title
Receive a report on Civil Service Rule considerations involving hearing procedures and get any additional direction from the Commission
body
HUMAN RESOURCES’ RECOMMENDATION
Receive a report on Civil Service Rule considerations involving hearing procedures and provide further direction.
SUMMARY
Following the Civil Service hearing which concluded in May 2017, the Civil Service Commission expressed the desire to streamline the hearing process. In August 2017, the Department of Human Resources presented the Commission with some ideas of the types of Rule changes the department was conceptualizing, and asked the Commission for any additional direction. This report updates the Commission on the current status of the changes, and provides a glimpse at the proposed edits currently being discussed with bargaining unit exclusive representatives.
DISCUSSION
Between February 1 and May 10, 2017, the Commission conducted a discrimination complaint hearing. The hearing concluded after eight (8) sessions, and a final determination was issued by the Commission on May 10, 2017.
As an administrative law hearing body, the Commission has broad authority to conduct hearings in an efficient manner and which do not conflict with the Civil Service Rule Section XIII, Civil Service Commission Hearings. The Commission has expressed a desire to make the hearing process more efficient. In an effort to make better use of the parties’ time, the County Human Resources Department provided an initial list of proposed Civil Service Rule revisions to the Commission at the August 2017 meeting and asked for further direction.
Process changes for considerations include:
• Imposing limitations to repetitive testimony;
• Hearings are conducted informally, but motions are made in accordance with the Rules and witnesses are examined pursuant to California Evidence Code;
• Requiring parties meet prior to the hearing to pre-mark exhibits and identify exhibits each can agree to prior to the hearing; confirm the issue(s) being heard by the Commission, and establishes timeframes;
• Requiring parties to bring specified number of copies of exhibits to the hearing.
• Requiring parties 5 days’ prior to the hearing, to identify the witness list, exhibit list, reasonable estimated time for hearing, a one-page summary of the case setting forth the charges, if disciplinary, the disciplinary action being appealed, and defenses to be raised by the Appellant;
• Requiring the parties to identify a list of facts to which they can stipulate without the introduction or admission of evidence;
• Requiring the parties to take reasonable efforts to consolidate documents;
• Establishing a standard of conduct of individuals participating in the hearing process;
• Establishing the Commission’s authority to censure or take other appropriate action for failure to adhere to hearing standards of conduct;
• Establishing a procedure to address “Pitchess” motions (affecting public safety employees); and
• Establishing parameters for cross examination of witnesses;
• Advising parties of these protocols as the hearings are set, and the Commission’s expectation and potential limitations to parties which decline to follow these protocols.
The County has provided all bargaining units representing Civil Service Employees the opportunity to meet over the proposed changes. The County has met with or received input from the following employee organizations and has nearly completed its review of and incorporation of suggested edits as appropriate:
• Deputy Sheriff’s Association (DSA, Units 3 & 4)
• Solano Probation Peace Officers Association (SPPOA, Units 12 & 15)
• International Union of Operating Engineers, Local 39 (Stationary Engineers, Unit 10)
• Service Employees International Union, Local 1021 (SEIU, Units 2,5,7,8,9)
ALTERNATIVES
The Civil Service Commission could request additional items be included in the proposed revisions, removal of items to be included, or ask Human Resources to disregard these efforts; however, the Human Resources Department is not recommending this as the previous hearing has raised concerns regarding efficiencies sufficient enough to warrant further review and discussion.
OTHER AGENCY INVOLVEMENT
None.