« Patrick or Healey: Who Can Manage the Boom? | Main | Kerry's Gaffe a Boon to Republicans? »
October 31, 2006
Civil Service Is A Disservice
How come Lowell can name a new city manager in less than a month, yet it could take up to nine months to name a new police chief?
It makes no sense frorm a public safety or government standpoint, where rapid succession is important to keep things running effectively.
Civil Service is the culprit. It is the state's way of giving unions a say in the hiring - and God forbid, firing - process
In Lowell's case, Civil Service rules will ensure that the new selection of a police chief is dragged out for six to nine months. Here's how it works in real time: Chief Ed Davis has tendered his resignation effective Dec. 1. City Manager Bernie Lynch will likely name an interim chief after he talks to all the possible in-house candidates. This choice will be made over the next week or two. Next, a notice for applicants will be posted. Then the applicants will have to take a Civil Service exam to determined the top three candidates by virtue of their test scores. The next police chief's exam is scheduled for April 2007. What follows will be interviews with the top three exam finalists, meaning that the No. 5 finisher on the exam, who just might have made the best chief based on his knowledge, experience and veteran experience, will be watching Law & Order reruns instead of participating in the process. Then the city manager will make his recommendation for the next chief. The council will then ratify the appointment. This will happen in May or June, based on how quick Civil Service returns the test results.
Whew!
Civil Service's only value is to determine a statistical rank and to make sure that all officers keep abreast of police work. Notice how they only study when an exam is scheduled.
While Civil Service might make sense for promotion through the ranks, it is absolutely a hindrance when it comes to naming a chief. Time should be of the essence; it shouldn't dictate the process.
The City Council should eradicate Civil Service as a part of the selection process for a new police chief. With a professional manager on the job, it should rely on the manager to consider the best candidates, interview them, present them to the council, and pick a successor based on professional qualities and abilities.
How can this be done? The council would have to vote on a motion for a charter change. If successful, the home-rule petition would then have to go to the Legislature for approval. Once that is achieved, Civil Service is removed from the chief's selection process.
How long will it take? Less than a month. If the council acts swiftly, the proposed charter change could be directed to the Legislature in January when lawmakers reconvene.
Once Civil Service is eliminated, the manager could conduct interviews and appoint a chief on his own time table. Lowell could have Davis' successor on board by February 1.
Civil Service was established to keep politics out of the selection process. Yeah, right. It should be a dead service, so that trusted municipal leaders get a chance to do what is best for their communities.
Any thoughts?
Posted by at October 31, 2006 2:13 PM
Comments
It seems like a burden to good government. My only suggestion is that if a charter change is pursued, it should not be limited to just the police chief, as there must be other key positions that could be filled in a more efficient manner.
Posted by: JP at October 31, 2006 3:25 PM
Won't happen Jim. Makes far too much sense.
Posted by: Joe Friday at October 31, 2006 4:03 PM
JP, my only problem with eliminating Civil Service at the lower ranks is how do you define performance for promotional purposes? If you leave up to a command staff, there might be a proclivity to base such decision on internal politics. I don't see a problem with giving someone a knowledge-based exam for lieutenant or segeant or captain, but when it gets to chief that's a different story. The best man or women should get the job based on high standards and criteria set by municipal leaders. Now I know that might not be perfect, but at least there is a good check-and-balance to the process. Plus, if the chief doesn't work out, he can be fired without going through a prolonged Civil Service process.
Posted by: jim campanini at October 31, 2006 4:05 PM
Joe, nice to hear from you. I think we need a return to common sense and traditional values. I don''t want to sound like a Republican, because I'm not - I'm a registered Independent - but the partisanship of decision making at all levels of government threatens to erode the way we, as Americans, were taught to cooperate and arrive at a mutual consensus. I am worried that the next generation won't have much common sense to do anything if we, as adults, don't show them the way. If you were to take a survey on Civil Service, most people would vote 75-25 to eliminate it, but it will survive because a strong minority will lobby legislators to protect it at all costs.
Posted by: jim campanini at October 31, 2006 4:10 PM
Hello James,
I agree, cival service exams are not the
best criteria to choose who is the best
qualified for a public position of leader-
ship.
There are numerous factors that go into
hiring a person, who is the best qualifed
for the position.
bill deignan
Posted by: Bill Deignan at November 1, 2006 4:16 PM
