pages: CivilServiceBoard/2007-07-11.pdf, 3
This data as json
body | date | page | text | path |
---|---|---|---|---|
CivilServiceBoard | 2007-07-11 | 3 | City of Alameda Page 3 Civil Service Board Minutes Regular Meeting of July 11, 2007 listed in the letter as to when the Bargaining Units needed to respond, and Karen Willis confirmed that there was. Board President Robles-Wong asked for input from members of the audience. Linda Justus, ACEA President, stated that they were supposed to have received copies of the Civil Service Rules that contained suggested changes, and that she was interested to see what changes the Board wanted to make. Board President Robles-Wong shared that Member Peeler's copy of the Rules had highlighted sections that she had questions about but did not include changes. Member Rich stated that the reason the letter had been sent out was because the Board wanted input from the Bargaining Units regarding things that needed to be changed or updated. Pam Sibley stated that she had attended the meeting to hear about the proposed changes and that the Rules language needed to be changed. Board Members, Rich, Robles-Wong and Peeler all agreed that the Board intended the changes to be "housekeeping" to update outdated language, but that if something in the Rules is wrong it needs to be changed. Board President Robles-Wong explained it was policy versus procedure. Member Rich stated that the Board's role is to maintain the Civil Service System, not to be change agents. Board President Robles-Wong stated that if an issue was procedural, any rule related questions should go to Administration. Executive Secretary Karen Willis stated that the process would be for Human Resources to send recommended changes to the Bargaining Units and ask for their input, and would then bring those changes back to the Civil Service Board. 6. ORAL COMMUNICATIONS, NON-AGENDA (PUBLIC COMMENT) Alan Elnick shared with the Board that there had recently been a reassignment of a non-confidential classification that currently existed within one Bargaining Unit, to a confidential position within another Bargaining Unit. He stated that this reassignment had caused a reduction in force for the original Bargaining Unit. Karen Willis stated that there had not been a reduction in force because it provided another opportunity for the person who had held the reassigned position. Alan Elnick stated that the person had to compete for the position with other applicants. If the incumbent had not been hired into the new position they would have in turn, been laid off. He also stated that the position had in fact been removed from Alameda City Employees Association. Karen Willis stated that there was a memorandum sent to the Bargaining Units regarding the change and that Human Resources did not receive a response. She also stated that the department had requested the change because the position had become confidential. Linda Justus stated that she did not agree with the exam process and the new probation period for a person who had already been doing that job. Board President Robles-Wong stated that there are Bargaining Unit requirements under State and Federal law and that the City has responsibility as to its part of those requirements. Alan Elnick stated that the person had been promoted into a new position with a one year probation and that person could be eliminated at any time with in that period, and that because the previous classification had been eliminated there was now no position for the promoted person to fall back on. He also shared that he was concerned about the situation under the current Rules. Member Rich stated that the Civil Service system has rules and management has discretion as to how to administer these rules. Some of these things may affect areas that are bargainable. Board President Robles-Wong asked Mr. Elnick if he thought there should be a new rule throwing everything open to competitive exam or was there specific language he would like to propose. Member Rich asked Mr. Elnick if he thought a rule was not applied correctly or if the rule is flawed. Mr. Elnick responded that he was not sure. Member Rich stated that the rules do not say that no one gets laid off. Member Rich suggested something be prepared for review. Executive Secretary Willis advised Mr. Elnick to submit a letter from Alameda City Employees Association to include in the next Civil Service Board Packet which will go out one week before the meeting, and Mr. Elnick in turn agreed to do so. Pam Sibley stated that employees never know when to expect a reclassification or an exam, and that there is no protection in the screen-to-list process. She also stated that the Civil Service Rules are great but the interpretation is muddy. Board President Robles-Wong asked her to put her comments in writing so that the Board has something to look at in order to better understand. He also asked that Human Resources send a strikeout copy of the Rules to the Bargaining Units and requested that the Agenda for the next Civil Service Meeting include reviewing the current Rules page by page, as well as to vote for a new set of Civil | CivilServiceBoard/2007-07-11.pdf |