Wednesday, August 12, 2015

Police Aide Flap Invoked to Reject Dispatch Trainees

A proposed ordinance establishing a trainee position for police dispatchers drew fire Monday from Council President Bridget Rivers based on what she described as unfair treatment to police aides.

Rivers said she received "phone calls after phone calls after phone calls" from police aides who took training for almost a year and were now out of a job because outsiders scored higher on a Civil Service exam for the job.

"The city has wasted a lot of money," she said, suggesting the police dispatcher trainees might meet a similar fate.

Councilwoman Gloria Taylor said she also received phone calls regarding "inequities or the perception of inequities" in the police aide situation. Rivers said the aides had planned to attend Monday's agenda-fixing session, but she "begged them not to come."

Taylor made additional lengthy comments about "glaring inequities," but City Administrator Rick Smiley said one situation would not preclude looking into the other.

Police Director Carl Riley summed up the need for the trainee titles by calling it "real simple."

"Everyone said they wanted officers out in the street," he said, but now he has two officers assigned full-time to dispatch. Based on the city's population shift to 40 percent Hispanic, he also needs bilingual dispatchers, he said.

Riley said the city uses a Language Line translation service, but it takes time to relay calls for translation and get responses.

"We need somebody to speak Spanish," he said.

The trainees would start at a pay rate much lower than that of a police officer and after a year would be promoted to the title of "telecommunicator." In a memo on the proposal, Personnel Director Karen Dabney said public safety telecommunicators were required to have one year of experience in all aspects of emergency dispatch.

Rivers said at one point that she had a conflict on the police aide matter in which someone from the outside scored higher on the test, but Riley said the aides were not yet off the list and nobody had been released.

Taylor again raised a concern about "preferential treatment."

City Clerk Abubakar Jalloh reminded the council that the ordinance was up for second reading and a public hearing had been advertised. The ordinance required tabling at the Aug. 17 meeting, he said.

Councilman Cory Storch said the council was in a difficult position, as they were hearing from Riley that police are needed in the street, while others raised an issue of fairness. He said he did not receive any calls about the issue and he was in favor of moving it to the agenda. But as Rivers and Riley went back and forth over the facts, she said, "Let's be clear - this council is about public safety. We have to tell the whole story."

"I think the issue just got confused," Storch said, "Words were put in my mouth."

Finally, Brown said the council will move to table the ordinance on Aug. 17

Two other new titles in the ordinance were not even mentioned at all Monday. Both were related to the federal Women, Infants & Children nutrition program. One title was peer counselor and the other was lactation counselor. The jobs were needed as a result of the WIC grant audit finding, Dabney said in a memo. The jobs would be funded by federal grants. Unless the public safety and WIC titles are somehow bifurcated, it seems a council rejection would affect all four titles.

--Bernice

4 comments:

  1. The problem may be hiring trainees who haven't passed or scored high enough on the Civil Service exam first. That's where the preferential treatment is, and the waste of money.

    ReplyDelete
  2. The question is this. Why is the city proposing an ordinance for the newly hired (Uncertified) 911 telecommunication operators but will not do the same for the (Certified) Police Aides? The civil service list that was called affects both positions. However, you have one group who did not even take the test but are being protected and another who not only took the test but passed the test and are now Certified Police Aides with exactly one year experience but are being displaced. The City wants to create a Trainee position for the dispatchers, however, is this even legal in the eyes of the NJ Civil Service Commission if an audit was performed? The Trainees will perform the same duties and the Certified dispatchers so I'm confused where the "trainee" aspect of this ordinance falls in place, these trainees WILL and have been working alone which should not be. Makes me wonder which dispatcher(s) they are looking to protect.

    ReplyDelete
  3. Sounds like this is some back door sneaky politics. If the current police aides are already certified and trained and have the mandated 1 year experience, why not first pass an ordinance to secure their positions? I am certain that Again, the City of Plainfield has wasted tax-payers money in training the Police Aides which requires overtime and officers being taken off the roads to hire to train a new group of police aides. This is unconscionable! Who is responsible for making these decisions? Hopefully, this is Not passed by council.

    ReplyDelete
  4. THAT'S WHAT HAPPENS WHEN YOU HIRE YOUR DAUGHTER AND OTHER POLITICAL FAVORS AND THEY SKIP CIVIL SERVICE

    ReplyDelete