Ethics...

The entire change would be so (no names) a union board members son would be eligible this way.

[Greg Stout]

I agree....there has never been a post yet about the status of the contract negotiations. There is only rumor. There are a slew of people on that board. We are we not getting weekly updates in our roll calls? It does not need to be Det Stout or cocrane....

Obviously, you are talking about two separate issues here today; the Sergeant’ Test and Contract Negotiations. As far as the test goes, it was administered on September 20, eight days ago. If any of you have seen a test scored and results released in eight days here at TPD, let me know when and where. Frankly, it takes the City some time to do it. Secondly, the PBA has been in direct talks with City HR representatives dating from weeks prior to the test to right now. We have been told that the In-Basket portion of the test will be graded sometime this week. If it is not, the City will be hearing from us.

A PBA Board Member asked to be put on the agenda at the monthly Board of Directors meeting, to discuss the Sergeant’s Exam. That same Board Member made no mention to us in regards to what he wanted to discuss. We began hearing rumors over this past weekend regarding him wanting to change the rules of the current test and opening up the scoring percentage to let others be eligible for promotion. At yesterday’s meeting that member denied that he had spoken about the current exam. He did say that he was interested in opening the test percentage in future exams, end of story. Approximately fifty officers were in attendance. If you need the full unedited version, I’m sure any one of them can fill you in. If you took the test you will remember that we asked you to complete a survey after finishing the test. Out of 274 test takers, 163 of you responded. Some questions were not answered. These are the answers to the three questions we asked:

Question YES % NO %
Was the testing process better as a whole? 103 63% 44 27%
Was the In-Basket portion a positive change? 95 58% 63 39%
Was the elimination of not applicable SOP’s helpful? 127 78% 19 12%

Overall, 63% of you who answered the survey saw this as a positive change. That is a good thing. We have this information available as well as all written suggestions given by you to further improve the test in the future. The information we received from you has also been turned over to Kimberly Crum, HR Director of the City. Simply drop us an e-mail and we will send you a copy to review what was said about the test.

As far as contract negotiations go; we are nearing the end of the negotiations. We have attended four face to face meetings with Mayor Buckhorn. We are still negotiating one article we deem as important to us and when that article is answered to our satisfaction we will make a tentative agreement with the City. We will post the tentative agreement with full information on each change and we will hold a posted A / B Cycle informational meeting as we always do. Then you, the members, make the final decision to ratify or reject the contract. We very seldom give updated contract information because every negotiation has rapid changes to it on both sides. That makes it very difficult to give real time information on ever changing proposals.

Lastly, as of September 10, 2011 I have personally attended 110 roll calls since taking office. I keep a spread sheet on when and where I go. On Saturday, September 10, I attended a 0600 roll call on B Cycle in District II with Sgt’s., Alsip and Mumford’s squads in attendance. At 1400 that same day, I was at District One for Sgt. Southwick’s squad. Sgt. Boeving’s squad was also there, but she was not in attendance. Please invite to your roll call and I will gladly attend in between scheduled roll calls. The PBA disseminates accurate information as quickly as we receive it.
Respectfully,

Greg Stout

Greg,

Since you are here on the board, a few quick questions.

The city only allowed 3 days to review the test, when contract specified 4. Have we said/done anything about it?

The in-box isn't available for review- what is the city's explanation for the delay? Will we have a 4 day period to review/grieve the in-box?

A large number of people have complained that the in-box answers are subjective, or subject to multiple interpretations (various reasons for each one). Are we going to do/say anything about this?

There is a rumor floating around that some of the in-box tests might have come loose from their paper clips- since the only names on them were on the cover sheet, will this be an issue (if it is true)?

I'm sure that everyone would appreciate any answers you could give us. Obviously, a respectable portion of the department is not getting any information, which just leads to more rumors/discontent. I understand you are going around to roll calls, but maybe posting on the PBA site, or using the bulletin boards would reach a wider audience. Might even want to think about making an email list to distribute information.

Obviously, a respectable portion of the department is not getting any information, which just leads to more rumors/discontent.

You're pumping a dry well here buddy. They just refuse to believe this, and when it's said, we get the old "we've been to X rollcalls." 110 rollcalls sure sounds impressive doesn't it?

But wait, let's do a little math: as we all know, the "new improved" Tampa PBA was established in 2008. Let's give them the rest of 2008 to get organized, and start our little exercise with January 1 2009. Since then, there have been a total of 1001 days (365+365+271.) With 3 rollcalls per district per day (for a total of 9 rollcalls per day) that's a total of 9009 rollcalls. And as Mr. Stout says, he's been to 110 of them, for a whopping total of 1.2%!

Hmmm, that 110 sounds a lot less impressive now. Funny how a little perspective changes numbers huh? Maybe there are better ways of keeping touch with members here in the whiz-bang days of the 21st century than going to less than 2% of the rollcalls? How about a weekly email digest? A members section on the PBA site that only verified PBA members can see?

The point is, I don't need to see your face Mr. Stout (and haven't, since January of this year.) But I DO NEED TO KNOW WTF IS GOING ON, AND NO, YOU AREN'T GETTING THE WORD OUT EFFECTIVELY!!!! Stop being defensive and dismissive, (sound like the last administration anyone?) acknowledge you've haven't been communicating effectively, and make a change!!!

[Greg Stout]

Greg,

Since you are here on the board, a few quick questions.

The city only allowed 3 days to review the test, when contract specified 4. Have we said/done anything about it?

The in-box isn't available for review- what is the city's explanation for the delay? Will we have a 4 day period to review/grieve the in-box?

A large number of people have complained that the in-box answers are subjective, or subject to multiple interpretations (various reasons for each one). Are we going to do/say anything about this?

There is a rumor floating around that some of the in-box tests might have come loose from their paper clips- since the only names on them were on the cover sheet, will this be an issue (if it is true)?

I'm sure that everyone would appreciate any answers you could give us. Obviously, a respectable portion of the department is not getting any information, which just leads to more rumors/discontent. I understand you are going around to roll calls, but maybe posting on the PBA site, or using the bulletin boards would reach a wider audience. Might even want to think about making an email list to distribute information.

Please come to our web site http://www.tampapba.org to find the answers to your questions.

Thanks for your response and your comments. Positive feedback is always appreciated.

At yesterday’s meeting that member denied that he had spoken about the current exam. He did say that he was interested in opening the test percentage in future exams, end of story.

Maybe at the meeting. Following the test, this "member" made it clear they were trying to change the CURRENT list. What was said to you "on the record" is not exactly consistant what they had been politicing for, to put it a nice way. Maybe someone talked some sense into them since then.

Thank you Greg for answering my questions.

[Greg Stout]

Thanks for asking!

Greg, I was not able to go to the meeting. Is the PBA considering asking the city to change the test eligibility structure? Thanks.

[Greg Stout]

A board member asked us to look at future testing and to open the overall percentage rates on both the Det/CPL and Sgt's Test. Nothing will happen to this current test and before anything would happen in the future it would be with the consensus of the membership.
Thanks for asking.

Greg