•- That we have a specific paragrapb which I find no objection. : found so objection by it from the City Commission.. If us doe't get what we want out of the Police Academy we know what to do mere kaov what to do. 22 OCT 15 5 Mt. PadK& tt : Let me ask aquestion? We don't have any problems► with the !sub contractor, what have you or the problem Miss Nicol is raising, but there is something in here that's inherent in this phase that I think you may not address and that is this. Say for example that you have a Commissioner or City Manager form of government. A person who is acting as a supervisor or department head can fit in one or several ratagories. That person maybe acting ( when the person's acting and that person 's official capacity) we can employees. Let me think of a better example let's Say a private contractor. If that private consultant, if that person is carrying on functions of city government and is acting under cover of that title or that mandate that person is still not a city employee, that person is still not necessarily a cont- ractor and may not fit in any of these catagories other than the fact that it may be acting as part of the city or participating in a performance of city functions and if we can cote up with the definition that's all inclusive that includes what she wants and everything else I think we would all be happy and I think that of all the languages suggested and I'm not saying that we are right. I am saying the language that we already have and you're already closet to it. Ms. Nicol: I want to get as much of this on the record as possible. Mr. Lloyd: I'll present this to the City Commission, but what I'm telling you now is the City Commission has a problem, with this.... they wouldn't like it. Mr. Padgett: What were the objections in Mr. Lloyd: I told you that they felt there were certain areas of over ----- Mr. Padgett: I understand that but I'm saying, do they use examples? Mr. Lloyd: I don't think they cite examples but I think some of the --+-- this wasn't cited by the Commission but I think an example was cited of negotiations with revenues. Now I have actually with the only - as far as persons who actively acted in the performance of city functions would be other than agents, employees, and officials would be independent contractors, we have several of those and I think if you use a term independent contractor it would just about cover the spectrum and I have no objections to including the subcontractors e:ther,you knew sir, because it's possible that a contractor settle forth the intent of the contract by hiring a sub contractor (talking about a building) I can say well I have no control over myselt I just took the lowest bidder. What it does and this says it does, so I have no objection ---- I think you will find that, that would just about include it all. Mr. Pando: Mr. Lloyd, I hear you say that you have no objections, does that mean that you will recommend to the City Commission? Mr. Lloyd: I said so. I said so. Yes as far as that's concern. Did you have something on this specific point? Mr. Panda: On the specific point that you covered just before. Deletion of the word "Potential :applicant". I'm asking for the record how you define "applicant" at this point? Mr. Lloyd: Well it says or any applicant for employment with the City of Miami. Mr. Pando: All right, but what I'm saying is that at what point does an individual become an applicant? When he has actually filled out an application? Mr. Lloyd: When he fills out an application forts. Mr. Padgett: it's much broader than that. In a sense that there maybe situations where people don't like for example I know in all of the testing going on by the city a person doesn't necessarily fill out an application until the person passes the test.I'm sorry I stand to be corrected on that. Mr. PaNlk: That's all right. Mr. Padwit: There are situations where people can apply tor jobs and doesn't nec- essarily have to fill out an application. lir. Lloyd: Well, when they apply according to the rules as far as that Ross... Mr. Paulk: We consider one an applicant when they have filled out a formal application for a particular job. Mr. Padgett: Well 1 think you have to qualify that I think of the Sanitation Depart- ment right off where you use temporaries quite a bit. 23 OCT 15 W5 Mr. Pau1k: That's correct. That's the only area where it is for stancirby involves into a position, but in no place otherwise. It is sort of an arrangement. Mr. Holder: Under those definitions 1 would like to strongly object to the reizuvable of the words potential applicant. This leaves open the possibility of discristnating very clearly for instance over the phone to people who call in to get information on jobs and also leaves open the possibility of discrimination in the employment. The civet of esploy- sent offices, if somebody can't get in there to fill out an application they cannot become an applicant. Mr. Lloyd: Let's take a five minute recess. Mr. Andrews: Now far have we progressed? Mr. Lloyd: We're on paragraph two. Mr. Andrews: All right two recruitment. I think there were only some minor adjust- ments as far as the group is concerned that we need to spend so much time doesn't come about evidence. Mr. Lloyd: Well I think I better explain what they are. Mr. Andrews: Well will you please explain what they are. Mr. Lloyd: Recruitment - If you will recall that there was a question of in recruit- ment about whether or not the present recruiting area could be enlarged and we did add an addendum to 2-A Recruitment. Now the Police Department union has suggested that we include the whole State of Florida instead of Dade County and the Fire Department has suggested that we leave out provided however, that applicant residing in Miami will receive a 5% point addition to the score of any test administered after the recruiting area is enlarged. L just called this attention ---the City attention to the Justice Department that the Coaaissio took no action on this consent agreement as it was. Mr. Padgett: All right. The, way we look at that we other than the fact you said you can't find minorities within the city when we last left. We were talking about the question is this we were saying we can't find minorities in the city and we've been thinking about going outside the County. Now we didn't know they changed other than when we received this we think that you are going to at least still give minorities the opportunity. We think that if you have to go outside the city then that's give them some kind of preference and we think say a 10 or 15 point ---- Mr. Lloyd: I had a 5% point sir. Mr. Padgett: Ok, we don't agree with the concept --- what objection would you say a 10 or 15 point? Kr. Lloyd: My only objection to a 10 or 15 point percentage is can we sustain it legally? Mr. Padgett: There are cities in the United States that have ---- the City of Los Angeles: fcr example has an absolute preference for city residents. They are chosen before anybody else. yr. Lloyd: And they've had no problems with that? !tr. Padgett: No. Mr. Lloyd: I don't have any serious problem with this 1 just chose S points. 1'11 tell the Commission that you'd like 10 if that's all right with you? Nr. Padgett: Wc° don't see anything wrong with •- Mr. Lloyd: Excuse as. The Fire Fighters Union -- you express an objection, is that correct sir? Well maybe not ----maybe that wasn't you that was the Police Department--- i think Nr. NC Crary has withdrawn his -- In other words you have readily agreed that we can go outside the city. Now you withdrew that agreement, what's suggested now is the we be allowed to go outside the city when we can't find them to the city with s set of 10 or IS point addition --- Mr. Andrews: I don't understand where we are beading if you cannot find the qualified applicant in the city you are Roil to Rive then 10 pint to qualify. Mr. Padgett: Wos teat isn't what we are saying. It's a pass plant+). 24 OCT 151975 Mr. Andrew,: But it you find a qualit td applicant in the city there is no need to go outside. Mr. Padgett.: No that's isn't the way it was addressed. It was addressed is that in terms el absolute numbers ( many tines it's impossible to get the number of people they are talking about). So what we are saying is in order what you can do or what the concept that you have given us which we don't disagree with is that you will make every effort to get people in the city when you can't find people in the city then you will enlarge it to the County and give city residents a part preference. This isn't a racial issue. This is bi-racial. Mr. Lloyd: Yea, if you're in the city black, white, green, blue, or purple why y get the points ---- Mr. Paulks My only concern with getting into that situation is simply this that so long as we restrict to the City of Miami we don't have any serious challenge before us but I'll take juet use some hypothetical classification about police officer because there Is we generally use that register until it is exhausted before it becomes a year old. But take a classification where there are a few in number throughout the city. If we should open it to Dade County and if we should give some preference 15 points or whatever 5, a total preference you know, separate the two registers here in the city and here other than the city. We are getting into the area of possible challenge because someone is saying i Nally don't have an opportunity. Mr. Padgett: On what basis? Mr. Paulk: Well I'm just a little bit --- I'm raising the issue because I'm concerned about ---- I don't like to even announce -- even send out an announcement for a classifi- cation where we have no register until we have a vacancy. Because we could be in a position of establishing registers and there would be no position to offer to whoever might get on that register, so I'm simply equating it to the fact that we got a low turnover kind of effect, whatever that might be and that we have the distinction between two groups of people. one is a city dweller and the other is one is other than a city dweller and if we give either the total of that solution preference to the group who live in the city over the group that don't live in the city. I'm afraid of what brairwise to apply quite frankly in a of discrimination and it might not oe one who would be on Ok what other there might be? Mr. Padgett: Ok. The only discrimination that I could see would be discrimination in terms of the city resident vs. another city residence. Mr. Paulk: That's correct. Mr. Padgett: Ok, and there is --the thing that we are talking about here there is nothing unlawful about that. The City right now has all kinds of things that it does for City residents it doesn't do for County residents or charges County residents premium. Nr. Paulk: That's true. but we already have a lot of people that are disturbed over the fact that applicants are and I'm not talking about City employees. I'm talking about persons who are interested in getting employment who when they are turned away at our reception desk where you make applications. They cannot apply because they don't live in the city. There is a frustration there and I hope that that frustration doesn't generate into a complaint which will reverse the situation through any kind of a court action. Mr. Andrews: Would it be possible for us to achieve this without setting any points first is you give the examination and you have public in the City of Miami who would ;ualify for these positions finally get on the register if you were fearful that the register you produced would not be sufficient to meet all vacancies that occurred in the city. would it be possible then to place the City of Miami residents first on the register and anybody outside of the city secondly on such a register Mr. Faulk: Sight. Mr. Andrewss And not relate it to any point? Mr. ?sulks That coul4 be done.... But I'm saying that could generate a problem much the saw as one lobo is being turned away right now in a low turnover kind of a register. Mr. Padgett: Well right now it's more rigid than that. You just say you can't be hired unless you live in the city.. We're opening it up. Mr. Faulk: That is correct. But what I've suggested to you Mr. Padgett is that when you at least eatortain the :deg that yes you cam compete but so long u they aren't city residents available for the position than we'll give you cossideratien. 25 OCT 15615 Mr. Padkect: That's the position Mr. Andrews suggested. Mr. Lloyd: Exactly what he's saying is that the recruiting area may be enlarged to inciude Dade County provided that City of Miami residents can be given first prefer ence. Mr. Paulk: Well in effect you'd have the five Mr. Padgett: Padgett: No, what we are saying you're that city residents aren't given first preference they're just given 10 points or 15 points whatever we agree on and that you could put them higher . Mr. Andrews: You're running a risk here now --i shouldn't be arguing the case for you but if what you are saying then is that you've got --that you get an examination where it's open to more than the City of Miami and you're now looking at a population that has less percentages of ethnic representation than in the City of Miamiyou could end up with a large body of others or Anglo -Saxon and even with the 5% given to the City residents they may be at the very bottom of the list --- Mr. Padgett: That's the risk you take, but that's the reason we want more points, that's exactly the reason when you want more points. The other thing is and I'm ending up defending this-- and this was suggested by the city. Mr. Paulk: I understand that I wasn't the one, it was the Police Department that suested it originally. I don't mean and I'm just raising the area when we start turning people off it's one thing and turning them away because they don't happen to reside in the city. I don't have too much difficulty with that. Although we have had some serious concerns about people becoming upset ---- Mr. Andrews: I'm going to recommend and request that the City Attorney provide language at this point and document that we submit to everyone which will provide the elimination of any points and puts people residing inside the City of Miami is given first preferential treatment. Mr. Paulk: Let me ask you this Mr. Andrews, we are speaking about preference in this particular thing. is it all inclusive of every kind of register that is established not only entrance but promotional whatever. Mr. Andrews: No when you foresee a a serious problem or when an examination is given and it demonstrates that this is a problem. Mr. Faulk: No. no what I'm saying to you is that a promotional position, we'll say, Typist Clerk III , for instance is given. We don't accept applicants perse they are an employee and I think there is a distinct difference in applicant and employee. Mr. Padgett: This doesn't relate to the same thing. Mr. Paulk: I think we need to be absolutely clear on what the argument is not one who is seeking promotion because they are truely not ---- they are an employee seeking an opportunity for promotion. So that it doesn't have all the inclusiveness ---because we do have for the most part I would say people who are eligible for promotion that we wouldn't be giving an open examination. 20 OCTls10 10/15/75 Tape 5 Mr. Andrews: yes, that's what's intended .end that mechanism would only by used when it is demonstrated, and 1 want to repeat that, demonstrated that we can't get the applicants from within the city of Miami only to fill the posit- ions. Mr. Paulk: It might indicate that we would attempt to recruit applicants for the particular position being tested for it and if there are no recruits avail able; we've really exhausted our efforts then we must broaden that base to be able to attract someone who is interested in this particular job. i think at that point if we do open it to Dade County then we might have somebody flow in who happened to be a city resident. At this point, if they're tested and they get on that register, what Mr. Andrews is indicating is that they would be given total preference. Mr. Andrews: They'll be put on first. Mr. Mc Crary: We're talking about giving an examination. If you're talking about giving one examination with both city residents and county residents... Mr. Paulk: Mot initially, Jessie. 'what we're talking about is attempting to for instance most recently we ran announcements and advertisements in the Miami Herald, the Times and the Diario Las Americas for interrogation stenographer and Secretary II and we could not attract anyone to take it on the basis of city residency. Consequently we had to open it up. There are about 5 class- ifications we had to open it up for because we could not attract through our media of advertisement. Mr. Mc Crary: Ok, let me explain what my concern is, Mr. Paulk, and I think you understand. The last examination that we gave relative to entrance for police officers, recruiting within the City of Miami we found that we had greater percentages of minorities than, we have ever had based on our recruitment within the city. I am just afraid if we do not try to confine it to the city that we tray have a Larger number of people passing but we will have a greater, a less number of sonorities if we open this thing wide open. So Z want to be sure that we are to try to abide by Cohen as you're doing now with the testing, that every opportunity - if we get 110 on the next register hopefully we'll get the same kind of percentages rather than getting 500 available from the county and only getting let's say 2 • of them being minorities. Mr. Andrews: To set your fears aside in this area using the police example that you're using, if the Civil Service made announcement to conduct an examination and we found(this is only an example, please) there were no applicants from the City of Miami because it is now restricted to the City of Miami then we would use that as cause to go about giving the exam: on a broader basis. Mow in the second yo arou:,3 if we opened it up to the City of Miami and Dade County there were 25 applicants from the City of Miami and 50 from Dads County and that's the way they ended up on the register the 23 from the City of Miami would be up there first. Mr. Mc Crary' Ok, but you see my concern here. MO started on a program where we got more minorities by restricting to Miami and I don't want to move from that and go to Dads County getting 400 and only have 20 blacks on it or 2 Latins and... Nr, Andrews: I agree with you and I think the city administration and the Civil Service Board and the City Commission are all in agreement with that concept. I don't think, t know they are. U$IV lTiytm SMARM' Mr. Manager, one of our concerns still is and Mr. Me Crary, while the recruitment drive did attract 110 minorities one of the problems of why we even brought it up to begin with was that 27 of those people either falsely indi- cated on their applications that they live in the City of MLaai or they actually• in fact, did not live• and what our concerns were was that 17 of those were the minorities that we 'seeded and this is why we said,.. Mr, Andrews: You're not 'were of this and I suppose this is an appropriate time to discuss this but the Police Department wrestled with the real serious problem and the Civil Service office brought it to my attention too and t thought rather than gave them get into a big !merengue and have a misunderstanding at that point is Wiping to that register that we :could just proceed through the register and employ thaw because so many et those people that are identified as the major just pointed out were set actually in the City of Miami but they were a minority rsprss- a tation. So we didn't raise the issue but we will in the future to try to restrict 27 OCT 151975 it even more! -A) to the City of Miatli and begin checking addresses and doing other things that maybe wp should have done in the initial go around, ok? A11 right. The next area then is on page 3, same section, subsection (b) Police Department. That particular portion of the stipulation reads: The city recognizes its obligations which are embodied in the Consent Judgement... Well, i consider that a minor area and I'm not going to touch on those because if we discuss every one of these we're going to get into extraneous areas and there is another minor adjustment that I'm not going to trouble people with because we're going to drop it out. But this next one is important and that is Mr. Padgett, we would like to adjust that to read "the parties recognise". Mr. Harrison: Mr. Ardr� stand.... you say you're dropping things out. I don't under - Mt. Andrews: No, we are going to put in the final draft that which was dis- cussed at the City Commission Meeting but. 2 don't think that we need to dis- cuss it. 2'1l use this as an example to indicate what we're not discussing at this point. It says in paragraph, subsection (a) of 2 about in the middle of the paragraph on page 3, ith line. I'm going to read it out of context to get to the point of which was dropped nut. "The recruitment program shall include maintaining contacts with area highschools, technical and vocational schools, colleges and organizations which have traditionally expressed an inter- est in providing minority and female applicants." Then it said, "Or which indicates such interest in the future." and we're delineating that because we want this stipulation to apply to conditions as they exist right now. And so the part I skipped over which would have been eliminated is that part which was discussed yesterday which indicates "such interest in the future". So it is those kinds of things that I hope we can bridge over and include but those areas, and if someone else thinks I've skipped something that is important why you can bring it to our attention and we'll evaluate it. So the next adjustment then is 2(b), Police Department. We want to change the City recognises to the parties recognize its obligation.(INAUbIELE CONVERS:AION) The parties recognize their obligations or whichever is grammatically correct. Alright, the parties recognize their obligation. Mr. Padgett: This is a point that we've been talking about. I can understand what you mean if you're saying parties if you mean Mr. Mc Crary and the P.O.P. Do you understand what I'm saying? The Department of Justice is not a party to that so you can't, we can't accept that. Mr. Mc Crary: Mr. Andrews, the language that the city proposes changing the word the city to the parties certainly would be unacceptebel to as as a plaintiff in Cohen. 1 certainly do not look to F.O.P. or P.B.A. for anything that Cohen requires. They were not party defendants in any way and I think it is unfair to say that the parties recognize if you want to confine that to Cohen. F.O.P. was not a party neither was P.B.A. SL'L.'tiER: My understanding of this when you're addressing the parties in this Consent Decree are the parties to this Consent Decree so the Justice Depart - sent would certainly be included in that and not necessarily including the F.O.P. at this time because I haven't consented to any of this yet. Mr. Padgett: No, I don't mean that. The point we've made all along is that we were not a party and the action of Cohen can not be hold...against the United States c.overnment. That's the point we're raking. ... If they're consistent with what we're asking you know we're happy. UNIDENTIFIED SPEAKER: If that's the point you're raising then why are you allowing any reference to Cohen at all? Mr. Padgett: well, the reason that It's blocked off like that is because the city has suggested, and we haven't agreed to it., the city included thst language. That's what that teens. That's all that means. Nr. Harrison, But when you're talking within this Consent Decree when you say the parties you're talking about the parties that agree to this decree. Nr. Padgetts i didn't say thst. That was the suggestion of Mr. Andrews... Mr. Harrison' 1 understand that but then you said that the Justice Department Finds that 'acceptable because you're not ready to agree to that. t want to clari- fy on whet when we talk to parties... You reached out there and you grabbed me out of the audience, you said the r.o. P. and embraced me in that parties. 28 OCT 15175 Mr. Padgett: Let me clarify. At times when I refer to parties I will be inclua- inq F.G.P. and other times I won't. Mt. Harrison: Ok. I'll rise to the issue. Mr. March: Mr. Andrews, what prevents you from leaving the wording as it is saying making the statement in the Consent Decree that the city recognizes its obligations, etc, and continue like it is worded now. I don't think that that is somethtng that the parties involved in this particular Consent Decree would find objectionable. You're only committing, you're making a statement and it would be fine to say for the Justice .,►epartment consent to participation by another party in this Consent Decree as expressed here and would bell don't see that it would be objectionable either for the F.O.P. or the P.S.A., whatever if you just left it, "The city recog- nizes its obligations, etc.". You're just committing in this Consent Decree to participation in • Consent Decree on the part of the city as is expressed here and, therefore, why would it be objectionable to anybody else who signs... Mr. Padgett. Mr. March, there are several other things that are going on. There is, the F.O.P. has presented a position that clearly indicates that they are not quite happy with the way this written too so I don't even think; it is my impress- ion... We all may be throwing straws in the wind. Mr. Mc Crary. Could I just comment one thing? You know on sosae reflection, Mr. Andrews, I'm probably opposed to Cohen being even mentioned here. Mr. Lloyd, let me tell you why. You see i don't want to embody within this Consent Decree Cohen and get the lawsuits mixed up. You see because a judge could then look at this take judicial notice and say, "Well, what are you fellows doing combining lawsuits?" Not one person, Cohen is not a party to the litigation United States of America versus City of Miami. Mr. Lloyds I know that, I can read well. Jessie. Mr. Mc Crary: I understand, counsel. The other is this is another lawsuit. So don't bring us in here. I'm saying why do we need this part at all? You know it doesn't concern any of the defendants, the other defendants... Mr. Lloyd: Jessie, you know yos were the one that asked me before are we recogniz- ing the Cohen Decree. Now if you want this out we'll still continue to recognize it but I don't care, it can be out of there. I'm neutral on this one. Mr. Mc Crary: Well, I would prefer, I would just suggest that we exclude this portion because we're talking about suing under two different applicable statutes as they apply to.... I see no reason for Cohen to be even mentioned in here and certainly that takes the other defendants out of the question because they're not a part of the Cohen. Mr. ::oyd: : don't really have any serioas objection to it particularly. I know like but ;:t's not go;.ng to be agreed to and so there is no point in bring- ing it up. Z know what I want in there. I think we all know that. M.. 1ndrvws: But the question that we have to address ourselves to is that we'll have two different standares to utilize... Mr. Lloyd: Yes, you're the one that was concerned about that. You wanted to know, well look in the goals is it going to be different and I think we've established it is going to be d.dfferent. Mx. Mc Crary: Let me say this, Mr. Lloyd. I'm asking that Cohen be excluded from this. I don't have any problems - you will never go back to Cohen because you will obey Cohen automatically if you sign this. You don't have to worry about me and Cohen enyesore. rtr. Lloyd: Fine. Ok, you worried about it before and now you're not worried about it. A11 right. Nr. fie Crary: you know. You happened. I'm saying why are The only thing calls. Nell, you've changed your position with 10 different position papers know that we got just the day before it heppened. me day after it sorry, Kenny. Kenny reminded we got them the day after. I'■ just you dealing with Cohen at all - two different lawsuits mot connected. that's the same in here is the City of Miami is defendant in both Mr. Floyd: 1 don't have, Mr. Padgett, how secluded? yourself, do you ears if this is 29 OCT 15175 Mt. Padgett: We don't have any probier with the language involved in the Cohen Suit being excluded but wr an Win sere language in here concerning re: rtmi:ment . Mr. Lloyd: You know we had that in there. Mr. Padgett: Well, there is. There is something about the TriinCultural Program which we are not opposed to but all concerning the Cohen Suit we have no problem with that being excluded. Mr. Lloyds I see, 'that's alright. Well then do you want in there.... Mr. Padgett: ...expand the last phrase, in terms of what the Tri-Cultural Program is going to do and all of that. If I recall correctly the city was going to get back to us and tell us if the Tri-Cultural Program was going to be refunded. 1 think that was where we stopped talking about the Tri-Cultural: was it going to be refunded, for how long and give us some idea of the program. We have been getting some of that informally. Mr. Paulk: My last understanding of that, Mr. Padgett, was that it was extended from August through December. tn other words there were "X" amounts of moneys that had not been expended and that in order to cover the next recruiting cycle for police officer there was a request made and it was extended through December. That was approved some months ago. Now there is a request as I understand has been made to extend it to March. I don't know if it is through March or into March or what and that I think Mr. Andrews could indicate whether it has been approved or not. I don't know at this point and your question is whether or not there will be a request made to renew it. Mr. Padgett: To renew it or to have some kind of vehicle that has an on -going recruiting program to assist the police in its recruiting needs. That's what we're after. Mr. Harrison: Mr. Lloyd, I think that the city should guard the inclusion of this particular statement here because I think that there is not anything signi- ficant as far as to the mixture of lawsuits. I think that the city can stand by its record. As to the implementation of the provisions with regards to this being a specific example of the city's efforts at rectifying all of the things that have brought us here today. I don't think thet..Z can speak for the P.S.A. this is not objectionable to include any reference to the city's efforts in the area of Cohen et al and I don't see why it should be objectionable to anybody. It does show the city's position. It is reflective of the city's past performance in this particular area and I think that you should defend vigorously the right to include this in the Consent Decree. Mr. Lloyd: Well, I think that probably we might put that in...judicial findings as far as that goes. Mr. Harrison: Mr. Andrews, if striking the reference of Cohen obviously has an effect on the F.O.P. proposal i call that to your attention so that there would have to be a redraft of that at some future time. Mr. Padgett: I tried to refer to that. Mr. ?ando: I just want some clarification on what this actually means where you said the .:ity shall continue to operate the Tri-Cultural Program or other similar recruitment program. That moans that for the duration, the 5 years contemplated in thi:: cunsenr_ decree if the city agrees to it they are actually making a commit- ment to continuo it. Right? Nr. Padgett: Yes, either Tri-Cultural or some kind... Nr. Panda: So somehow you'll find the funding to continue the program? Mr. Tee Garst.i: nor. Manager, I'ms. Tom Garcia from the Tri-Cultural Program. At present time we've made application for an extension until !larch. Wow that applicat- ion will most likely be approved. We're also getting requests from our for a grant renewal application which we feel will be favorably cosside"tf it is forwarded by the city. Mr. Andrews; 111 right. let's go on then. The next area... Mr. Padgett: Just so i'li know, let me sum up. There is going to be an effort :lade to exclude all references to Cohen but we're going to oar up with language concerning a recruitment that will include the Trim4ultural Program or something expanding on the last phrase. I just want to mks sure everybody understands that. 3t� OCT 151975 Mt. Andrews: You may find r Terence to the Cohen Case in the judicial findings... just by reference. Mr. Padgett: If we do that we may have to include same language saying we take the position that is not really...... UNINTiLLIGIBLE CGWEP.4TIoN Mr. Mc Crary: Mr. Andrews, one question. Now this is rumor: I don't know, maybe you know; That Tri-Cultural Program may not be funded. Mr. Andrews: We're optomistic that it will be. Mr. Mc Crary: ok. Then I'd like to propose that we use in there in addition to Tri-Cultural Program some of the language contained in the P.O.P.'s provision that you will maintain active recruitment because if you don't you sort of restrict yourself. Mr. Andrews: Well, we put in there "or other similar recruitment program". and that's what is being preserved.... Mr. Padgett: That's what's being preserved and we're going to make an effort to expand it. There will be an effort made to expand it. Mr. Paulk: I want to offer a word of caution at this point because of what Mr. Mc Crary indicated - "continued recruitment". We could have a problem. The last examination, the register that we established was in April of this past year or this year. That register will run in the neighborhood of almost 10 months if it exhausts in January. And if we continue to recruit we would be in a position of out there encouraging people to come in for something that is not available until such time as that register is exhausted. So we identified in our recruiting mechan- ism for the Tri-Cultural affect where it cycles, where we crank up recruiting so that we're not recruiting continuously because it is a problem if we start adver- tising, encouraging and I don't want us to get into that posture. Mr. Lloyd: I think we can say"continue to maintain"which would cover... Mr. ?caulk: That's fine just so long as it's not misunderstood by anyone. Mr. Andrews: Page 4 which is "C", Fire Department in the city's draft... Mr. Lloyd: That's the 13th line down, Mr. Chairman. Mr. Andrews: I'll read the paragraph: The city shall also provide assistance to applicants to prepare for both written and physical tests and for oral interviews as well as orientation to assist applicants to be successful in becoming fire- fighters(and then now we charge language) in their pursuit to pass the fire college training grogram. There was considerable discussion and there was a point of clarifying that just to make sure that the language stated the full intent. Some people felt that there was an implication that they would actually assist them to pass through possibly other means than written, physical tests, oral interviews... Mr. Padgett: The firefighters themselves proposed just ending that sentence after firefighters, in becoming firefighters. Mr. Andrews: Yes, but that was discussed at the commission time and it was con- cluded that in their pursuit to pass the fire College Training Program... Mr. Charles Hall: We really don't have any problem with it either way. Mr. Andrews: And this comes via discussion yesterday and the commission agreeing to that particular one because I marked my agenda... INAUDIBLE. Mr. Andrews: Now there is a further adjustment in the following paragraph, "The city if the above named organisations are willing, shall secure cooperation from them in tutoring and training applicants" (and there w have a recommendation that commas via the fire organist:on) . John, do you have your copy. I Lost mite. And to that we would add the €ollowinq language and I think you see it before you but for the rest of the public, a new sentence to be added: in order for the city and cooperating organisations to prepare minority persons to be hired by passing a fire- lighter exam the Civil Service board will give the test now being prepared for a period of one year durinq which time testing procedure vill be reviewed as to its job content and validity. Ten in the next paragraph the city understands that 31 OCT 151lWS this program will supplement the normal selection process, for the period of this decree. The balance of that paragraph has been struck. Mr. C. Hall: Maybe i can explain what we were trying to do there and it really is more of a functional thing than anything else. We felt that the overall goal included in the proposed decree would apply regardless. But the problem is if in effect with that language in there we have a problem in integrating the candi- dates from the recruitment program into the candidates who might pass the test who did not come out of the recruitment program. in other words there is no way that we can be sure that 50% will come out. It might be 60 but the candidates are ranked according to their score and that was a mechanical problem that we were dealing with there. Mr. Padgett: Ok, if you think of it this way I don't think it will be one in the cense that all we're saying is that what happens here and has been the prob- lem with these programs in the past is that they have been used to train people and nothing ever happened to the people. All we're saying is that when the city chooses its firemen, firefighters, when they take the tests that at least 50% of the people be selected from here assuming they pass the test and everything else. We think this is a minimum. You may end up having 100%. Mr. Halle Yes, the problem, of course, is in effect you're creating two lists by the language. In other words how co you put that 50% in with people who did not go through the recruiting program but passed the test? That was our problem. Mr. Padgett! There won't be any problem because there is only going to be one list. It is just going to be the people who took the firefighter examination and passed and who are ranked. We're saying if the city and the fire union is investing all this money and time in training these people there should be some kind of guarantee that at least some of their people get on the program, at least a minimut of their people should get on that one list. Mr. Hal:: I don't nave any argument with what you're trying to accomplish it's the language and the mechanics that I'm having a problem with as to how they can be integrated in the list itself. What's our major problem. 0f course, the other problem was that we think there should be one goal here rather than two goals and that would eliminate part of our problem. Mr. Padgett: This goal is just one part of the other goal. I think we can sit down and thrash i t . Mr. Paulk: There is a problem though, Mr. Padgett with regard to having 50t of the people who participate in the recruitment progaas and having a different per- centage whether it's 55, 70 or what that they may not cofrelate and you may hold us responsible in effect. Ultimately you may hold us responsible when we look back that we weren't able to accomplish one thing but perhaps we're able to accom- plish the other. Mr. Padgett: No it won't, it won't work that way. All I'm saying is that in your overall goal if you only take in two fireman one of them is coming out of the fire- man training program. That's all we're saying. Mr. Paulk: I understand that precisely but from a register.... Mr. Padgett: If you don't take in any none will come out of it. ztr. Paulk: Well, that would be true. The goals would be meaningless if there weren't anyone employed because there were no positions available. Out what I'm saying to you is that assuming that 70% is the thing that is imposed insofar as a goal and that this Sat although maybe there is 100 people to be employed and we'll say tt:at 50 of them that are to be considered or to be... Mr. Padgett! $ay io cams through the firefighting training program. Mg. Paulk: Right. Five of them you would want us to be able to employ - SOP. Mr. Panda! No, SO% of those employed roust come from the recruiting. That's the way i understand it. Mt. Padgett! rio. no. Mr. ?aulks It is that if there are 100 people on a register then we'll say that 33 of than cams from the recruitment program 15 of those people are expected to be employed under this goal of whatever number eight be emptoyed and 701 as this OCT 151175 outlines shall be minnity under the, evr>rali goal, in the back. Mr. Padgett: We can change th language to make it conform. think we can work that out but we aren't trying to say... Let me tell you what we're trying to achieve by this. if programs continually get funded and people get trained and there is no assurances that people who come out of these programs will ever get into say fire college or say with the Police Department or say if it was a carpenter's union a carpenter's union. What we're trying to do is assure that at least a minimum number of those people get into the fire college because the way it is written if we excluded that language there's no assurances the city will even use, there is no assurance the city will even accept any of those people. Mr. Lloyd: May 2 take a personal privilege here first to discuss this? One of the problems which has been pointed out to me, and I may be wrong in this amd Mr. Paulk you can correct me, but two problems. First, the Fire Department itself as well as the Firefighter's Union is concerned with (1) they have two goals rather than one. (2) With respect to Civil Service Rums what you get is you have a register which is established. Now assuming, this is assuming hypothetically, that you have say 50 applicants; let's just say for the sake of argument 25 are persons who did not take this course, 25 are persons who took the course. The top 10 are persons who did not take the course and there are only 10 vacancies. You pick the top 10 and your 25 who took the course are on the bottom you never reach them. i would assume that could never happen because of the fact... Mr. Paduett: You've just figured out what we're trying to do. Mr. Lloyd: 1 understand what you're trying to do but t mean to say is... You know as a lawyer 1 have to bring up the parade of imaginable horrors. Mr. i' idgett : a person go he is going and th''n all because you the tst. That's t'xa,-tly what we're trying to protect. through a 7 or qw.`t7K training program an i WC' 7:i`"i:mac t'.i (,r' 1 i('.i 1y to be qualified ^;l,e�t� � �:-��-�.;, e _c� of .i Fu n - , :il) .i<i .?a et :i'Vr a:e.' no :on tc,1 yteu Rio u::'t f.. 40_ _ on _n e C.F•.: • u�3:..� C.i'.4.t' _a as s'.ii":.'c: e'7r Ziod•. of)ic Mr. P. uA: A;I ba,-;.. T.0the p 1:i'.'.. 1 w,1t. trying to rat:-c 1:1 :."t' pol =": '-t 3►omen'_ .:::;tom. W4S issued 1) CK _f 1e37 . What you're trylrt. to tie us in:.- ,ire' glo::as. They're not. goals. 13y arnplit.cation of this ana dual goals, two qoa::;.... ".r. :adgett: Mr. P.iuik, I tries. tr; :-xplain chit every way I can to you and I don't hove ,any other way to do it. New I'm just assuming you're never going to understand it. Now there is nothing else : can do for you. Mr. ,:1k . Yoe may be right. Mr. Lloyd: Maybe he understands it he just doesn't agree with it. Mr. Padgett: I don't want you to take it personally but the point of this program is to get minorities. Mr. Paulk: 1 understand that comp:ezely. MI. Padgett: Now if you were saying that in spite of, say if 8O to 90s of that program is minorities and they still aren't getting into, and the bulk of the minorities are going to come through that program are not going to get into the Firs college you'd have missed the boat anyway. Nr. Paulk: I'm not saying they will not. What I'm saying is that we hope by God that we do but w': i't want to be saddled with two goals that we cannot be respons- ive to in the event it does not materialise. Mr. Padgetti We can exclude the whole thing and we can sit down and draft something else. UNIVENT1FSED SPEAKER; I think we can work it out. Let ewe say this. The first time we went to bat with this problem we brought the minority representation on the list from *Snot sere up to about 301. Those people who passed the test• about 30t. Nr. Padgettw Now many peepie or actual numbers was that? tMtocurt Let► srummx, Mall, I can get the figures. live got the whole thing worked 33 OCT 151175 up. 1 can ,;iv,. you the fiures hut th important factor. of the people hired 30i Was on a county -wide recruiting basis. We this to the city that we can improve those don't think the problem you're invisioning we'll do much better. Hopefully, we'll do ere 30% actually hired. That's the were actually minorities. Now that figure once we figure once we Limit figures and we hope that we can. 1 will really be a problem. I think much better. Mr. Padgett: I keep hearing this chain of horrors from them and I'm sitting here defending something that you suggested. Now maybe I'd better say this: I don't think we'te making touch progress. Let me be honest. i think we could go to 12 O'Clock tonight and we'd be on page 7. Now either... Maybe it would be just as well if you'd write down these positions that you have and just hand them to us and we'll get back with you Friday and present our objections because I just don't see us getting through this this evening with any kind of reasonable per- iod of time. I think we're wasting time... Mr. Paulk: Mr. Padgett, the only thing I can suggest to you that there are cer- tain things that need to be discussed. The commission will ultimately come down with the things that they feel that they want in. Whatever I have to say or anyone in this audience or anyone up here has to say may have no affect on what their final decision is but if we can come up with something that is.... Mr. Padgett: I'm beginning to feel that Mr. Paulk: But if we can come up with something that we can reasonably agree to it is going to make it far easier for the commission to endorse it. Mr. Padgett: But you're telling me even if we reasonably agree to it that the City Commissioners may not so we're blowing gas. Mr. Paulk: Well no, not necessarily. Now I didn't say that in no way. Mr. Padgett: I think that is what you're saying. Mr. Paulk: No, sir, I'm not. I'm sayir.k; that i may raise a lot of questions that may go unanswered and we may have to agree with something that I'm not agreeable to necessarily and thy. commission will ultimately hand down their decision as to what they feel is desirable. Mr. Padgett: I'm not disagreeing with you, Mr. Faulk, in what you're saying but what I'm saying is that we may be exercising, engaging in an exercise in futility because what you're telling me is that regardless of what we agree the City Com- missioners are going to play the Monday Morning Quarterback. So maybe they should be here now or son a representative on their part. Mr. Andrews: Let's clarify this one point because maybe Mr. Padgett has something worth pursuing here. We have to vacate this room at 700 O'Clock no matter what i.s,r:ns. There is a Planning Board hearing tonight. But perhaps it wr,uld be better based on what we have already discussed and the fact that we really got at the heart of the areas that concerned us in your earlier discussions, Mr. Padgett, when you began caroming our draft versus your draft and discuss goals and the areas surrounding the goals particularly as to the identification of the affected parties. Perhaps much discussion could be saved if we went ahead and prepared a draft for your review but I doubt that we could get that ready by Friday. We could get it ready by the 22nd as we indicated to you. me. Padgett: If we get it on the 22nd what do you expect to happen then? Do you want us to have final approval saying yes or no? Mr. Andrews: Yes, that's what we had hoped. Mr. Padgett: All right, fine. Mt. Pando: When does the public may have, make its input? At what point will the public make an input into those plane. Nr. Andrews; Well, that occurea actually yesterday through the whole process and to only reason for inviting everybody here was to make sure that this was all done in public forum and so forth. Put you can obviously see that we're going through practically the same processes that we went through yesterday. But I don't.... When I told the Mayor and the commission how we were going to conduct this meeting I told them that the reason that we were going to do it this way is because I didn't want anybody to feel that they were excluded from this process or that we were in any way restricting anyone from making a contribution. But we're going through the 34 OCT 1S 5 same thing we went thre ueli yesterday except we have the Justice Department here who now maybe can answer or challenge_ solve of the things that we would have put in the stipulations. But you can see that this is a difficult process and at best I think, Mr. Padgett, I felt that in the beginning it would have been better if Mr. Lloyd and I, Mr. Faulk could have sat down with these three people and have gone through this not in this public forum and did the very best job that we could have then brought it back to the City Colalnission for final sanction and distributed copies to everyone and at that point in tine have people argue whether they agree or not and the commission is going to be the one that is going to finally give Mr. Lloyd the authority to enter into this stipulation by adopting a resolution.... Mt. Pando: I agree with you totally. The point is that as somebody raised a point, if the City Commission is not listening to what is happening here and for example let's suppose that everybody makes a recommendation and everybody agrees but Mr. Lloyd doesn't agree; the City Commission may not know that because it would not be reflected in his recommendation. So I think if they are the ones that would have to make the final deterMination I think that they should be listening to this kind of thing or just postponing until they can be here. Mr. Andrews: 1 think we're going through a process where we're trying to close the gap in understandingbetween the Justice Department and the city. We've had a lot of dialogue and a lot of understanding. We think we understand the limitations of the Justice Department. We know what we're trying to accomplish for the city. We can 2 believe come close to a final draft of this stipulation that Tenets most of those requirements. it won't be perfect. They would review it on the 22nd. They would say we agree with everything except this, this, this; it would come back to us. We have to present that to the City Commnission and get a final word as to whether the commission accepts their findings or not. If they don't we're going to litigation in certain areas. If they accept their findings we're ready to sign the stipulation....Let me finish. At that period in time though I invision that the City Commission would do that in public meet- ing, everyone would be present so they'd know what type of stipulation the City Commission Ls going to enter into and if there were real serious objections on the part of the commission after hearing from the employees, the public and the advisory committee then they'd have to decide upon advices from the City Attorney whether we're going to have to ,argue this out - that particular item out in court with the Justice Department. Mt. Pando: Now there is one thing to be said about this process which is time consuming and frustrating often. I think that the public or at least those here interested have, are better informed now and have a better handle of the issues that we're discussing so that when the City Commission comes to hear the public we know what they're talking about. But perhaps we're beating a dead horse. Mr. Don March: Mr. Andrews, I'd like to go through for the benefit of Mr. Padgett a suggestion I made to you earlier in the hallway during the break and see if this isn't what he had in mind when he just made the statement that he made. Mr. Andrews: Let me say this on the record, Mr. Padgett, before we hear from this gentleman that when we supply our copy of our final draft to you and you discover that you have some serious problems with that then I think, and I've eaapressed this to the City Commission, the City Commission may very well have to sit with you present and these people present at the final session to close this out if there are real serious areas. If there are not they probably can be closed out in a different canner. Ok? Mr. lurch: i participated yesterday, you weren't here and I don't know if that gentleman that was talking earlier was here. Yesterday, this document dated 10/10/75 was the document that was discussed and various employee organisations citisens, people in other interest groups came forth and brought their input into the various areas of this document based upon their particular interests. These were accumulated by some in' written form, you have the copies of much of it. Otheres were just statements here, Mr. Lloyd did the best that he could to incor- porate this input with notes or whatever. A lot of the input that was brought in was brought in a discussion if a particular area conflicted than would be one organisation as to one subject that would conflict with the input from another organisation as to that same subject which the two together would still conflict with what is !mere. These were the kind of areas that the City Commission was hav- ia+I difficulty resolving and very much of the oonversattou at tiers was, NOW what do we think the Justice Department is after here?" "What is their interpre- tation7" They're trying to figure out what it is that you had tss mind. Ia your abeam. there nobody that mule speak for you. They could say well we think that, 35 OCT 15 5 My suggestion was earlier, ar.d I make it now and i think it is consistent with Your statement as to our ability to perform here as a group, I suggest that Mr. Lloyd prepare for your purusual a list and go exactly the way the Consent Decree dated 10/10/75 is listed as to subject matter - go right through. As we coMe to an area in which there was input from an organisation, type that up, put it there and next to it attribute the change to the organisation or whatever and go through this whole list. And it may be a certain paragraph will say 34) which you'll say 3(a) according to the Fire Department - they would like it to readi 3(e) according to the Police Department - they would like it to read, and go through. Then you could speciticaliy give an opinion, your opinion as to haw the Justice Department stands on that particular version and then using that input from you then Mr. Andrews, Mr. Lloyd, whoever participates could then most likely or more likely arrive at the kind of Consent Decree that the City Commission would have the least difficulty in approving and in getting on with this whole thing. I'm taking a chance, but have i made myself clear? Mr. Padgett: : understand what you're saying, Mr. March. Part of what we have hopefully been going on at all times prier to that is that we were doing almost actually what you're saying. I've said it before, it appears that we're negot- iating over running water. You know every time we get to the same spot it is different water. I mean the ground rules are changing and i thought that on both occasions that we were down here before we have at least one time or at least in many instances two or three times went over almost everyone of these paragraphs to some extent and have stated what our objection was and tried to explain the basis for our objection. What is happening, even if we set it up the way that you want it set up I still don't think that it would resolve it because what has happened is that say for example on this involving the Fire Department; f-wk- 36 OCT 15'5 Mr. Padgett: 1 think 1 understand what the problem is, but I think we went over this if I am not mistaken about 3 tines and what happens every time we come back somebody sees a problem that was different than before, and yet 1 am still unclear as, and I don't like to use, -•--(this isn't a threat) --but when it comes times to hang somebody whose's neck is going to be in the noose, is it going to be the fire union or the fire chief or the City, because what I hear a lot is, even though nay like you representing PHA or FOP or the fire chiefs, will suggest something, you will suggest it and then all of a sudden I'll hear a hedge here, or they will suggest something and I'll hear a hedge there, and all I am doing is I am serving as a conduit, in fact I have ended up three times today defending positions, put forth either by the city or by a fire union, and the fire union or some other union and I don't think that is necessarily my job, and I am defending it against another particular interested group from within the city so I don't know how to, even if we did what you are saying, is to come to a resolution. Lt. Ken Harrison : For two points, first feel free anytime to defend any of the PHA positions and second, and most seriously, I think that in your absence you wern't aware of the difficulty that the City Commission has in resolving each of these different points, and what I am saying is, that your opinion, you specific opinion as to where the different in -put sections vary from the desired end, would he of value in helping them arrive at the finish product that he would have prepared for signing or not signing. Mr. Padgett: I am more than willing to give that input once again, or for the third or fourth time, but it just doesn't seem like we are even narrowing the gap. I think you have to admit that. Lt. Harrison: The absence of the of the City Commission contributes greatly I think to our inability in this particular form here and may contribute to an inability at a future time to resolve it as easily as we would resolve it. Mr. Padgett: The point is well taken. Lt. Harrison: Your input would be of value in minimising the difficulties we would have in resolving at this future date when Mr. Andrews would again present this same subject for consideration by the Commission. Mr. Andrews: If you consider that process Kr. Padgett I would suggest that we will make every effort to have this version that we produce available to everyone so that in the event that they want to do this, they could take •s copy of this end do what has been suggested, and if it is the FOP or whoever it might be by placing side by side the kind of information they want for your consideration. Mr. Padgett: Fine but I think that still has to fit within the time frame that you suggested and I think our position is known on every one of these. It came to me as a surprise when you said that they wern't clear to what the .lu3tice Department wanted. I can get a feel for it now when you went through paragraphs 5,6, and 7 and it turns out nobody really understood them. 'slut came as a surprise to ate but I am willing to go along with that, if that fits within the sant time frame for the 22nd. Lt.Harrison: You will recall from the first time I was here, you have to spell things out. What I need now, I would like to know specifically before we leave here, I as not satisfied, yesterday was a very lengthy session, there were a lot of people here had some very important things to offer and I think coming dawn here yesterday and reviewing this thing and expecting that to be sufficient, expecting to accomplish over night, being even prepared for consideration by you, was ambitious at best. I would like to know before we leave here today what the next step is going to bs, what we have to have, and when it is loges to be presented, who is going to consider it, what is going to be dose and what is going to happen the next tins, how much is there going to be between the next addressing of this particular issue. This is what I need to know, so we can evaluate the realistic aspects of the whole effort. Mr. Lloyds I would like to get one thing do s tonight, so we coo be positive ------there's osly a few .iaor corrections is the sanitation depsstassst tkisg and i think Mr. McCrary you just wasted to talk about 30 seconds. Out I would like to gist that dose tonight. 37 OCT 151975 Mr. McCrary: Mr. Andrews, in line with what the Lt. has said, I think we may be able to resolve the problem if the party defendants in this eater we to get together, form their position to present to the City CoMmission in terms of what they are going to present to the Justice Department. i think you can do that in secret, behind closed doors, without violating the sunshine law, since you are talking about negotiating on a consent decree which leaves out judicial kinds of things. If you did that, then the City says here is what we intend to present. 'Chose parties, other people who are not defendants but interested parties, could then present to the City Commission their objections to it, would be a hell of a lot, ---you knew, along the way. 1 thought that was what we were doing yesterday, so that you would present what the City thought and we would come in here today and say this is what we got, Justice, take it or leave it. Mr. Andrews: Let's have the sanitation department come forth and present, --- Mr. James Johnstone: I am James Johnstone representing the Sanitation Employees Association, referring specifically to page 10 and 11, we reviewed with the City Commission yesterday, the vaious areas and this morning we, the committee and Mr. Jones, Director of the Sanitation Department net for an hour or two and agreed on language that I am recommending here, and 1 don't think it in any way circumvents or violates the Justice Department's language. What we did, on page 10, we simply beginning with the 2nd paragraph under 8 we deleted the words according to budget restrictions which is agreeable to Mr. Jones. The purpose of that is that according to budget restrictions was a temporary thing we had agreed to through a collective bargaining process some time ago and we all agreed that we shouldn't have another document restrict us in any way. As a matter of history back in April we have 70 stand-by laborers, we were cut back to no standby laborers, and we got into a labor dispute and as a result of collective bargaining and cooperation by the City and by our organization we negotiated an agreement where we got up to 25 additional standbys and now we are up to 35. We are working through the collective bargaining situation here and we didn't want to reflect on this, this restriction, according to budget restrictions and the director of the department of sanitation has agreed with this to take this out. Mr. Lloyd:It is okay by the City Commission also, and I think it is helpful actually. What is taken out is according to budget restrictions, which would be 1, 2, 3, 4, on the 5th line down. Mr. James Johnstone: The next area that we changed again with Mr. Jones' approval, is the next paragraph down, as vacancies occur in the waste collector's classification, the department director shall select, and we have added with the assistance of the sanitation employee's assocation committee a replacement from 'he e:.cabiished list of standby larobers. You will recall that when you discussed this with the Sanitation Employees' Association's committee. this standby laborer ---the moving up into the regular classification was a potential problem, Mr. Jones has agreed with this because this simply reflects the on -going day to day relation- ship we have. This is dons cooperatively now as a result of the collective bargaining process, and we felt that what was lathe draft of the City gas a little bit more restrictive. It was only the director without the assistance and I think what we are shoring is simply a reflection of the cooperation between the City and the Employees Assocation. Mr. Padgett: We have no objection to you including yourself as opposed to us, or anybody else. Mr. Johnstone: And the next paragraph down we have added the sass thing, w have a training program. Again we added with the assistance of the Sanitation Employees Assoc. Committee, this simply relfscts exactly the same. This is a voluntary program, the propic who are 40141 the tratains arc sanitattoa employees association members. they are not paid for this. purely voluntary, so we are reflecting again that we ars able to suggest who Casa be promoted tato these categories. And the last thing. on the following pare on page 11, we deleted in the first full paragrph under waste equipment operator, we deleted when it says 'with the established experience requirements', --lose of tbs oinctty groups of the Slacks and Latins, it is impossible for them to get the eminence needed to qualify. so we have deleted that and what we simply said is in accordance with the goats and quotas established Mersin for flacks, Latins and Manes, so there is no quotas. so strike that out. What Leeway would you rather use? Mr.Lloyds Einiatate the redundancy. 38 OCT 151175 Mr. .Johnstone: So then there would be with the goals established herein, and that is it. Mr Padgett: I still have one questions, I direct this to both you and Mr. Paulk, since the sanitation inspector position, was it your latent to include that particular change in this particular provision? Mr. Paulk: Cb,yes, and it is in the original draft that is supplied in the City's proposal. Mr. Padgett: Can we just include that? Mr. Paulk: Oh, yes, no problem with that. Mr. Johnstone: Are you back on your draft? Unidentified person: ----their draft, ---- Mr. Paulk:-----page 11, if we are talking about the city's counter proposal. Mr. Padgett: I can tell you what it was, we can't seem to find it, the City had discussed with you and they had agreed that included in this language there was going to be a sentence saying the position of sanitation inspector which is now a position, -- Mr. Paulk: Mr. Padgett, I think in your original one, the sanitation inspector was not there. It was something we discussed in Washington. Mr. Padgett: It is included in your draft, dated 9/17/75, page 11,-- Ate. Paulk:----right,it was in the City' counter, and also in the one being offered. Mr. Andrews: Mr. Padgett, I guess we are about ready to close, and I want to repeat again the process that we are going to use in order to get a draft document to you by the 22nd and that is that Mr. Lloyd will endeavor to take ail of these comments and all suggestions of the City Commission has received, into consideration your concerns here and draft a document which ve will submit simultaneously to the City Commission, to you, the employee groups, everyone concerned as ve did is the past, and then we will receive from you your comments in reference to that draft. If your comments are of a nature that are to us they are minor, we will go ahead and sake the adjustments, .f they are not, then the City Commission is going to have to become involved. Mr. Padgett: --is going to have to become involved or w are soing to have to say that it isn't worth us even talking again. Ws think this is drawn out and has reached a point where we have reached diminishing returns. We want to make sure we exhaust every avenue. Mr. Andrews: If there is serious concern on your part, that you cannot live with sections that we will develop, and based on your comment, ve find that we are not in a position to make those adjustments without commission involvement, then a meeting will be set up convenient to you and ve rill have a meeting that all the people involved by that ties will have had an opportunity to digest what we are presenting and can hold discussions. That may require a full day session so I hope that you can be prepared to participate. this is extremely important to the City and,•--- Nr.Padgetts I would like to say I would like to push this whole thing within a limited time frame, and I hope you stress that to the City. ---the whole shooting match within two weeks. I can't stress that strong snow. I said I would provide a list of sites. I will provide them. I vi ll have those available tomorrow in the City Clerk's office or through htis Nicol. I don't think there was anything else that we promised. I said I would get with the fire department. Nr. Andrews: There is one aors annouaesasat I have in behalf of the City Cisrk. Ns has designed a method of keeping you informed and he has takes ail the people who signed up who went to be informed in reference to this matter. and established a file folder in the Clerk's office. My tstormstton 39 OCT 151175 according to the City Commission's polity to keep everyone Lnform d, all correspondence that everyone trafteiits, a copy of that will be sent to the City Clerk and the City Clerk will duplicate it and place it in your folders. So anytime yo+hein City Hall you can pick up information that is in your folder, or retain it as a file here in City Mall so it is available to you. That is with the exception of the Advisory Committee, we plan to continue to send tbe. information. If 1 send something to Mr. Lloyd, and the Clerk gets a copy, I'll send a copy of that to the City Commission and to the Advisory Coomittet, the rest will receive their information through the process that is being set up. MUTE: Me*tins adjourned at bt43 P.M. 40 OCT 151 5