Chicopee could withdraw police and fire departments from state Civil Service system

Last week’s retirement of the police chief could spark an effort to remove the police and fire departments from the state’s Civil Service system.

“Change is always difficult but we have to understand when something has outlived its usefulness. We need to move forward,” Mayor Michael D. Bissonnette said. “It duplicates a lot of protections that exist and adds one more bureaucratic layer.”

The system, created originally to help protect municipal employees before the days of labor unions, oversees hiring and discipline mostly in police and fire departments.

When there is a vacancy in a department, Civil Service holds an exam and, using a formula, community leaders then select candidates from the top scorers. Special provisions move people, mainly military veterans, to the top of the list despite the scores.

It is partly frustration with the cumbersome hiring process that is sparking the consideration. Bissonnette said he has asked for a police chief’s test to be held but the next one is not scheduled until the spring.

The process is also limiting since test scores are not the only indicator of a candidate’s ability to be a good patrolman or firefighter, he said.

Removal of Civil Service would need legislative approval.

“The City Council would have to approve it and the Legislature would have to approve it. I will submit it to the City Council and it will be up to them,” Bissonnette said.

City Councilor Robert J. Zygarowski, a retired police officer who served as a past president of the patrolmen’s union, said he wants to hear both sides of the proposal.

“I would like to keep an open mind,” he said. “It has some good values and I have some concerns about losing the protections.”

John Shea, current president of the Chicopee patrolmen’s union, declined comment saying the union has yet to talk to its lawyers.

A number of police departments, including those in Springfield and Holyoke, have removed the police commissioner or chief’s position from Civil Service and many small towns never used the system.

Northampton is one of the rare police departments that has withdrawn from using the Civil Service system entirely. The process, which took two years, was finalized in 2005.

Police Chief Russell Sienkiewicz said there has been some recent interest from department officials who want to withdraw from Civil Service. Recently he has received calls from departments in Palmer, Greenfield and several in eastern Massachusetts.

He started the effort after getting frustrated with the hiring system. Sienkiewicz said he had to reject too many qualified candidates.

“It was a crazy way to hire,” he said. “The exam became rote learning, and it cut down a pool of candidates, some of who were already trained and working for a non-civil service department.”

Now Northampton hires a professional testing agency that gives an entry exam, which includes a writing component, and a mini-assessment center. Candidates are interviewed and their education and job experience are considered, Sienkiewicz said.

The change allows the department to hire non-residents, which gives them a larger pool of candidates. In the past he was able to hire a Washington state trooper who wanted to move to Massachusetts, as well as police officers from small towns.

The downside is there is a bigger turnover of officers since some will leave if there is an opening in a department in their hometown, he said...
http://www.masslive.com/news/index....nsidering_withdrawl.html#incart_river_default

It should be telling that this move always comes from the city or town's side and not the guys/gals at the PD saying "You know what would be a great idea? Leaving Civil Service."

good for Chicopee

I thought cities didn't have the ability to remove their PD's and FD's from CS.

Add the fact that those already on the PD keep their CS status post-removal.

I already have a job, I just think Civil Service is an antiquated system, and there needs to be something better....why doesn't MA go to the way almost every other state in the country is, and leave the hiring up to the individual department?

Seriously? I'm not even a cop and I can tell you why that's a bad idea. Can you say nepotism and favoritism?

I'm being completely serious, just about every other state in the country (excluding MA and NY) leave it up to the individual departments to hire, each department offers its written test, or you submit a resume and interview, and this process works just fine....New Hampshire, Maine, Vermont, just to name a few in New England...getting out of New England, you have California, Florida, Arizona, etc...I could go on and on...In CA the LAPD offers its written test every month, you just walk in and take it, and you don't need to wait every two years to take a civil service test.

This is the reason why cities and towns across MA are becoming frustrated, they have openings but cannot fill them due to Civil Service...Chicopee and Worcester...and you have plenty of towns that opted out, such as Amherst and Northampton.

Is there favoritism and nepotism? Sure, that exists everywhere, its just a fact of life and is something you will never get away from, Civil Service or not.

I don't doubt that they do it differently in other places. You seem to forget that those in power in this state bring nepotism and favoritism to a whole new level. If it were an Olympic event, the politically connected in this state would take the Gold with ease. Look, I really don't know who you are. All I can say is if you're using places like Amherst as exemplars to support your opinion, we're probably not going to get along.

Well that's your prerogative, I'm just pointing out the fact that Amherst is a large town that opted out of CS.

Civil Service is not the reason why we can't fill our numerous openings. In fact, after the CS exam, there are hundreds in line to fill them. The problem for us is an employing entity that claims they're broke.. Yet spends millions on skating rinks that never appear or pools that the savages just destroy anyway.. Your boat in this argument is sinking...

My argument is that, under Civil Service, departments have to wait two years for more applicants to come along so they can fill their vacancies.....this is what the article is saying...I'm not knocking anyone's job or department...go talk to the Worcester or Chicopee Chief's, this is why they are frustrated.

Bullshit. You find me one agency who has completely exhausted their list. I'm willing to bet it's never happened. Not once, not ever.

They don't have the intestinal fortitude to come out and say they don't like who they're getting (read: I'm sick of losing bypass appeals to hire the well-connected).

Joel...... Ask an administrator who's hands have been tied and have been restricted from screwing guys they DON'T LIKE?!?! Ask an administrator who got their position THROUGH CS?!?! Yup... I'll get right on that!

CS has saved employed Officers asses more times then not and it may not be perfect but it's the best we have. No one has to wait 2 years for a list as long as there are interested applicants for that particular shithole. As for other states look at how many guys in other states bounce from job to job...... No thanks, I prefer some security for my family.

I don't understand the having to wait 2 years comment. The only time that would happen is while waiting for a politically connected person to get to the right spot on the list. Otherwise the list is good between tests and if they want to hire they just send out cards.

In the last 10 years he's been my chief, I can count the number of times I've been graced by his highness' presence, on one hand.. But sure, if I can manage to get by his knights and guard dogs, I'll ask him if it's really civil service causing our shortage issue. Wait, no, we don't have an issue because whenever we bring up our manning shortage, his majesty just erases our minimum manning needs on the books and writes in what the city manager wants...