At the June 21 Council meeting, a city employee (who was about to be laid off) spoke during the open forum section of the meeting.
“Thank you Mayor and Council. My name Michael Medlin. I am a resident of District 4. I quickly wanted to thank the City for the opportunity of working at city hall for the past 5.5 years. This is one of the highest levels an unarmed security officer without a Department of Defence clearance can achieve and I have enjoyed serving the both residents and employees of San Jose.
“To Councilman Oliverio, I sometimes raise my eyebrows and do double takes at some of your ideas but appreciate your out of the box thinking. I would simply ask that you continue your efforts to reevaluate the current seniority system to include performance evaluations.
“As I talk with many co-workers I sense the majority consider evaluations as a positive rather than a negative tool. In fact many have said the feedback on their performance has been helpful in them achieving exceptional status. The problems that council faces with our current deficits is truly unique and one question will always remain while others have been answered.
“How many of the city’s best and brightest will leave employment each year before we finally address this issue?
“It is time to level the playing field and send the message that bias and favoritism claims do not hold merit.” He ended with: “I thank your for your time and hope our paths will cross again.”
Michael’s testimony is a reminder that layoffs and step increases (salary increases) are done 100 percent based on seniority and zero about performance. Michael’s question is a good one in that many of our best and brightest are laid off through no fault of their own by simply getting hired a month after someone else.
What do you think? Is it fair to lay off outstanding performers in any organization while others who may be burned out remain?
When the City of San Jose hires somebody for any position, there are minimum criteria that are established for employment. This is particularly true when it comes to the more complex jobs that require specific training or education. It is also very true when it comes to public safety where there are many levels of testing that a candidate must pass in order to just be considered for hiring. This means that once the City hires an employee, theoretically all of those employees are going to function at an established acceptable level.
One would also assume that although every employee starts their employment having reached an established bar, that continued employment would then add ongoing training including formal courses, on the job training, mentoring by existing employees, etc. Couple this with actually doing the job they were hired for and it should be patently obvious that an employee is going to improve steadily through their career. In other words, the seasoned employee should be far better at their assigned tasks than the brand new employee.
Now, do some employees with decades of service burn out? Yes they do. Do some brand new employees find out quickly that they are not cut out for the type of work that they signed on for? Yes they do. But does the CSJ evaluation process identify these traits? No it does not. Like many companies, the City has an evaluation process that currently is a sham. Poor employees are routinely given adequate marks. Outstanding employees are routinely passed over for promotion in favor of having the right colors and genders in the mix or through some good ol’ boy network of friendship.
In a perfect world the City could simply lay off based upon those evaluations but San Jose is far from a perfect world. The human factors involved in evaluating performance are light years away from fair unbiased, and would most certainly result in keeping friends of friends and not the highest performers. It would most definitely be a popularity contest where those kept would be those who kissed the right ass, played poker with the right group, or unfortunately turned their heads at the right time when those above them made mistakes.
To avoid the debacle of having the City run by the High School equivalent of the most popular boys and girls clique, the seniority system is used to keep it completely unbiased. Using seniority removes the natural human bias from the process. This means sometimes a less competent worker may end up keeping their jobs. But, it also insures that a great worker who isn’t popular also keeps their job.
Another factor is that of recruiting, hiring, and keeping good employees. How many readers in the private sector have been the victim of a layoff, passed over for a promotion or raise, or never even got a job just because somebody was buddies with the decision maker? In the private sector it is not unusual for a person to hop scotch across the Silicon Valley working for dozens of companies during their career. Private sector people follow the money and companies also come and go. Public sector people usually choose public service because they like the stability of working for the same organization for their entire career.
Public employees choose the slow steady rise in income over the roller coaster that is the private sector. Public employees are willing to put in three or four decades of service to the same organization for a good retirement (well, used to anyway). You will not attract those types of loyal employees with a system that may toss them out after a few years just because they didn’t play golf with the boss. The private sector methodology does not work in the public sector because the motives, attitudes, and personalities of public workers are different than private sector employees.
It is laudible to want to keep the best employees in an organization. There are many private sector tactics and methods that can be used in government and are long overdue. But, making a sudden switch after decades of using a broken, biased, subjective but usually ignored evaluation system isn’t one of them. Unfortunately it is also patently obvious that due to the poor economy a significant motive for the City to supposedly keep the “best and brightest” is simply a ploy to lay off the more expensive older employees who have reached the pinnacle of their pay scale. I fear that it would be awfully coincidental that many of the higher paying positions would be layed off even if they were excellent employees just to save a buck. Look at what the City is doing to public safety to save money. And, if I was that young employee whose job was saved because somebody though I was a hard worker, I would certainly contemplate my future with an organization that was going to can me as soon as I had a few more years on and started making better wages.
> it should be patently obvious that an employee is going to improve steadily through their career.
Patently obvious?
A seriously ignorant statement.
The situation is often just the opposite. It is common for employees in many career fields to get bored and lose interest in doing a good job over the course of their careers..
This is ESPECIALLY a problem in jobs that are inherently boring, repetitive, bureaucratic and where there is TOO MUCH JOB SECURITY.
The classic case are tenured college professors and unionized public employees who simply “retire in place” on the job.
It’s impossible to get them to do their job. It’s impossible to fire them. They become just pure “deadwood”, and other, more junior employees get stuck doing their work without getting paid anything extra.
The idea that an employee is automatically going to improve steadily through their career is arguably wrong-headed and is certainly a stupid basis for employee retention of compensation.
I assume you are referring especially of our educational system. However, the solution is not in immediately letting go employees based upon existing evaluations of performance which are flawed. The evaluation system needs to be revamped and followed. Then you can let substandard employees go without fear of letting friendships, bias, and suspect motives be the driving factor in handing out pink slips.
As for improvement, I cannot believe you are so blind as to believe that somebody freshly trained in a skill set is better than somebody who has practiced their craft for years. You are letting your frustration at the smaller percentage of burned out workers overcome simple logic. For me, I will take the surgeon who has done hundreds of complex operations for the one to open me up over the young kid fresh out of med school who has barely held a scalpel. The list is endless of workers of all professions who hone their craft over decades of training and experience who excel above all others as a result. The examples of drooling sloths in some professions that need to be given their walking papers is far less.
I completely agree. I don’t know why people, especially PLO, are praising the private sector. They need to take a long look in the mirror. I would suggest to you, PLO, that it is the private sector that needs some serious fine tuning. Seniority, while it is not perfect, is at least non-subjective.
Why do we automatically assume that a new hire with little experience is the best and the brightest?
Is it fair to lay off outstanding performers in any organization while others who may be burned out remain?
Do you have any data to support this idea that new hires are the “outstanding performers”, while those with experience are “burned out”?
Do you want your heart transplant to be done by an intern, or somebody with experience?
Gauging from some of the attitudes demonstrated and opinions shared here on SJI by self-purported “long time” city employees, I would tend to believe that the city could receive better bang-for-the-buck service from a newer employee than a more “experienced” peer.
Remember – in a Civil Service position, wisdom does not necessarily come with experience. Rather, the Civil Service “experience” tends to develop sclerosis of the mind in the employee.
Please insert your own job choice into your paragraph about Civil Service and then see how you feel about it. Your stereotyping is not only inaccurate, but incredibly insulting to the many hard working public employees who take pride in their job performance.
Actually, I can do just that, as I work in a unionized organization. I see first-hand on a frequent basis what happens when seniority exists as the first, last and only determining factor in a layoff situation, and the results are not pretty. Talent is sacrificed, longevity is prized.
Once upon a time, people could rise or fall depending on their talent levels.
Now, at least if they are employed by the City of San Jose, they rise or fall strictly based on how long they’ve been drawing a Guvmintal paycheck from the City.
Some of us out here think that there may be a better way of doing things. You obviously disagree.
In the union I work in, the lazy bored senior worker is the exception to the rule. In fact, most younger members aspire to have the knowledge that the senior members have attained over the years through training and experience. I don’t deny that it takes place as I have seen it in the educational system and in fact, yanked my kid out of a school with a bunch of older lazy teachers. But, it isn’t as common as you would portray it to be and I believe less so in a governmental organization where career opportunities and promotions are fought for tooth and nail.
People stereotype the government worker as lame and lazy when, in fact, it is just the opposite. If people knew how hard we have to work to earn that money and how many of us do the job of two people and get just one salary, they wouldn’t be so quick to judge, without knowing. I think the opposite. I see the private worker as the lazy person. Many times I wish people would just do their jobs. It’s like they go to work and don’t want to work…but they want their paycheck. It’s become quite frustrating; can’t get anything installed correctly. Delivery people break your big screen’s screen before they can get it into the house. People misdiagnosed because somebody is too lazy to look a little more into the symptom to make a correct diagnosis. Take your car to the mechanic only to have them do some rinky dink job. They get paid, your car is still broke. Order something in the mail from a huge chain store and they send you used merchandise. Lip smackin’, gum chewin’ young person who would rather die than try to help you in the store. The list goes on and on. So, for every government person you say is lazy, I can find 50 private sector workers who are REALLY lazy.
Here we go again,….
Years ago, there was a mechanism for step increases based on merit/performance. It was stopped about the same time this fiscal “emergency” started 8-9 years ago… almost a decade.
Pier,
A young, aggressive, and proactive police officer invariably receives more internal affairs complaints. Pending internal affairs complaints can lower an officers evaluation, even if the complaints have no merit. Also, the evaluation process is extremely subjective – 10 different supervisors will come to dramatically different conclusions for the same officer. Lastly, there are evaluations that are not done on a timely basis, sometimes goings years without being done.
Maybe you should look at the evaluation system first. Better yet, pay attention to a city that is imploding on your watch. You are truly rearranging the deck chairs on the Titanic. You have a city manager that just called you and the other city council members too irresponsible to make a decision regarding a grant to save 53 police officers, and unilaterally made that decision herself. Tackle that first – our gang problem is exploding yet you want to fix the leaky faucet on the Titanic first. Our murders for the first 6 months of the year are already 50% higher than all of last year.
It is truly amazing how this administration has devalued, demonized, and demoralized the hard working city employees, yet you have not had enough. This has to be one of the most dysfunctional cities in the state, if not the country.
By the way, how about stopping the city hall give away to the county? You and the rest of your cronies are virtually giving away a property that is worth millions more than the city is getting.
PO, thinking out of the box is great but thinking IN the box works too.
In my opinion, motivating your employees to do the best that they can is a management issue. From the top down. If you have employees that want to work for a company or feel that they are part of that company then they will be willing participants in the growth of the company. That is called motivating your employees.
Threatening job loss is a motivating factor but will not get you beyond minimum performance. There is a huge difference between threatening an employee to do better and encouraging him/her to do better. I believe one will get more out your employee by encouragement rather then threatening.
Again, in my opinion, I believe City employees have felt threatened by Reed, Figone and the Council. What you will see is minimal work out put. In the private sector this leads to a decline in customer satisfaction, stagnate growth and a diminished stockholder value. A management overhaul would be imminent.
To the City Hall security guard who got let go – you were an unarmed “security guard” at City Hall because the City wanted to save a few bucks and hire you rather than full fledged professional police officers who could do more than “observe and report.”
Security guards by and large are (1) young people looking for experience that might look good when applying to be a police officer (2) folks that always wanted to be police officers but for some reason (usually a personality trait ) couldn’t pass part of the background check (most often the psychiatric eval) or (3) aged – foriegn born who are perfect (for obvious liability concerns) “observe and report” types.
PLO – you have no clue. The City’s eval system is and has been broken forever. Your merit based porposal can never and will never be viable for the same reason the current system doesn’t work; there are so many “protected class” employees that anything a supervisor documents idicating sub-standard performance is instant grounds for the employee claiming a hostile work environment for “Racism, sexism, agism, homophobia, hetero-conspiracy, good-old boy networking…..” you name it it will end in a payout by the City to the slighted party.
(“To the City Hall security guard who got let go – you were an unarmed “security guard” at City Hall because the City wanted to save a few bucks and hire you rather than full fledged professional police officers who could do more than “observe and report.”
Security guards by and large are (1) young people looking for experience that might look good when applying to be a police officer (2) folks that always wanted to be police officers but for some reason (usually a personality trait ) couldn’t pass part of the background check (most often the psychiatric eval) or (3) aged – foriegn born who are perfect (for obvious liability concerns) “observe and report” types.” )
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
It appears you must be a “law enforcement” expert of some type. But you couldn’t be more wrong with your statement of the City of San Jose Security Officers. They are every professional and most have been a veteran law enforcement officer and retired military or decided to do something different and like doing that kind of job. These officers “DO” go through the exact same background as San Jose Police Officers. The just chose to work in Security, so I guess they don’t make $100k a year.
I agree with your views of PLO, he’s way off.
By know means should City Employees be laid off by how good of a job they have done.
Seniority is there just for that reason. Job performance reviews can be skewed as in the case of favoritism by managers like City Deputy Director of Transportation Matt Morley. This man does not play by the Civil Service Rules, nor does that Idiot Alex Gurza.
Seniority, well when you have worked 20 years and you have a “average” review history and along come layoff’s. Now some new employee who is a “climber” in the City System and holds the same position as the 20 year vet, who is also on the chopping block; but seems to be a “Wonder Boy” Employee. One that gets above standards on every review but has only been with the city for 5 years… Who gets laid off first?
Under the new way of thinking, the old guy who has seniority gets the axe because he makes to much money and is also deemed less useful due to his age.
The City management keep the butt kisser until he finds out that he too is just a pawn in Reeds game.
In the real world, if you were there first, you get to keep your job. The other way of thinking is insane, as it equates to “cutting in line” and not waiting for your turn.
Do that and your gonna get you ass kicked by a pissed off 20 year veteran City Employee.
So Michael Medlin, get over it, your laid-off stop whining.
The City Fact Checker
“These officers “DO” go through the exact same background as San Jose Police Officers. The just chose to work in Security, so I guess they don’t make $100k a year.”
Having done background checks on all manner of City employees, including police officers, dispatchers, security officers, etc., I can say you are way off base. The background check conducted on police officers is far and away the most intensive, intrusive, and comprehensive check done on any City employee. The checks done on all the rest pale by comparison. Working as a security officer is nothing to be ashamed of but trying to equate that job with a police officer is completely out of line.
Fact Checker, “You Lie!”
Unless by “Elite Backgrounds / Investigations Inc” you mean the San Jose Police Department Personel/Backgrounds Unit -the only group who backgrounds police officer candidates, records clerks, dispatchers and even the janitors assigned to clean the station house. Why I even heard that they do the backgrounds for animal control, park rangers and parking control.
Having done background checks on all manner of City employees, including police officers, dispatchers, security officers, etc…
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
So Bubble, you must work for Elite Backgrounds / Investigations Inc and not the City as the City farms “all backgrounds” out. They have the City of San Jose contract for backgrounds for all City employees. If you do work there you guys have missed a few things on your backgrounds in the past.
Well just in case you didn’t know, up until recent times the City Security Officers were sworn officers with Peace Officer status while on duty. Those Officers were backgrounded as Peace Officers, just like the City Park Rangers.
So it seems that your statement comes from someone that may have been misinformed.
But I respect you for trying…
The City Fact Checker
Actually they don’t. The ‘background check’ for an actual police officer includes more than checking a few references as in the case of the security guards. Police officers receive the rough equivalent of a federal Top Secret clearance of which I had in the military. Security guards like many other positions which have limited on-duty authority only reach the Secret level. Additionally the police background check has multiple phases the guards check does not to include checking everything from your credit, your neighbors opinions, your high school n college transcripts to a full psychological profile, polygraph exam and more.
Basically you just compared a “long division quiz” to a “geometry final.”
Are you going to tell me that the San Jose Police Department Personnel Unit does not do background checks anymore? No, the CSJ does not farm out all backgrounds, only those less important. Also, having worked for CSJ for nearly three decades, I cannot remember any security officer being a “partial sworn.” Care to name the year that they changed? Over 30 years ago doesn’t seem “recent times” to me. I do recall when the VTA used partial sworn for security prior to handing it over to the SCCO Sheriff. Might want to check your own facts.
The San Jose Police Department, Bureau of Administration , Personel Unit conducts ALL backgrounds for the San Jose Police Department. ALL.
That’s an interesting concept, but they DON’T! The back grounds continue to be conducted by a contractor. Either by Elite or some other Investigation contractor on the list.
You are both pretty close to the truth but…. your wrong on some accounts.
San Jose has not done it’s own backgrounds for at least 15 years or more.
(Really now) – I see that your “trying” to continue to make this Security position less of a career choice to make yourself feel like a big man.
Start asking around “Mr. Know it All” ask some of the old timers at SJPD, ask the Park Rangers… Don’t just say you asked them, actually go and ask them if this is so important to you to put down these fine City Employees
Would “you” care to name the Dept. that you work for since you have a vast intelligible knowledge of all City functions.
Look at the job description for Security Officer http://www.sanjoseca.gov/HumanResources/spec/2431s000.htm,
It indicates that these officers are sworn in, Deputized as Peace Officers by the City. The Peace Officer status for this position comes from the authority of the City Manager, go ask that office about this if you don’t believe me.
(Cigar) I respect your insight, but you too my friend are wrong on your account of fact checking.
The Security Officer background is more than just reference checks, as they have access to all criminal info as the city police officers.
As these “Guards” as you put it, have and do make criminal arrests, issue criminal citations, detain subjects for criminal activity and so on. It is a necessary career choice, since they take some of the burden off of the police dept. to the lesser involved enforcement actions.
Have a nice day!
The City Fact Checker
@ The City Fact Checker :”…So Bubble, you must work for Elite Backgrounds / Investigations Inc and not the City as the City farms “all backgrounds” out. They have the City of San Jose contract for backgrounds for all City employees…”
You my friend are FIRED! The San Jose Police Department, Bureau of Administration , Personel Unit conducts ALL backgrounds for the San Jose Police Department. ALL.
So it seems that your statement comes from someone that may have been misinformed.
I have never seen any of the City Hall Security guards booking any of their arresttes at the Jail. I have never seen them processing their prisoners at PPC, AIB or J-Hall. Where do they file these citations they write? or access the criminal info like the City officers?
If any of this were true – and it isn’t – there was some major redundancy going on. Why did the city need security guards to do police work and why did they need a police force when the Security Staff was apparently a mini-police department?
If by arrest powers you mean they could make “citizens arrests” then by your definition we are all “peace officers.”
As far as the security officer job description…. while it may exist i would love to be a citizen who was on the receiving end of some enforcement action by a city hall security guard claiming he or she has peace officer powers. I cvould easily double the City’s deficits for the next few years. The City Manager can “confer peace offcier powers’ on anyone or anything she likes – they just don’t mean a darn thing.
“Observe and Report” is about the full extent of thier function – I know because I have taken a few “witness statements” from them. When crimes are committed in/around City Hall guess what they did? dialed 911 and asked for the real police to come handle their business.
“They are every professional and most have been a veteran law enforcement officer and retired military or decided to do something different and like doing that kind of job”
Retired veteran law enforcement officers working as security officers? I am not buying it. Most cops I know who have retired are making bank working in the private sector. Does San Jose pay its security officers $50 an hour or more? I know many retired cops making that and more working for corporations as plainclothes security, internal investigations, etc. Yet, you say they are willing to step down and wear a uniform absent a gun and other protective equipment.
I find that hard to believe and I’d like to see some facts to back it up. Retired military might fly if they only have a half a dozen years or less and are looking to get into law enforcement eventually.
Seems to me that working for $35k – $55k a year after making double that as a police officer might be a bit of a step down. So, who was a former police officer willing to do that? Dan Helton? Rick Lam? Tony Shaddox? Dwight Lawson? Matt Chasuk? Any others at the Convention Center? How about Luis Matos or Juan Ruvalcaba at GSA? San Jose employs just over a dozen security officers. If any of the security officers are former police officers now working as a security guard, I would be surprised unless you are using only one person as your example. This doesn’t mean that it isn’t a good profession, just that equating that job with a police officer is a quantum leap.
You just don’t get it do you, it was said that the City Security Officers are not back-grounded the same as REAL Police, again you might want to check with PD since you know everything and are omnipotent and all knowing.
Wow, nice guy you are and a good little Reed Puppy. I assume you were throwing peoples names around that are or were Security Officers? and by doing that it made you feel important and full of power! I’m impressed, NOT!
But that’s okay your an “Idiot” and even if you held the truth in your hand you would say, NOPE that’s not it because I say so!?!? Pat me on the head Mayor Reed, I be a good boy yes I am…. I’m glad you know retired police officers, that’s nice to know… What are their names? Pete Constant? Rob Davis?
BTW – I am an average citizen and have a very good job making “BANK” as you put it, not a City Employee. One of my friends was a Security Officer for the City many years ago, but I do take offense to people making fun of others who are doing jobs others wouldn’t do for less pay.
Quantum Leap was a TV show with Scott Bakula as the leaper!
The City Fact Checker
You posted up using the moniker “City Fact Checker” when in reality all you had to bring to the table was second hand information from a friend who “was” a security officer many years ago. Yet, you portrayed your information as current and accurate. The fact is, you are wrong on all accounts and now you think by insulting those who revealed your ignorance using Reed’s name is the best response?
If you had current information you would know that the people I named are current security officers working for San Jose, several of whom I personally have worked with. Second, nobody cares if you are impressed. What people care about are posts containing the truth. In fact, the only true thing you said out of all of your rantings regarded a TV show that you clearly used to watch. By the way, I don’t need to check with the PD, it has already been done for many years. I’m thinking you might want to change your post name, your credibility just headed down the growler…
PO, I like your use of this public forum to pat yourself on the back and grand Stand. Your part of the reason along with Chuckie that all these people lost their jobs. Now crawl back in your hole, I mean city council and do the job your suppose to do. LAY OFF MORE EMPLOYEES.
shows so much shameless, blatant favoritism it borders on the ripley’s believe it , or not, scale. You would not believe some of the things, if I told you. Bottom line is, it is so unfair to others. Performance based layoffs would not work in our department. All of management’s favorites/friends would stay (and there are some really lame ones who have been there for years and cannot do the work), and the ones who were not on management’s “favorites” list would be out of the door, no matter how good they were. We sit back, watch and shake our heads because they do it so shamelessly. I think the directors in each department should be held accountable for allowing favoritism to play a part in their department.
Sounds like the SJPD under Chief Davis. Young, white, skinny, and with an uncanny ability to kiss ass and you were in. Or, if you fit into the CSJ’s unwritten affirmative action quotas, you were in. God forbid you speak out and say anything contrary to the administration however. High scores on testing? Years of additional education at institutes of higher learning? Extracurricular activities in your community? No Internal Affairs complaints? Awards for outstanding contributions or high productivity? None of these made the slightest bit of difference with Chief Davis. Unless you fit a certain “need” or were one of his clones, forget promotion. Unless you spent the day reaffirming his every decision, forget advancement.
And the CSJ wants to give their leaders the ability to ignore completely seniority? As posted by so many, the citizens would not get better service. Quite the contrary the ranks of CSJ workers would be filled with those who rather than exhibit the best work ethic, were the most proficient and making their bosses like them. Methinks PLO must have some good looking young brown nosing staffer on his roster that he doesn’t want to let go.
Pierluigi,
To people like you and me who have extensive work experience in the real world, the idea of being retained, fired, rewarded, punished, demoted, or promoted based on our productivity and not on our seniority, seems as natural as breathing the air. But in the pampered, protected environment of the public servant this concept is alien and threatening. I just don’t think they’d be able to adapt.
It doesn’t matter how well you design it or how well it’s administered, it’s hard to imagine any merit based sytem that would not be immediately resented by, resisted by, picked to pieces by, and finally sabotaged by the employees. Toxic employees exist in every organization, public or private, and cannot be motivated to pull their weight and are constantly on the lookout for opportunities to play the victim card. Any slight miscalculation on the part of the employee evaluators would expose the deep pocket of the City to pricey wrongful dismissal lawsuits filed by these dedicated public servants assisted by their union provided lawyers.
So as much as I believe in the concept of using merit as the basis for deciding which employees are providing the best value to the taxpayers, I’m also a realist. Generally speaking, mediocrity goes along with a seniority system. The best we can do is to accept the seniority system but do our best to really try to limit the size of our government so that we only have to pay for a little mediocrity instead of a LOT of mediocrity.
You know something Galt? You and PLO both make a lot of sense. In fact you make perfect sense if you want a police department that is modeled after your favorite exporter of competition in your choice of work: TIJUANA BAJA MEXICO!!!
That’s what Mr. Smarty Pants – Think outside the Box – Oliverio’s proposal will get us. That is exactly what Gurza/Reed/Figone tried to give you during recent contract negotiations. They demanded performance rankings of officers and said that they would decide who got laid off and who stayed. The politicians want to hand pick the police department -they want to hand pick “the best and brightest” who are smart enough to know that “what the councilmember wants the councilmember gets” in his/her district… It spells CORRUPTION! We saw the mentality behind this when PLO called the Chief of Police to claim that he was being harassed after he was caught stealing campaign signs!
You really don’t have to worry about any of that though – the mislead (by PLO/Constant/Reed/Figone) voters made sure that (1) SJPD would be understaffed by layoffs now, (2) understaffed more in the future -due to layoffs and the mass exodus of officers not vested in the retirement system (3) would ensure that future recruitment of replacements would be difficult if not impossible due to lousy pay and benefits compared to other police agencies in the state. The term-limited politicians will be long gone and you will be wondering how things got so bad – be careful what you wish for.
You fell on tough times due to the overall economy of the WORLD! You want to blame someone so you blame (1) illegal aliens and (2) public employees. Two groups whose lot in life looks pretty good in tough economic times. You are too proud to do the work the illegals hustle for and to good to be a lowly cop or firefighter – where has it gotten you?
….a former bartender and private sector worker is now a public employee, yet praises the private sector. Ironic, isn’t it?
Hey PO; why not start a forum on Recalling Reed or firing Chief Figone. It is all over all the forums and it is the talk everywhere. You say you always step out of the box, so do it now!
A great blog Pierluigi. I was happy to hear Michael’s opinion. A shame he was one of the ones to go.
My preference (thanks for asking!) is for the City to install a robust performance management process/system and completely eliminate the seniority system.
As a side note, I have to say that I have always had a problem with the expression “best and brightest”…doesn’t leave much room to value diversity and varying work styles/motivational factors, does it? Companies do quite well when they have a good mix of highly motivated, bright employees who want to zoom up the company ladder (and are quite willing to make work/life balance sacrifices required) and also employees who are perfectly happy to do rote type of work; wanting simply to do their jobs to the best of their ability and go home. Also, let’s not forget those companies who get the job done by hiring disabled (physically and mentally) people who have the motivation to want to work and do the best they can…but they may never be labeled “best” or “brightest.” They most defintely have something to contribute too.
Thanks again Pierluigi, I am behind you 100% on the is issue of looking at eliminating a seniority system.
Tina
You might consider investing a modicum of your vast talents into researching city operations before integrating private sector experiences and nuances into formulations to wit your eloquent opinion appears to be based.
In doing so, you might experience a moment of glee; perhaps become perplexed as to why “Brother Michael” is still with us…did the very seniority system his Honor, Councilmember Oliverio and you espouse to eliminate…save him?
David S. Wall
This is a silly idea. Part of the reason is to avoid political favors if the mayor and council could simple layoff everyone because of reviews they would and then hire all their supporters. Sure a guy laid says he should not have been but if he had seniority would he say the guy with six months on stays because my boss thinks he does a better job.
The police do a background, academy with daily observations, FTP with daily observations, year of probation with observation reports by supervisors. There is a final review before deciding to keep an officer. I think that is enough to establish the employee meets a baseline ability. If an employee fails to produce a supervisor has tools to ensure work is done. Argue that the supervisors do not do their job and supervise substandard work sure they may at time pass along a marginal employee.
If anyone does not see why the mayor and council are elected if you allow them to remove employee they will sell the position to whomever gives them the most money. Right now they sold their votes for a ball field. They have so many side deals it’s crazy know one ever checks what they do with their money.
An example Pete constant did not take a secretary why because he wants to answer his phone? No because he did not like the employee he was going to get. He felt the employee would not be loyal and might tell on him. He hired a staffer to fund raise all day.
The real problem is our elected officials get elected to profit. They are on their way to ruin the city as the federal gov. Almost ruined the country. Stop being sheep. How can reed say the employee contracts are the problem when he voted for every single contract. Has reed once said he is to blame for passing contracts and taking money. Ask anyone of them for an accounting of how much money they take in. The mayor takes in well over $500.000 a year. Someone gives him $500,000 a year even on his last term with no plans to run. What a scam. Where that money really goes is never checked. Over and over we find the elected officials tell the world the sky is falling but they will fix things if we give them complete power then the abuse it for profit. It’s all lies. Stop them from profiting. No fund raising no ball parks no scams and elect people to run the city and you will see better choices. It’s clear as day that they are marketing their plan to you. Fake bloggers fake articles fake numbers.
PO,
Why wait until its layoff time to get rid of “sick, lame and lazy” employees?
In the last 10 years how many city workers have been discharged (fired) for substandard performance (vs. theft, sexual harassment, etc.) after passing their probationary period? (if the answer is zero or close to it, maybe the city has a “supervisory problem”)
Will supervisors be included in performance based layoffs…or will “worker bees” be the only one’s honored with that privilege?
For those of you on SJI who have for years been insulting and belittling public employees in general and CSJ employees in particular, I have one question: Who will be doing the performance appraisals that will partially determine who gets laid off? Why, of course, other incompetent, lazy, long-standing public employees. That’s right, City supervisors and administrators — the evaluators — are public employees who have more seniority than those fresh-faced so-called “best and brightest” who supposedly run circles around the rest of us. Seems like rather contradictory thinking is involved in this scheme. Funny how reality doesn’t seem to support perception. Why do I say that? Well, Pier, you are perceived as someone who thinks merit is important. But that really isn’t true, is it? The City had a merit program with MEF employees called the Employee Service and Performance Pay Pilot. In this program, full-time employees with at least 10 years’ service would earn an extra $500 if they received an Above Standard performance appraisal like the ones you want to base layoffs on. That’s merit, isn’t it? Well, in 2008, back when the City bargained with its employees, this performance program was killed at the request of the City. The program evidently rewarded 350-480 employees annually (over 50% of eligible MEF employees), which proved that a lot of 10+ year veterans achieve high performance, which puts a lie to your stereotype of old, burned-out employees. What’s interesting, though, is that you were on the Council then, but I don’t remember you kicking up a fuss about the demise of this merit program or even calling for re-instituting it. Sounds pretty hypocritical, doesn’t it? Oh, that’s right. This performance-based program costs the City money, whereas performance-based layoffs will (you hope) save the City money by removing employees at higher pay steps while keeping the “best and brightest” who are at their lower pay steps and have much longer to go before they reach retirement. It’s not really about performance or service to the public at all.
Are you pissed off at the city start with calling the major advertisers in the mercury news and ask them to pull their adds.. Ask them to demand the merc go back to impartial fair reports. I bet you see the owners of the merc change stop holding hands with reed and print all the stuff people have been telling them. Get at the money and stop the fox news reporting geared toward an agenda.
Next get a list of Reeds supporters and boycott their stores and products. Money is everything to these people. Touch their money and they will drown their own kids to save their cash. Look what Warren buffet did to his niece when she gave an interview.
It amazes me that you continue to put forth such misinformation about background checks all in the name of standing up for a profession that nobody has besmirched except for you in your own mind. Let’s look at this step by step.
1. You are absolutely incorrect about San Jose PD not doing their own background checks. You can confirm this simply by calling the Personnel Unit of SJPD and asking them. You have several people who have posted here, obviously who work for SJPD, who know first hand this to be true. You can hold on to what you believe to be correct but the simple fact is, you are wrong. In fact, I’ve had background investigators (police officers assigned to the Personnel Unit) initiate criminal investigations over information that has arisen during a background for a city employee. I’ve also seen background investigations conducted on IT personnel who are transferred to the PD from other city departments, again by cops.
2. As for making somebody look like a “big man” you fail in the reading department as there are multiple posts using terms like “Working as a security officer is nothing to be ashamed…” and “This doesn’t mean that it isn’t a good profession…” What I see here is somebody who is either a security officer for the city or someone else trying to equate themselves as a cop out of jealousy or with an inferiority complex.
3. I don’t need to ask an old timer, I am an old timer. Maybe you failed to read my post about being around as a city employee for nearly three decades. Since 99% of all cops retire out at 30 or less years, I guess I qualify. And, guess who I hang around with? Cops older than me. And, guess who I’ve watched go from security officer, PAL cadet, VOLT volunteer, etc. to a police officer through the hiring process? The previous poster is right, the security officer position is a great stepping stone if law enforcement is the ultimate goal. If not, it is still a good profession, but not the same as doing full time police work.
4. The job description you posted states ” Ability to be deputized as a Peace Officer.” and “Deputization as a Peace Officer will be required within a prescribed time after employment.” Whether or not they are deputized is the question. Care to post how many of the just over a dozen security officers in San Jose are deputized? I bet a couple of phone calls would reveal the embarrassing answer. I also see you left out this important part describing the security officer authority “This is a single position class in the General Security series and differs from other classes in the Security family in that its major function is confined to City buildings and immediate area rather than an airport, park, parking lot or other broad access area.” There is a very important reason they put this sentence in. According to the Penal Code, security officers would bump to an entirely different classification if they worked in the parks or airport in uniform with a badge.
You also left out this part that is a lower standard than being hired for a police officer position: “Any combination of training and experience equivalent to completion of high school and one year of responsible experience in security law enforcement field or related field.” A San Jose cop has to have a minimum of 2 years of college and a BS or BA is preferred.
In fact, let’s look at the requirements for a police recruit, the entry level position hired by the city:http://www.sanjoseca.gov/HumanResources/spec/2214s001.htm. Funny, I don’t see anything on the security officer position about a police academy or POST certification. Let’s look at the police officer requirements also to see the difference between a security officer and a police officer: http://www.sanjoseca.gov/HumanResources/spec/2215s001.htm
5. The authority for being a sworn peace officer doesn’t come from a city manager, it comes from the Penal Code. By the way, are security officers allowed to carry a firearm while working and do they? Are they sworn off-duty and can they make an arrest anywhere in the state 24/7/365? Can you explain if a security officer makes an arrest say at a city building under what authority they do so? Are they partial sworn and if so what section covers them? Can you explain how the SJPOA would allow a sworn peace officer to be hired by the city without representing them?
Speaking of historical information regarding park rangers, are you aware that several times the park rangers have tried to achieve full-time peace officer status with the ability to carry the same safety equipment as a police officer? The city has routinely denied that request because they do not want the park rangers to then be represented by the POA and they do not want to pay them the same pay scale as a police officer. Quite frankly, they should be and it is a travesty that the city puts them in harms way without the various protections.
Lastly, nobody here is trying to degrade the position of a security officer with San Jose. However, the job of a security officer and that of a police officer are worlds apart. Yes, a security officer can come across dangerous circumstances. Yes, it is an honored profession. However, even the most biased of observers can tell the difference between the two jobs with minimal investigation. There is a very good reason the requirements for a cop are much higher and the pay reflects it. This doesn’t mean a security officer isn’t a decent job, they are just different.
Boys Boys Boys! You guys need to stop this bickering on who knows what? Who cares! Stop measuring your Penises, or Old Frank will have to come off the front porch and spank both of you kids for being in my yard and send you home to your Mommy, Mayor Reed.
Old Frank
Mine is still young and working….
Good for you sport.
Why does any of this matter? Through the incompetence of most of San Jose’s supervisors, yearly “performance appraisals” are rarely completed. I was recently laid-off after 7 years. In those seven years I worked under 6 different supervisors, due to the cities out-of-control turnover, all of my supervisors failed in their duty to record any of my actions or accomplishments. I guess the issues that needs addressing is cutting the fat where the fat exists. Why is the city harboring so many deadbeat supervisors?