Promotional Procedures Committee

IAFF2067 Promotional Procedure Committee

BALLOT Box VOTE

November 7, 2007 - The results of the voting for the three recommendations given to the membership for consideration are as follows:

Recommendation #1, PNA Points: 46 Yes, 53 No.

Recommendation #2, Competitive Testing for all Union Positions: 61 Yes, 38 No.

Recommendation #3, Posting of study materials and specifics added to Union Contract: 85 Yes, 14 No.

Recommendation #2 & #3 will therefore be added to the Negotiations table for upcoming and future negotiating sessions.

"I would like to thank all of those that contributed their time to study these issues and make the recommendations that were available for us to vote on. It is your hard work and devotion to the process that makes all the difference. Thank you again!" - Your Union President, Butch Crawford

October 16, 2007 - The Ballot Box vote on the recommendations given the Membership on the committee's work will be held on November 5th, 6th, and 7th. Members are asked to review those recommendations and ask questions about these recommendations prior to the voting. We'll do the best we can to help members understand what they are voting for. (Ballot Preview...)

Current Q & A's on the proposed measures up for a vote by the membership:

Q: Is this going to be a vote to accept / reject the recommendations as a whole, or will we be voting on each recommendation separately?

A: Members will be voting to accept or reject these recommendations separately. (Also, understand that "accepting" one or all of these recommendations does NOT mean they will be 'in-force' in the event they are accepted. You are voting to allow these items to be negotiated at the next and subsequent meetings with the city.)

Regarding the PNA System:
 
Q: I understand the principle of the PNA system, but I’m curious as to how the committee decided on that particular scale. That is, why did their study of the issue lead them to believe that the recommended scale is the best, as opposed to a scale that awards points starting at a lower score or a scale that only awards points for higher scores?

A: The committee had several discussions involving the value of the “points” in the PNA system. There were two opposing thoughts that reached a basic compromise to which the scale had been proposed. One of which is to reward points that would be both effective and of valuable. The second was to leave a situation where others following in that same effort would not be discouraged or left behind in determining their own career paths. In essence it isn’t too much to overcome; yet enough to make a difference. It provides a ‘scalable’ reward equal to the efforts placed.
 
Q: What is the projected overall impact of instituting a PNA system?

A: Since this element in the promotional process is one of ‘individual merit & achievement’ it would be difficult to determine the overall impact of the PNA system on the entire membership. However, it can be said that if one were to “predict” the “motivation” of half the membership in taking advantage of the system, its associated tests throughout his/her career, and reap the rewards in which the other half didn’t, couldn’t, or wouldn’t, the impact of instituting the system for those opposing halves would be measurable.
 
Q: Will there be any sort of “grandfather” points awarded to those people who have previously tested and earned scores within the PNA range?

A: The answer to this is both simple and “no”. These are NOT simple seniority points. However, they can be viewed as “earned seniority points” since the longer a member is active in the promotional process equal to his tenure, earned at the PNA scale, he holds points accordingly.
 
Q: When does the committee propose the PNA system be enacted?

A: To enact the PNA System into the promotional process will first involve negotiation with the city. Provided this is accomplished with a favorable outcome, we see no reason that it could not be enacted on July 1st of the year in which negotiations provided for its acceptance.
 
Regarding the Testing for All Union Positions:
 
Q: Who will determine the testing procedures for those positions not currently promoted by exam?

A: The procedure itself would be identical to all other procedures already set forth in the contract. The “who” is the contract language already in place and will most likely be identical to those with obvious alterations to fit that individual position.
 
Regarding the Clarification Language:
 
Q: I don’t understand what that recommendation is supposed to mean. I get lost about the time it hits “in reference to….”  Can this recommendation be re-worded more clearly?

A: Currently there is NO language in the contract outlining the date, value, need, chance, or record of those testing materials that will be in place for future promotional tests. We currently DO have a ‘consulted agreement’ with a past Fire Chief to post those materials at the first of each year for the remainder of that year. The language would clarify that in the contract in addition to any added, foreseen measure that would allow for those testing materials to change ‘during’ the year. It would hopefully prevent any misunderstanding regarding the purchase of books by members to which his time, money, and effort would be discarded due to some misunderstanding either by the Union, the Fire Chief, or Training Chief.

---

September 17, 2007 - Promotional Procedures Committee meeting held on Monday, September 17, 2007 at 8:30 a.m. at the Fire Training Center. (Meeting Minutes...)

The committee met to outline its recommendations to the membership, via a Memo to the Union President, concerning various changes/additions to the current promotional system relating to IAFF Local 2067, Union positions. (Read the Recommendation Memo...)

This committee remains adjourned until future requirements deem it necessary to met again. Thank you to all committee members for your hard work.

---

September 10, 2007 - Promotional Procedures Committee meeting held on Monday, September 10, 2007 at 8:30 a.m. at the Fire Training Center. (Meeting Minutes...)

This meeting consisted of motions for extending competitive testing procedures to all Union member positions, contractual testing material postings, and general discussion of promotional procedures.

**The next meeting is scheduled for Monday, September 17, 2007 at 8:30 a.m. in the Fire Training Center.

---

August 23, 2007 - Promotional Procedures Committee meeting held on Thursday, August 23, 2007 at 8:30 a.m. at the Fire Training Center. (Meeting Minutes...)

This meeting consisted of general discussion of promotional procedures. No motions were made.

**The next meeting is scheduled for Monday, September 10, 2007 at 8:30 a.m. in the Fire Training Center. (Subject to change...)

---

July 31, 2007 - Promotional Procedures Committee meeting held on Monday, July 31st at the Fire Training Center at Station #7. (Meeting Minutes...)

1. Possibility of increasing the number of eligible candidates on the 'waiting list'.
   --General discussion only.
2. Further discussion of proposed PNA points as an addition to the current promotional process. Various adjustments to the accrued PNA points and discussion as to the written scores required to earn those points were discussed and voted upon.
   --After presenting various proposed PNA-point possibilities to the presented PNA point system, a motion to accept the System with a recommended set of earned points was voted upon and accepted by the majority of the committee. Further discussion of cleanup language is awaiting further evaluation by committee members. (See PNA System accepted draft...)
3. General discussion on new edition, testing material as it relates to the current material being studied by candidates as a given year progresses.
4. General discussion on the makeup of future promotional boards.

**The next meeting is scheduled for Thursday, August 23, 2007 at 8:30 a.m. at the Fire Training Center. (Subject to change…)

---

June 18, 2007 - The third meeting was held at Fire Station #7. (Meeting Minutes...) Topics included:

1. Possibility of increasing the number of eligible candidates on the 'waiting list'.
   --General discussion only.
2. Presentation of proposed PNA points as an addition to the current promotional process.
   --Tim McDermott prepared and presented a proposed PNA point element to the current array of testing & seniority points presently being used. Motion to consider is awaiting further evaluation by committee members.
3. Discuss Committee attendance as the committee becomes further underway.
   --Tabled

**The next meeting is scheduled for Tuesday, July 31, 2007 at 5:30 p.m. at the Fire Training Center.

---

May 24, 2007 - The second meeting was held at Fire Station #7 this morning. Rain kept most of the participants at bay while a small handful of eager members managed open discussion with several topics that included:

1. General evaluation of each promotional process for individual ranks...
2. Introduction to a possible "minimum scoring system".
3. Discussing research of other Fire Departments and their procedures...
4. Possibility of increasing the number of eligible candidates on the 'waiting list'...
5. Various Seniority Point options...
6. Introduction to PNA Points...
7. Discuss the pros/cons of the 'holding of scores'...

Members were asked to expand on some chosen topics and bring back to the table in "written form" & suitable for discussion, those topics they have worked on. (Meeting Minutes...)

**The next meeting is scheduled for Monday, June 18, 2007 at 5:30 p.m.

---

May 22, 2007 - This newly formed committee has met once on May 3, 2007. (Meeting minutes...)

**The next meeting is scheduled for Thursday, May 24, 2007 at 8:00 a.m. at the Fire Training Center.

---

May 3, 2007 - This committee is formed and made up of the following members:

1. Butch Crawford
2. Jason Smith
3. Bryan Edwards
4. Kurt Holley
5. Gary Pollock
6. Stephen Clymer
7. Jason Bradford
8. Keith Scott
9. Charles Littleton
10. KC Day
11. Ronny Davenport
12. Louis Domgard
13. Jack Ingram
14. Leon Ragland
15. Nick Terhune
16. Jeremy Morris
17. David Faught
18. Mark Helm
19. Steve Roberts
20. Joel Chesser
21. Marcus Cochran
22. Travis King
23. Tony Atteberry
24. Tim McDermott