Police exam may head to arbitration

11/27/2006

William Kaempffer , Register Staff

NEW HAVEN — A promotional exam in limbo at the Police Department appears to be heading to arbitration, with the city and police union at an impasse on how it should be scored. That could push any exam for new lieutenants back to next summer or later unless an unexpected agreement is reached.

"We had some negotiations. We tried to come to a happy medium," said Emmet P. Hibson Jr., the city’s director of labor relations. In the end, however, the city administration was reluctant to deviate from the scoring recommendations of its testing consultant, he said.

Sgt. Louis Cavaliere, the union president, said the two sides had made progress, but the city abruptly reverted to its original stance.

"It’s kind of a setback to us. I really thought we had an agreement so we could put this to bed and have a test," he said.

The sticking point is how the promotional exam’s two components will be weighted. Historically, the written component has been worth 60 percent and the oral 40, but the city wants that reversed.

For the first time in the police department, the oral section will be in an assessment center format, which involves role playing and is viewed as more comprehensive than the previous oral panel.

Based on its consultant’s recommendation, the city wants it worth no less than 65 percent. The union has been willing to go no higher than 55 percent for the oral section.

"Unless they come to a 65-35, I don’t see how we can agree," said Hibson.

"That makes us suspicious of what their motives are. It seems like that’s something easy to do, a compromise," responded Cavaliere.

The backdrop for all of this is a history of contentious lawsuits surrounding civil service in New Haven that have voided promotions, restricted the city’s discretion on who gets promoted and enflamed racial tensions between factions who believe the system is biased to benefit the other.

The arguments usually surround the oral component, which is the more subjective of the two.

The delay in the lieutenant’s exam has caused some hard feelings inside the police department among a group of sergeants who want the exam to move forward and blame the union executive board for holding it up.

"Some members are venting their frustration at the union," said Cavaliere, the union president. "My members need to understand it’s the city that is holding up this exam, not the union."

He said the union’s duty is to protect the interest of all members and not just the sergeants who want the exam. An agreement could impact future exams for other officers.

Earlier this month, the bad blood prompted an acerbic memo from a sergeant who accused the union of representing only the "good ole boy" network. Cavaliere fired back a terse response accusing the sergeant of attempting to divide the union "to serve your own personal ambitions."

Both letters were posted around police headquarters.

In 2004, two fire department promotional exams were thrown out by the city’s Civil Service Commission after the city administration expressed concern that too few minorities scored well enough.

The city argued it could face a civil rights lawsuit claiming a disparate impact against blacks and Hispanics.

Instead, when the results weren’t certified, a group of 20 mainly white firefighters sued, claiming reverse discrimination. Earlier this year, a federal judge dismissed the case, but a lawyer for the firefighters said the decision will be appealed.

Hibson said the experience with the Fire Department has to be a consideration as the city moves forward with a police exam.

City lawyers say if the administration disregards recommendations from its testing consultant and agrees to a different weight, that could put it in a legally precarious position if the test yields a disparate impact against minorities.

Going to arbitration would help eliminate that onus.

"If we did it on our own, we’d be opening up ourselves and the corporation council office and human resources office to a lawsuit," Hibson said.