Lt’s Promotion Exam: UPDATE 03 May 07
As most of our members are aware on 01 May 07 the City of Chicago announced that there would be a RE-TEST for the previously administered oral portion of the Assessment Exercise.
The Chicago Police Sergeants’ Association WAS NEVER contacted or consulted with regards to this decision. In fact, it only came to our attention shortly before the teletype message was disseminated.
Many of our affected members have contacted us expressing their concerns of how the City of Chicago and the Department, along with the accounting firm of Ernst & Young could once again, administer a promotional examination that at best could be described as flawed. This latest step is grossly UNFAIR and raises major concerns of the INTEGRITY of the entire testing process.
Our affected members have expended a tremendous amount of energy, monies, and personal sacrifices, including time away from their families while preparing for this lengthy exam process.
We are currently in the process of discussing with our attorneys what options are available to us and how best to proceed on behalf of our members.
I appreciate the professional demeanor that our members have displayed when contacting the Association, along with their constructive suggestions and comments. I would encourage anyone who wishes to forward their comments to do so.
We will continue to post updates on our Web site as they become available.
If you wish to forward your comments you may do so by any of the following:
Police mail: CPSA - Unit 545
U.S. mail: CPSA 1616 W. Pershing Rd. Chicago, IL 60609
Fax: 773-376-7344
Email attachment. Cpsa_sgts@ameritech.net
Sincerely,
John Pallohusky
President
Chicago Police Sergeants’ Association
Thursday, May 03, 2007
CHICAGO POLICE SERGEANTS ASSOCIATION ALERT
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
11 comments:
I urge the Sergeant's Association to seek an injunction stopping the June re-test.
If a number of candidates experienced problems during the January Oral Assessment Exercise, then the City should investigate to verify these problems (our entire encounter w/ proctors was recorded on a second tape recorder) and provide a remedy narrowly tailored to remediate the affected candidates.
The scores of 650+ candidates that did not experience problems on the oral portion should not be affected by a remedy created to address the issues of less than 40 candidates.
Is there any doubt that something is rotten in the state of Denmark? We now call upon our union to protect the interests of its membership.
I could only imagine some cheater complaining about someone else cheating.....you guys make me laugh!
The only fair thing to do would be to re-test everyone-with different questions-period! And keep the question info away from anyone connected to the department-that takes care of the people with crappy proctors and the people with the magic phone calls.
Who are you calling a cheater, loser?
I'm all for a re-test, still, I believe I should have the results of the first test, before I make the decision to take it again.
Where is the accountability? Funny how in the field, one gets written up by you know who, but if you're an insider, "ah, just do it again til you get it right". Incredible
They should just shit-can that oral part anyway. It was nonsense.
Any updates from the buffoons at our "union"?
Anonymous said...
Any updates from the buffoons at our "union"?
Tue May 08, 05:48:00 PM
Yes,they will continue the corruption,take even more money out of your paycheck and then do absolutely nothing for the working officer.
While many of the posts identify valid points, I don’t believe any have addressed the issue of those of us who can’t re-take the oral assessment because of other commitments on the date of the exam. Many of us have made plans that will involve substantial hardship and/or expense if we elect to cancel our plans to accommodate the City on their latest whim. Where is the equity in this? We took the exam in good faith and moved on with our lives. If there were malfunctions in the administration of the oral assessment, allow those who can substantiate they were harmed by those glitches to re-take the oral exercise with new questions. To allow everyone to re-answer the same questions is an insult to everyone and certainly diminishes the integrity of the exam. Further, to assert that this is an equitable solution because everyone will have the same advantage is erroneous. Undoubtedly there are those who will argue that there will always be someone with previous commitments on the date of the exam regardless of when it is administered. There may be some truth to that assertion but this is different; we took the exam in good faith and moved on with our lives. Allowing everyone to re-test with the same questions on less than seven weeks notice leaves those of us who cannot, or opt not to, participate at a serious disadvantage. Let’s face it, one must score among the top eighty or ninety to even stand a chance of promotion to begin with. Factor in a re-test where the majority of examinees can rehearse their responses to questions that were supposed to test one’s ability to “think on their feet” leaves those of us who cannot re-test with little, if any, chance of getting promoted. Even if we elect to cancel our plans, we are still faced with the possibility that some sort of injunction will prevail and our plans will have been cancelled in vain. Once again, where is the equity in any of this?
Also, in a best case scenario this solution provides certain individuals with an unfair advantage. Those with access to high ranking department members can get a break down on what to answer, therefore the answer is not what they would do but what Deputy Chief X would do. Worst case (most likely) scenario is that "study groups" can be force fed answers including new additional points, in order to bolster the scores of select individuals.
The next Sergeants' Association meeting is this Thursday, May 17, 7:00pm, at 1616 W. Pershing Rd.
Every sergeant concerned about the announced re-test of the oral assessment portion of the lieutenant exam should do their best to attend this meeting and voice their concerns.
Post a Comment