Category Archives: Civil Service

N.O.P.D. Senior Police Officer Promotions

Posted on by
Reply

It used to be a constant struggle for the Crescent City Lodge of the Fraternal Order of Police to convince the administration, whoever that happened to be at the time, that the men and women of the New Orleans Police Department deserved an opportunity to get this time-and-grade promotion, that the necessary functions were in place to make the promotions, and that making the promotions will have a positive effect on the retention of valued, veteran officers.

These days, we do not have to make those arguments. What we do have to do is remind our members — more than 92% of all NOPD employees — that in order to get promoted, they have responsibilities and that there are deadlines for doing those things.

This past Friday, Dawnella Adams of NOPD Human Resources sent a very informative email concerning SPO promotions via the NOPD.GOV email system. If you are an NOPD Police Officer seeking to be promoted to Senior Police Officer, please take the time to read over this important information. To read the full email sent by Ms. Adams, check your NOPD emails for Friday, November 3, 2023, at 10:00 a.m. Here are the highlights of that email:

Superintendent Anne Kirkpatrick is proud to announce online training modules for the promotional position of Senior Police Officer.

Minimum qualification requirements for this application include:  

  1. Permanent status as a Police Officer with NOPD. 
  2. Three (3) years of experience with NOPD in any combination of Police Officer or Police Officer I. 
  3. Successful completion of the current New Orleans Police Academy Police Officer II, III, IV, or Senior Police Officer training program. A letter from the Police Education and Training Division certifying the successful completion of this training must be submitted. 

*After the above requirements are met, CLICK HERE.

SENIOR POLICE OFFICER TRAINING PROGRAM REQUIREMENTS: 

The Academy has formulated a SPO curriculum that will be delivered in a series of web-based training courses. Candidates are required to complete a total of five interactive courses offered by the Virginia Center for Policing Innovation (sponsored by the U.S. Dept. of Justice Community Oriented Policing Services – COPS Program). The VCPI “E-Learn Center” offers 24/7 access to these courses which include a variety of learning tools, multi-media segments, and exercises. Officers may access this training website on personal time from any computer with 

Internet connectivity. The modules can be paused and resumed to the location where discontinued. Participants will be able to print a certificate of training upon successfully passing each course examination.  

HERE ARE INSTRUCTIONS FOR ACCESSING THE ON-LINE TRAINING (CORRECTED): 

Eligible SPO candidates may CLICK HERE to access the VCPI website, CREATE AN ACCOUNT and REGISTER AS A NEW USER. Once registered, you’ll be able to access the Student Dashboard to view and register for Courses and to download evaluations and training certificates.  

Upon accessing the E-Learn Center officers will be presented with a menu of 13 Events, Courses and Resources from which to choose. Officers should click on the button REGISTER MYSELF and BEGIN for each of the SPO required training modules listed below.

A tutorial on how to use the commands is provided initially and can be viewed at any time by clicking on the “help” button on the top right of the screen. Officers taking the courses must complete all pages and each tab/insert within each page to be eligible for the certification exam. If at any time you exit the modules, reentry will allow you to go back to the location where you left off.  

SUBMITTAL OF TRAINING CERTIFICATES: 

Upon completion of the modules and the course exams, you will be able to click on the final section to print the “Certificate.” The five completed certificates (in total) shall be personally delivered to the front desk receptionist at the Police Academy Monday through Friday between the hours of 8AM and 3PM. 

DO NOT EMAIL CERTIFICATES.

If you experience any difficulties with the online training, contact Duane Johnson, Academy Curriculum Director, dujohnson@nola.gov . 

The Fraternal Order of Police urges all eligible members to visit the VCPI E-Learning Center as soon as possible and to register for the required courses. Each course listed states the course is the 2023 version and lists an End-Date of 12/31/2023 at 11:59pm. We are not sure if that is an actual end-date for course availability, but will check and report back to members.

Here is an outline of the SPO Curriculum as provided in Ms. Adams nopd.gov email:

SENIOR POLICE OFFICER TRAINING PROGRAM REQUIREMENTS: 

The Academy has formulated a SPO curriculum that will be delivered in a series of web-based training courses. Candidates are required to complete a total of five interactive courses offered by the Virginia Center for Policing Innovation (sponsored by the U.S. Dept. of Justice Community Oriented Policing Services – COPS Program). The VCPI “E-Learn Center” offers 24/7 access to these courses, which include a variety of learning tools, multi-media segments, and exercises. Officers may access this training website on personal time from any computer with Internet connectivity. The modules can be paused and resumed at the location where they were discontinued. Participants will be able to print a certificate of training upon successfully passing each course examination. 

SENIOR POLICE OFFICER CURRICULUM:   

I.                    ETHICAL DECISION MAKING: POLICING WITH PRINCIPLED INSIGHT 

Synopsis – EDM explores the practice of decision-making and the ethical principles that support effective policing. EDM stresses that police ethics are not just an afterthought or a means of discouraging bad behavior, with public trust integrity and liability hinging on each and every decision. Ethics are a controlling insight that informs and guides police practitioners from an internal personal capacity while exploring realistic modern-day challenges faced in the policing profession. 

Run Time: 2 hours                                   Completion Time: 4 hours 

II.                  COMMUNITY POLICING DEFINED 

Synopsis – Provides participants with a basic awareness and understanding of the fundamental principles and best practices of community policing. Describes the practice of community policing while also examining how it can be effectively applied. The course explores partnerships, problem-solving, and organizational transformation as they relate to specific issues and challenges facing today’s law enforcement professionals and the communities they serve.   

                     Run Time: 4 hours                            Completion Time: 8 hours 

III.                COMMUNITY POLICING: IMPROVING POLICE EFFICACY AND BUILDING TRUST 

Synopsis – Explores how emerging issues necessitate a commitment to the key components of community policing: partnerships, organizational transformation, and problem-solving. The course includes an examination of the current state of policing—locally and nationally— addressing the current and emerging issues that challenge the effectiveness of law enforcement agencies and the well-being of the communities they serve. CPIPEBT challenges participants to explore the principles and practices of community policing as a means of achieving the public safety mission with greater efficiency by gaining and maintaining public trust and engaging the community in the shared responsibility of effective policing. 

                     Run Time: 3 hours                            Completion Time: 6 hours  

IV.                PROBLEM-ORIENTED POLICING: THE SARA MODEL 

Synopsis – Provides participants with a basic awareness and understanding of the fundamental principles of a common approach used by many community policing agencies to identify and solve repeat crime and community problems: the SARA model. The SARA model allows agencies to scan through multiple data sources, conduct a thorough analysis of a problem through the lens of the crime triangle, formulate a response, and continuously assess the impact of the response to the problem. 

                     Run Time: 1 hour                              Completion Time: 2 hours 

V.                  CRIME REDUCTION: ENFORCEMENT AND PREVENTION STRATEGIES  

Synopsis – Designed to provide participants with an overview of best practices for crime reduction, including guidelines for implementing an organizational model for crime reduction at all levels within a police department. The course offers useful strategies for problem-solving in order to develop immediate, short-term, and long-term responses to crime within a community.   

                     Run Time: 2 hours                            Completion Time: 4 hours 

INSTRUCTIONS FOR ONLINE TRAINING: 

Eligible SPO candidates shall access the VCPI website at VCPI (vcpionline.org) and click on the “LOG-IN” screen. From there, click on the “CREATE AN ACCOUNT” heading to register as a new user.  

Upon access to the E-Learn Center, you will be prompted to a menu in the left corner titled “STUDENT DASHBOARD,” from there access the “VIEW/REGISTER FOR COURSES” and then click “REGISTER MYSELF” to take each of the SPO required training modules.  

A tutorial on how to use the commands is provided initially and can be viewed at any time by clicking on the “help” button on the top right of the screen. The modules are sequential and cannot be opened out of order. Officers taking the courses must complete all pages and each tab/insert within each page to be eligible for the certification exam. If you exit the modules at any time, reentry will allow you to go back to the location where you left off.  

SUBMITTAL OF TRAINING CERTIFICATES: 

Upon completion of the modules and the course exams, you will be able to click on the final section to print the “Certificate.” The five completed certificates (in total) shall be personally delivered to the front desk receptionist at the Police Academy Monday through Friday between the hours of 8AM and 3PM. DO NOT EMAIL CERTIFICATES.

If you experience any difficulties with the online training, contact Duane Johnson, Academy Curriculum Director, dujohnson@nola.gov.   

Dawnella Adams, B.S., M.A
Management Development Analyst I
New Orleans Police Department
Human Resources
715 South Broad St.
1st Floor
New Orleans, LA  70119​
(504) 658-5400
deadams@nola.gov​​

​

The FOP’s Legal Defense Plan makes Membership Worth It (Updated 7/21/2022 – Previously “We Do Win Sometimes”)

Posted on by
Reply

I was cutting my grass, listening to the First Thursday podcast. The First Thursday podcast is hosted by Will Aitchison. Once a month, Will talks about legal issues from around the country that impact law enforcement. Will runs the Labor Relations Information System which tracks issues related to collective bargaining and discipline for law enforcement and fire personnel. Will is widely respected and I like to listen to his podcast every month. Will also wrote The Rights of Law Enforcement Officers, which is a fantastic book on many of the issues we attorneys deal with regularly here in New Orleans. I have had the opportunity to meet Will and hear him speak. I am comfortable saying that Will knows what he is talking about.

At about 45:00 into the July First Thursday podcast, Will started talking about a case involving Sgt. Willie Jenkins. I knew that case at once. It was one that Ted and Claude won. The win got Willie 5 days of pay back. We really win more than we should, statistically speaking.

Click here for the Civil Service Commission’s decision related to Sgt. Willie Jenkins. Willie was represented by Claude Schlesinger and Ted Alpaugh.

Click here for the Civil Service Commission’s decision related to Sgt. Joe Davis. I represented Sgt. Davis. Joe got 10 days back as a result of this appeal. That’s 2 weeks of pay.

The NOPD appealed the Civil Service Commission’s decisions in both cases to the Louisiana 4th Circuit Court of Appeals.

Click here for the decision from the La. 4th Circuit Court of Appeal as it relates to Sgt. Willie Jenkins. Ted and Claude represented Willie.

Click here for the La. 4th Circuit Court of Appeal’s decision as it relates to Sgt. Joe Davis. I represented Joe again.

You can also listen to what Will has to say about Sgt. Jenkins’ case at the 45-minute mark of the July First Thursday podcast.

Civil Service is one good reason to continue employment with the New Orleans Police Department. Civil Service decisions can be found here.

UPDATE: 7/13/2022

In a decision about what constitutes a strip search and/or a body cavity church, the New Orleans Civil Service Commission granted Sgt. Morrison’s appeal (5 out of 6 charges). The 4th Circuit agreed, stating that NOPD’s definition required that someone perform a visual and/or physical inspection. The evidence, to the contrary, did not indicate there was evidence a strip search occurred. The 4th Circuit Court of Appeal’s decision is here.

UPDATE: 7/20/2022

The New Orleans Civil Service Commission granted this officer’s appeal because the NOPD exceeded the time limits found in La. R.S. 40:25431(B)(7) and, therefore, La. R.S. 40:2531(C) required the discipline to be declared an absolute nullity. The 4th Circuit Court of Appeal affirmed the Civil Service Commission in the decision found here.

UPDATE 7/21/2022

Click here to see the New Orleans Civil Service Commission’s decision in the appeal of Sgt. Kevin Thompson v. NOPD.

New Orleans Emergency Rate of Pay

Posted on by
4

On March 11, 2020, Governor John Bel Edwards declared and a Public Health Emergency for the State of Louisiana as it relates to COVID-19. Also, on March 11, 2020, pursuant to a filing in Civil District Court for the Parish of Orleans, State of Louisiana, Mayor LaToya Cantrell declared a State of Emergency for the City of New Orleans. See Mayoral Proclamation of a State of Emergency due to COVID-19.

Mayor Cantrell’s State of Emergency proclamation directs the Superintendent of Police to take command and control over all police officers in the City of New Orleans pursuant to La. R.S. 40:1387 along with all authority typically given by such a proclamation. As a result of the State of Emergency, some city employees were placed on civil leave and told to go home. Another group of city employees was told to go home and perform their regular job duties from home. Finally, a third group of employees was told they had to report to work at their regular place of work.

New Orleans Civil Service Rule IV, Sec. 11.1 states as follows:

If it becomes necessary for an employee (exempt and non-exempt) to work on any day when the Mayor of New Orleans has declared an official emergency and has requested that only essential employees report to work, the appointing authority should adjust the employee’s work schedule to allow another day(s) off during that work period as a substitution. If such a substitution is not possible, then, for working at such time, the employees shall be paid the following:
(a) All non-exempt employees shall be paid at a rate of one and one-half (1½) times their normal rate for all hours worked.
(b) All exempt employees shall be paid at a rate of one and one-half (1½) times their normal rate of pay. Normal rate of pay for exempt employees is defined as the weekly salary.
(c) In situations where the emergency lasts for less than a normal seven day work week, then exempt employees shall be paid at a rate of one and one-half (1½) times their normal hourly rate for all hours worked subject to the maximum allowed for a regular scheduled work day in keeping with Rule I, Number 40. Under no circumstances shall an exempt employee receive pay from this section that exceeds more than one and one-half times his normal weekly salary for an emergency event.
In all cases, this pay is to remain in effect until the Mayor announces the state of emergency has ended or an announcement is made that City offices are open for business and employees are to report to work, whichever comes first.
(d) When the Mayor of New Orleans has declared an official emergency on a day in which city offices remain open for business, exempt and non-exempt essential employees (except for highly compensated employees as defined by the FLSA) who are assigned to perform emergency/disaster field operations duties may receive five (5) percent over their normal rate of pay while engaged in such duties during a declared state of emergency. In cases where the emergency declaration extends beyond four (4) weeks, a request for extension and reasons therefore must be submitted by the Chief Administrative Office or other executive authority to the Civil Service Commission for approval along with an anticipated end date and a list of the essential employees who will remain in the emergency assignment. (amended September 25, 2017, adopted by the Council October 26, 2017)

(Section 11.1 adopted March 28, 1996, ratified by the Council April 18, 1996, amended May 15, 2006, adopted by the Council May 25, 2006, effective June 1, 2006, amended April 28, 2014, adopted by the Council June 2014, effective April 28, 2014)

Since there is a declared State of Emergency and some employees have been required to report to work and some employees were instructed not to report for work and were placed on civil leave, New Orleans Civil Service Commission Rule IV, Sec. 11.1 comes becomes effective as it relates to the pay for those employees required to report for work at their regular duty station.

There is no definition of “essential employees” or “non-essential employees.” However, based on Civil Service Rule IV, Sec. 11.1, we can determine who certainly constitutes an “essential employee” and who certainly constitutes a “non-essential employee.”

Reporting to work implies both the performance of job duties and the location those job duties are performed. Essential employees are those employees who were instructed to report to work at the employee’s regular place of work or another location as designated by the employee’s appointing authority as required to accomplish the employee’s job. Non-essential employees are those employees who are not required to report to any particular location or perform any job duties. Non-essential employees are those employees being carried under civil leave, of who were initially carried under civil leave at the beginning of the state of emergency. There is a third group of employees in the state of emergency related to COVID-19 — those who are working from home.

The emergency rate of pay was introduced to encourage employees to report to work as needed under emergency conditions. In other words, some employees have to come to work in spite of conditions which make reporting to work more dangerous than normal. In addition to merely encouraging employees to report to work as needed, the emergency rate of pay works to fairly compensate those employees who, because their jobs do not allow them to work from home, must expose themselves to the dangerous circumstances forming the basis of the state of emergency.

There is no question that the employees of the NOPD, NOFD, and NOEMS are essential employees. These employees are required to expose themselves to a potentially deadly virus by the very nature of their job. No matter what precautions are taken, our police officers, firefighters, and EMS personnel are required to be exposed to the threat imposed by SARS-CoV-2. In addition to our first responders, any other employee who is required to report to work at their normal place of assignment is an essential employee for the purposes of this declared State of Emergency.

I have heard several reasons why police officers should not get an emergency rate of pay:

Excuse #1: The City has not told essential employees to report to work while telling non-essential employees to stay home. This is not true for the reasons discussed above. There are employees who have been required by the city to physically report to the employee’s regular place of work to perform the employee’s job. There is also a group of employees who were either not required to physically report to the employee’s regular place to work or the employee was not required to perform any work at all while still being paid.

Excuse #2: This is a state of emergency that exists throughout the United States. Police officers around the country are required to work under similar circumstances. FEMA won’t be able to reimburse everyone. Article X, Sec. 10 of the Louisiana Constitution states that civil service rules have the force and effect of law. Therefore, New Orleans Civil Service Rule IV, Sec. 11.1 has the force and effect of law. Civil Service Rule IV, Sec. 11.1 does not state that essential employees are to be paid an emergency rate of pay only if the city is going to be reimbursed for the expenditure.

Excuse #3: Police officers already get extra pay from the State every month. State Supplemental Pay is not emergency or hazard pay. State Supplemental Pay is intended to supplement inadequate salaries offered to law enforcement officers by municipalities or parishes.

First responders exist in the same world as the rest of us. They have to worry about getting sick and bringing the virus into their homes with their families. However, they don’t have the option of working from home like I do, or not having to work at all and relying on civil leave. Finally, they still have to worry about things like getting shot while trying to protect people like me and you — which has happened twice in the last week to three officers.

Civil Service Rule IV, Sec. 11.1, which has the force and effect of law, states that during a declared state of emergency where some city employees are required to report to work in the field at a place determined by the city which is not home while other employees are told to stay home and are not expected to perform any work while being carried civil leave or are allowed to work at home requires that exempt and non-exempt employees who are required to report to work in the field at a place determined by the city must be paid time and one-half (1.5x).

I understand that the COVID-19 emergency has created a great deal of pressure on the city. However, that is no reason not to give city employees what is owed to them by state law. The color of the trip sheet doesn’t matter. Whether or not it is reimbursed doesn’t matter. Some employees are entitled to be paid 1.5x. If the city does not pay its employees what they are owed in this emergency, who is to say they will report to work as expected in the next emergency.

UPDATE: I have already written a letter to the Director of Personnel, Lisa Hudson, at Civil Service. I have asked that the matter be brought before the Civil Service Commission when they conduct a regular meeting. There have been a number of comments referencing a possible lawsuit. However, the Civil Service Commission has sole jurisdiction. So, it will be necessary to bring this issue before the Civil Service Commission before it can go to any court.

 

FYI – Civil Service Appeals

Posted on by
Reply

Rule II, Section 4.3 of the Rules for the New Orleans Civil Service Commission state as follows:

“Appeals to the Commission must be actually received in the Department of Civil Service no later than the close of business on the thirtieth (30th) calendar day following the date of the disciplinary letter provided to the employee by the Appointing Authority. Should the thirtieth (30th) calendar day fall on a weekend or an official city holiday, written appeals will be accepted no later than the close of business on the workday immediately following. The date the appeal is date/time stamped in the Civil Service Office shall be presumed to be the date of receipt of an appeal. (amended June 10, 1982; August 25, 1983; January 21, 1988, effective February 1, 1988).”

Why is this important? This is important because if you want to appeal discipline taken against you, the appeal has to be filed in a timely manner.

IF YOU DO NOT FILE THE APPEAL WITHIN THIRTY (30) DAYS OF IMPOSITION OF THE DISCIPLINE, THEN THEY WILL ALLOW YOU TO FILE AN APPEAL, BUT IT WILL BE THROWN OUT WHEN THE CITY FILES A MOTION FOR SUMMARY DISPOSITION.

I habitually explain to my officers upon conclusion of a disciplinary hearing the following information:

  1. The hearing officer (Commander, Deputy Chief, Superintendent’s Disciplinary Committee) only makes a recommendation because only the Superintendent of Police (the Appointing Authority) can institute discipline.
  2. The fact that a pre-disciplinary hearing has been held does not mean the FDI (Formal Disciplinary Investigation) is complete.
  3. The recommended discipline has to go up the chain of command. Assuming everyone who has to sign does so after circling “APPROVED,” the case goes to a stack of cases awaiting disciplinary letters.
  4. It is not complete until you receive “cause expressed in writing” as required by the Louisiana Constitution. That “cause expressed in writing” is memorialized in the form of a disciplinary letter. That letter is written on NOPD letterhead and signed by the Superintendent.
  5. There is no telling when you might be issued the disciplinary letter. You will receive a phone call, an email, or some type of notice that you need to report to PIB to sign for the disciplinary letter.
  6. This letter is important for several reasons.
    1. First and foremost, it satisfies the requirements of the Louisiana Constitution.
    2. Secondly, it starts the clock on the 30 days you have to file an appeal as specified in New Orleans Civil Service Commission Rule II, Section 4.3 as quoted above. The date typed on the top of that letter is the date used to start counting the 30 days.
    3. Since you are a good FOP member, if you choose not to appeal, you can send that letter to me for the FOP’s Salary Reimbursement Option.
    4. The letter also says when the suspension starts (assuming suspension time is involved).
  7. Whatever appeal hearing follows is limited to the contents of the disciplinary letter.
  8. FINALLY, THE NOPD DOES NOT PROVIDE ME A COPY OF THE DISCIPLINARY LETTER. YOU, MY OFFICER CLIENT, HAVE TO LET ME KNOW WHEN YOU GET THE DISCIPLINARY LETTER. THIS IS CRUCIAL BECAUSE WHILE I WILL FILE THE APPEAL AND I CAN GET IT FILED THE SAME DAY I RECEIVED THE DISCIPLINARY LETTER, 31 DAYS IS TOO MANY.

Who is entitled to an appeal? New Orleans Civil Service Commission Rule II, Sec. 4.1 reads as follows:

“Regular employees in the classified service shall have the right to appeal disciplinary actions to the Commission, including dismissal, involuntary retirement, demotion, suspension, fine, reduction in pay, or letters of reprimand as defined in Rule I. However, a demotion, reinstatement to a lower classification, transfer, reduction in pay or layoff resulting from the application of the provisions of Rule XII governing layoffs shall not be considered a disciplinary action and thus shall not warrant an appeal except as provided in Sections 4.5 and 9.1 of Rule II. (amended June 10, 1982; May 19, 1988, effective June 1, 1988, amended February 17, 2014, effective March 1, 2014).”

New Orleans Civil Service Commission Rule I, Sec. 1, Paragraph 66 defines “Regular Employee” as:

“an employee who has been appointed to a position in the classified service in accordance with the Law and these Rules and who has completed the working test period.”

That translates to employees who have successfully completed any probationary period.

Have questions? You know what to do.

Hurricane Barry Payroll

Posted on by
Reply

Recently, Mayor Cantrell declared a state of emergency due to Hurricane Barry in the Gulf of Mexico. The Fraternal Order of Police (We) received numerous phone calls from officers concerned that the city would pay them correctly. I spoke with the police administration several times and Asst. Superintendent Noel assured me that Superintendent Ferguson was committed to making sure NOPD paid everyone correctly. An email to NOPDAll indicating that there could be a delay in when NOPD would be making payments for the declared state of emergency got officers worried again.

Continue reading →

New Orleans Lieutenant Exam Candidate Review Sessions

Posted on by
Reply

On Monday, November 12, 2018, the New Orleans Civil Service Department sent test results from the recent Lieutenants Exam to the test takers. 74 NOPD Police Sergeants took the exam. Out of those 74, 51 passed the exam (69%) and 23 failed (31%). The highest score 94 and the lowest score was 20. The average score was 57 and 53 was the cut-off between pass and fail (the lowest passing score). The Lieutenants List can be found here.

Starting November 14, 2018, the Civil Service Department will begin having candidate feedback sessions with Ms. Bharati Belwalkar. Ms. Belwalkar is the Civil Service Department’s psychometrician who is dedicated to NOPD testing. The intent of this article is to try to give candidates a realistic idea of what to expect in that candidate feedback session.

First, the candidate feedback session is NOT an appeal of your score or a protest of any questions. Your score on the exam will NOT change as a result of the candidate feedback session. The purpose of the candidate feedback sessions is to help the candidate understand their areas of strength and improvement, and to better prepare for the next opportunity to take the exam.

You will NOT see the test questions, your answers, or how they were scored. You will be given information intended to help you focus your studies next time. If you know where your weakest areas were, then you will be able to prepare better next time.

The meeting, which will probably be recorded, will start off by reviewing the 3 main components of the exam: Part 1: In-Basket, Part 2: Structured Interview, and Part 3: Oral Presentation. All three of these components were equally weighted in calculating the candidate’s final score. You will see a graph that looks like this:

The graph shows each component of the exam, the highest score of each component, and the candidate’s score for each component. On the example above (not real test results), the candidate scored 67% on Part 1, 28% on Part 2, and 54% on Part 3. Clearly, the candidate did the best on Part 1 and the worst on Part 2. Ms. Belwalkar will discuss each component in terms of the candidate’s performance on the types of questions covered in it. If any of the raters had specific comments about the candidate’s answers, that information will be shared with the candidate.

Next, Ms. Belwalkar will go through the six competencies tested by the exam. Those competencies followed by the weight assigned to that competency are:

  1. Demonstrating Department’s Values (12%)
  2. Leadership and Supervisory Responsibility (26%)
  3. Operational Effectiveness (25%)
  4. Critical Thinking and Strategic Planning/Problem Solving and Decision Making (18%)
  5. Communicating Orally and/or in Writing (9%)
  6. Partnering with the Community (10%)

You will see another graph that looks like this:

Like the first graph, this graph shows the total percentage weight of each competency and the candidate’s percentage score for each competency. The example candidate profile indicates that the candidate demonstrated about 50% proficiency in every category. Because the competencies are weighted differently, it may be more important to strengthen up those areas, but it appears this candidate needs an equal amount of work across the board. Ms. Belwalkar will work with the candidate to make the information the most useful.

Finally, you will have an opportunity to ask any questions you may have. Remember, you will not have the opportunity to review your test answers, the scoring rubric, or the questions. I guess you can ask, but I would expect the answer to be that it can’t be shared. The reason for this is test security. Sometimes questions are re-used or are changed a little and then re-used. If the questions or answers to the questions were passed around, they would not be able to use any form of those questions again or risk the validity of the exam.

Each candidate’s answer was scored by 3 different raters who used a common rubric to score the exam. The 3 raters then discussed their ratings in order to eliminate error and reach a consensus score.

If you want to schedule a candidate review session, you can sign up for it here. If you have issues accessing this link, contact Ms. Belwalkar at 504-658-3508 or bbbelwalkar@nola.gov. Ms. Belwalkar is New Orleans Civil Service Personnel Administrator for the Test Development & Validation Division, working in the capacity of Senior Psychometrician.

We know that there are going to be at least 23 people who are not pleased with their test scores. Unfortunately, the New Orleans Civil Service Rules do not contain any process for appealing a score or how your exam was graded. When the exam contains a multiple-choice section, the Civil Service Department allows for protests of questions. In those circumstances, the protest is made before the exam is scored and the answer can be validated specifically by reviewing the appropriate text. In the event that a protest reveals a problem, the answer key can be changed or double-keyed to fix the problem. However, there was no multiple-choice section on this exam. The answers, and the scoring rubric, were developed in consultation with subject matter experts (SME’s) from the NOPD. The overall examination and its scoring rubric were reviewed by another group of NOPD SME’s to ensure accuracy and thoroughness. Since the types of questions and answers do not lend themselves to protest, none were allowed. Each exam was graded the same way by 3 different raters. The Civil Service Department has done there absolute best to make sure that everyone had the best chance to succeed.

I also want to take this opportunity to thank Commander Louis Dabdoub for donating his time to help FOP help NOPD officers prepare for the exam. I also want to thank Travers Mackel of WDSU for helping candidates prepare for the exam. As usual, the FOP is dedicated to providing whatever assistance it can to help FOP members succeed.

The FOP Legal Defense Plan and NOPD Discipline

Posted on by
1

The FOP Legal Defense Plan provides legal representation to its members for any criminal or civil action resulting from the performance of your duty as a law enforcement officer. The FOP Legal Plan also provides representation for any administrative investigation. Administrative investigations include disciplinary investigations, Accident Review Board cases, or Rule IX Hearings. In addition, the administrative coverage includes appeals to the Civil Service Commission, the Fourth Circuit Court of Appeal, or the Louisiana Supreme Court, if needed.

The NOPD keeps hiring new officers and running academies on a regular basis. This means that there are always new officers coming out of the Academy who have not had any experience with the NOPD’s disciplinary system. I usually have the opportunity to introduce myself to soon-to-be Academy graduates at the Academy. I have a limited amount of time to introduce myself and explain a few things about the Legal Plan. This is my opportunity to explain a little more in depth. As always, you are welcome to call me if you have any questions.

The Consent Decree entered into by the City of New Orleans and the Department of Justice contains 13 pages that apply to disciplinary investigations. The one thing that has impacted the disciplinary system the most is the requirement that the NOPD investigate all complaints based on the allegation as opposed to the anticipated outcome. The NOPD has interpreted this to mean that they are going to investigate any complaint, regardless of its facial merit. The Consent Decree also formalized the NOPD policy to accept all complaints, whether they are in person, anonymous, from third parties, via email, etc. I had one case where someone in Australia didn’t think that an officer treated someone right based on an episode of a television show he saw. Finally, the Consent Decree limits the cases that can be disposed of as NIM (No Investigation Merited).

The Consent Decree initially led to an increase in the number of disciplinary investigations. However, with the use of body worn cameras, and tools such as Non-Disciplinary Counseling, Negotiated Settlement, and Mediation, the number of disciplinary investigations looks to have topped off and dropped a little the past few years. That being said, there are still more than 700 PIB Control numbers used every year.

First and foremost, I have a lot of people call and say “I hate to bother you with something this stupid…” Nothing is that stupid. Stupid things are stupid because 1) someone did something stupid and there is no explaining it away, or 2) someone made an allegation that is so ridiculous that you can’t possibly imagine it being sustained.

In the first case, where someone does something stupid – made a simple mistake or error – and there is nothing that can explain it away, there is certainly good reason to call. The FOP offers a benefit known as the Salary Reimbursement Option. No other organization offers anything like it. Here is how it works:

Salary Reimbursement Option (SRO)

The FOP Legal Defense Plan provides legal representation to its members so that they can defend themselves from accusations that constitute a violation of rules and regulations. This representation includes appeals, if necessary. However, sometimes you are accused of something that you did. For example, maybe it was one of those days and by the time the tenth person has lied to your face, you had enough and uttered a string of profanities. This string of profanities was recorded on your body worn camera. Now, you are accused of violating the NOPD’s rule on Courtesy (Rule 2, Paragraph 2). The complaint will be sustained.

Your FOP attorney will argue on your behalf. If there is a way out, we will explore that. If there is no way out, then we will argue for the least possible penalty. This is when the Salary Reimbursement Option comes into play.

IF you are represented by an FOP attorney and the penalty involves a suspension, you and your FOP attorney will have the opportunity to discuss your options moving forward. You probably have an option to appeal. However, IF you are represented by and FOP attorney AND you and your attorney agree that your chances of success on appeal are slim, then the FOP will reimburse you for any suspension days at $150/day for up to 5 days. That’s right – if you get a suspension for something that you did and you are not going to prevail on appeal, you can get a check for $150 per suspension day from the FOP in lieu of appeal. In short, instead of wasting money appealing a suspension you are not going to win, you have the option of cutting your losses and, hopefully, getting back to even. YOU MUST BE REPRESENTED BY AN FOP ATTORNEY DURING THE DISCIPLINARY INVESTIGATION TO BE ELIGIBLE FOR THE SALARY REIMBURSEMENT OPTION. You can only be represented by an FOP attorney for a disciplinary investigation if you pick up the phone and call.

If you aren’t calling because the allegation is stupid and there is no possible way it could be sustained, you should know that plenty of stupid allegations have led to sustained violations. Additionally, it keeps your options open for the Salary Reimbursement Options.

Do they need to notify you of a pending complaint?

No. The NOPD is not required to notify you that you are the subject of a complaint. Some investigators do notify the accused officers.

Many people find out about pending investigations when they receive a notice from the Civil Service Department of an upcoming hearing. The letter states that the Department has request an extension of time in pursuant to Civil Service Rule IX, Sec. 1.4. If you get one of those notices, then you are an accused officer in a formal disciplinary investigation.

Extension Request Hearings

The Louisiana Police Officer Bill of Rights, La. R.S. 40:2531(b)(7), provides that administrative disciplinary investigations have to be completed within 60 days. It also gives investigators the option of requesting up to another 60 days, for a maximum of 120 days to complete the investigation. The investigator needs to show good cause for the extra time.Unfortunately, just about any excuse serves as cause for the extension. The letter says that you have to attend. However, if you call me, I can handle that hearing for you. These hearings can be good opportunities to learn some information. You can also agree to the extension. There are times when agreeing to the extension may be in your best interest.

There are many other ins and outs to the disciplinary system. There are statements, disposition notices (NOPD Form 308), Pre-Dispositions Conference Hearing Notices, Pre-Disciplinary Hearing Notices, Pre-Dispositions Conferences, Pre-Disciplinary Hearings, Penalty Matrices, Disciplinary Letters, Civil Service appeals, other appeals, etc. I will cover those in the next post.

 

Unclassified Positions and Reform in the #NOPD

Posted on by
Reply

IMG_0153

Recently, I wrote about the New Orleans Police Department’s request to the New Orleans Civil Service Commission for the creation of 16 new unclassified jobs in the NOPD.  The NOPD made its pitch at the February 20, 2017 meeting of the Civil Service Commission and it received some media attention here and here.  The Civil Service department opposed the creation of these unclassified positions, referring to the request as “unprecedented.”  After hearing from the NOPD, myself, on behalf of the FOP, Capt. Mike Glasser, PANO, Lt. Keith Joseph, BOP, and a few others, the Civil Service Commission took no action to allow the Civil Service Department to complete its work and put the matter on the agenda for the March meeting (March 20 if anyone wants to accompany me on behalf of the FOP).

I do not intend to re-post my argument against the creation of the unclassified positions, but for those who have not had the chance to read this article or my letter to the Civil Service Commission in this regard, the Civil Service Rules, which have the force and effect of law, require that in order for a position to be considered unclassified, the job’s responsibilities are not appropriate for anyone in the classified service and should not be performed by anyone in the classified service.  Furthermore, someone serving in an unclassified position must have policy-making authority which is not subject to further review or modification.  Finally, the Civil Service Commission is required to audit the position regularly to make sure that it is still not fit for the classified service.  As both Superintendent Harrison and myself made a point of saying, unclassified positions are the exception to the rule in a merit-based system of employment like Civil Service.

Currently, there is no “Commander” position, really.  There is a “Commander” assignment.  The Commander assignment, which must be filled by someone holding the rank of Police Lieutenant or higher, comes with a special rate of pay.  While I am unaware of anyone actually pushing this particular issue, the NOPD stated that one of the reasons we need to reconsider this special rate of pay is that a special rate of pay does not confer any grant of authority.  So, the question is does a Police Lieutenant in the position of Commander have the authority to issue orders to a Police Major?  While I am unaware of anyone pushing this issue, there are reasons to reconsider the use of a special rate of pay for commanders.  The majority of people assigned to Commander positions are in the rank of Police Lieutenant.  Police Lieutenants are non-exempt employees.  That means they should make overtime like all other non-exempt personnel under the FLSA.  However, they do not get overtime.  They are currently being treated as exempt employees.  While their pension is controlled by their actual rate of pay, terminal leave is paid to these individuals based on their Civil Service classification.  Finally, it is just an abuse of the special rate of pay provisions.  This special rate of pay scheme was put in place in 2011 after the Civil Service Commission told then Superintendent Serpas that he could not have 16 unclassified Police Colonel positions.

So, if the positions were not fit to be unclassified in 2011, what has changed that would make them appropriate today?  Well, while not answering the preceding question, Superintendent Harrison said that Department of Justice report which led to the current Consent Decree indicted the prior leadership “had largely acquiesced to wide-spread abuses by officers at all ranks.”  Superintendent Harrison went on to praise the accomplishments of individuals currently in the position of Commander.  Finally, the Superintendent insisted that it was critical that he be able to “swiftly replace leaders who are not performing to standard.”

What is exceedingly clear from the arguments made by Superintendent Harrison is that the NOPD has some good leaders in the position of Commander and that Commanders are performing the jobs previously held by officers in the classified service and that Commanders do not have the type of policy-making authority that is not subject to further review or modification.  What is clearly lacking is any logical connection between the existence of the Commander special rate of pay and any of the accomplishments of the folks holding those positions.

During the meeting, Commissioner Stephen Caputo, the newest member of the Civil Service Commission, noted that on several instances in my letter to the Commission I stated the position of Commander had been historically held by Police Captains and Police Majors.  He then asked if I was advocating for the status quo, or doing things as they have always been done.

My response was that I was not arguing for the status quo, but that the Civil Service Rules require that the job responsibilities be unfit for performance by anyone in the classified service.  History shows us that prior to 2011, the job responsibilities were performed by employees in the classified service.  Nothing has changed to make the jobs unfit for the classified service.

That does not mean that we have to maintain the status quo.  For example, the NOPD has the longest working-test period for employees.  Working-test periods, otherwise known as probationary periods, are set at 6 months in the Civil Service Rules with a maximum of 1 year.  The NOPD has 1-year working-test periods across the board.  That means that if someone is promoted to the rank of Police Captain and is unable to meet expectations, they can be demoted to their prior classified position — for just about any reason.  Generally speaking, if someone is incapable of performing a job, that incompetence will reveal itself within a year.  My point is that before we go shopping for a new toolbox, maybe we should make sure that we are making the best use of the tools we already have.

Civil Service Commission Chair Michelle Craig said that the Commission wanted the opportunity to examine best practices.  While the idea of “best practices” aggravates me to no end, I was fascinated by Superintendent Harrison’s reply that NOPD was re-writing the best practices and, therefore, what they are doing is the de facto best practice.

In today’s environment of instant gratification, we have to be able to point out real-time problems to demonstrate why these ideas that run contrary to the civil service philosophy should be avoided.  That is an impractical demand.  However, make no doubt about it, it is coming.  There will be a discriminatory application of the “Great Place to Work Initiative,” if there hasn’t been one already.  The creation of 16 unclassified Commander positions, would eventually prove problematic.

The first merit-based civil service system can be traced back to Imperial China and Emperor Wen of Sui (AD 605).  It wasn’t until the 1940’s that Louisiana embraced the civil service system.  Even then, it was repealed in 1948 and re-established in 1952.  Since then, more than a few changes have been made to how civil service systems are administered.  However, the idea of a merit-based system of employment utilizing objective standards and competitive testing has persisted.

So, while I am not advocating doing things as we did them in 1992, I am advocating the maintenance of the underlying set of guiding principles which have served us well for a long time.  We don’t have to throw the baby out with the bath water.  We don’t ditch democracy just because there is a more efficient way to administer the Department of Education.  The New Orleans Civil Service Commission has taken some steps recently which are downright scary.  The “Great Place to Work Initiative” dismissed important civil service principles relating to promotions and competitive exams.  Of course, the NOPD would point to successes of newly promoted sergeants or lieutenants as if that is the result of the new system in some way.  If you are thinking they wouldn’t do that, that is exactly what they are doing with the Commander position.  Granting the NOPD 16 unclassified positions to replace the special rate of pay for Commanders would be counter to the underlying fundamentals of the civil service system.  Does that mean it has to be done the old way?  No.  It just means it shouldn’t be done the way the NOPD has proposed.

New Orleans Civil Service Commission Meeting 2/20/2017

Posted on by
1

IMG_0153

The New Orleans Civil Service Commission is set to hold its regular monthly meeting on Monday, February 20, 2017.  At that meeting, the Commission will consider a request by the New Orleans Police Department to add 16 unclassified positions.  These 16 unclassified positions would seek to legitimize the position of Commander, which is currently a special rate of pay based on the assignment as commander of one of the Department’s 16 divisions.

The Crescent City Lodge of the Fraternal Order of Police opposes this request.  In short, the Department should use classified positions wherever possible.  This protects the employee, the public, and the integrity of the system.  Since the beginning of time until Chief Serpas’s recent tenure as Superintendent, these positions have generally been held by officers holding the classified rank of Police Captain and Police Major.  Those classifications are still available.

The use of Police Captain and Police Major for these positions not only shores up the integrity of the system, but provides officers with a well-defined career path.  As it stands today, these positions are being held by Police Lieutenants who have no job security.  So, the administration can cut their pay significantly for any number of unlisted reasons.

This, along with the changes made to the recent promotional system, has taken much of the fairness out of the promotional system of the NOPD and left it vulnerable to the type of political interference the Civil Service system was designed to eliminate.

CLICK HERE TO READ THE LETTER SUBMITTED TO THE COMMISSIONERS OF THE NEW ORLEANS CIVIL SERVICE COMMISSION.

First Amendment for Public Employees Update

Posted on by
Reply

fop_logo1

I was recently contacted by a law enforcement officer asking if I was aware of a case out of North Carolina which ruled in favor of some police officers in regard to a disciplinary action involving posts made to Facebook.  I was aware of this case and I think it is important to put this in context for FOP members in Louisiana.  First and foremost, it is important to recognize that this case, Hebert E. Liverman and Vance R. Richards v. City of Petersburg, et al, 2016 WL 7240179 (not yet published) ,comes out of the U.S. Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.  This is important because the case does not constitute binding precedent for the U.S. Court of Appeals, Fifth Circuit — Louisiana’s court.  This case could be persuasive precedent, but it is not binding.  That means the argument could be adopted by the Fifth Circuit if a similar case were to be brought here, but the court does not have to adopt it.

More particularly, two officers of the City of Petersburg Bureau of Police were disciplined with an oral reprimand and 6 months of probation for violating the department’s regulations on social media.  The department’s regulations on social media read as follows:

J.A. 161 – Negative comments on the internal operations of the Bureau, or specific conduct of supervisors or peers that impacts the public’s perception of the department is not protected b the First Amendment free speech clause, in accordance with established case law.

J.A. 162 – Officers may comment on issues of general or public concern (as opposed to personal grievances) so long as the comments do not disrupt the workforce, interfere with important working relationships or efficient work flow, or undermine public confidence in the officer.  The instances much be judged on a case-by-case basis.

Generally, Liverman made a post on Facebook expressing his opinion on rookie officers being assigned as instructors for his department.  Richards replied to Liverman’s post expanding on that post discussing new officers being placed in specialized units.  Liverman replied again and Richards again replied to Liverman’s reply.

In short, the court held that the Supreme Court set forth how to analyze whether a public employee’s speech was protected speech in its rulings in Pickering and Connick.  There are three questions that have to be answered:

  1. Was the employee speaking as a member of the public on a matter of public concern?
  2. Does the employee’s interest in First Amendment expression outweigh the employer’s interest in the efficient operation of the workplace?
  3. Was the protected speech a substantial factor in the employer’s decision to take adverse employment action?

The Fourth Circuit came to the conclusion that the officers were, in fact, speaking as members of the public on a matter of public concern.  The court went on to conclude that the second and third prongs of the test set forth in Pickering and Connick were also met, making the Facebook comments protected speech.

More importantly, the court held that the regulations themselves were unconstitutionally overbroad.  The reasoning of the court was that the regulations constituted prior restraint of protected speech.  As evidenced by this case, the regulations did lead to discipline of protected speech.

Many of you may have regulations similar to the regulations at issue in this case.  It has long been my belief that these regulations are overbroad and I still think that they are.  This case supports my contention that they are overbroad.  The NOPD regulation on social media reads as follows:

Employees shall not post any material on the internet including but not limited to photos, videos, word documents, etc. that violates any local state or federal law, and/or embarrasses, humiliates, discredits or harms the operations and reputation of the Police Department or any of its members.

It is my opinion that this regulation suffers the same constitutional shortcoming identified in the Petersburg case.  However, the Petersburg case means does not control what happens in Louisiana.  We may, one day, have a chance to argue for a similar ruling here.  But until that happens, please be careful with posts made to Facebook, Twitter, etc.