Police promotional exam to rely more on oral exercises than written test

08/08/2007

William Kaempffer , Register Staff

NEW HAVEN — A state arbitration panel has sided with the city in a debate over a police promotional exam that has been delayed for a year after a dispute on how it should be graded. In a recently released decision, the three-person panel ruled for the city, which wanted the oral section of the exam to count for 60 percent of the total. The union had wanted the oral and written sections to be weighted equally.

"I think that this is a win for the city, showing that the arbitrators believe that the city had a legitimate concern regarding Title VII," said city Labor Relations Emmet P. Hibson Jr. "We're happy to get this behind us and get the test going."

Title VII is a section of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 which prohibits employment discrimination based on race, color, religion, sex or national origin. The city and its testing consultant argued that a greater weight to the oral section, in this case in an assessment center format, would create a more valid exam for the skills required by the job and lessen the likelihood of encountering a disparate impact on minorities.

For the first time in the police department, the city will use the assessment center as the oral component, which supporters argue is a better gauge of a person's job-related capabilities. Some evaluation techniques include in-basket exercises, role playing and decision-making problems.

In the past, when using a more conventional oral exam, the city used a 60/40 formula with the written exam more heavily weighted.

Sgt. Louis Cavaliere, police union president, said the union would not appeal the arbitration decision but expressed displeasure with the process. He claimed that the city agreed to a 50/50 weight last year and then reneged on the deal.

"I've always grown up in labor that you're only as good as your word," he said. "It's going to change the dynamics of how I work with the city from hence forward."

Rob Smuts, the city's chief administrative officer, has said that, whatever the arbitration decision, the city would move forward making promotions and hopefully have a certified list in November.

The city already has a testing consultant, Chris W. Hornick, under contract. Hornick, who originally had proposed the oral be weighted 70 percent, testified at the arbitration hearing.

Originally, the city planned to give the police lieutenant exam in 2006.

Hibson said the union is mistaken that the city ever agreed to a 50/50 weight for lieutenants. There was an agreement pertaining to a sergeant test that was administered in 2006 but that did not carry over to the lieutenant test, Hibson said.

Both sides dug in their respective heels on the lieutenant weights and agreed to interest arbitration, which includes three panelists — one selected by the city, one by the union and neutral arbitrator. In the end, the management and labor arbitrators toed the company line. Will Clark, the city's former labor relations director and incoming chief operating officer for the city Board of Education, voted in the city's favor. James Howell, a retired city police officer who now is executive director of Council 15, an umbrella organization for state police unions, was the dissenting vote. Neutral arbitrator M. Jackson Webber cast the deciding vote.

It's not unprecedented that Title VII concerns have driven promotional policy. In 2004, the city's Civil Service Commission didn't certify two fire department promotional exams on the city's administration's recommendation after the city corporation counsel and personnel director voiced concerns that too few minorities scored at the top of the list, which could have opened the city up to civil rights lawsuits.

Instead, a group of white firefighters sued, claiming their rights were violation. A federal judge threw out the case, which is now before the 2nd U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals.

Hornick's firm also administered the hiring exam for the fire department this year, which was blasted by aldermen, members of the fire commission and fire union after the city decided to make the exam 100 percent oral but for months failed to convey that beyond the small circle of decision makers.

As a result of the controversy, the aldermen pulled funding for an academy class for the next fiscal year.