Why register? ...To Enhance Your Experience
+ Reply to Thread
Page 32 of 33 FirstFirst ... 222930313233 LastLast
Results 621 to 640 of 644
Like Tree30Likes

Thread: City of Los Angeles 2013

  1. #621
    MembersZone Subscriber
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Posts
    39

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by scfire86 View Post
    Do you know if a time cutoff is used in all LA hiring or just LAFD?
    There is no time cut off, they process in the order received, which means if you didn't get your CPAT in first you will get to interview at a later date when your number comes up. read the joinlafd website, they do a good job of explaining it there just as they have all along.


  2. #622
    Forum Member scfire86's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2004
    Location
    HB
    Posts
    10,131

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by JDJFIREMAN1 View Post
    There is no time cut off, they process in the order received, which means if you didn't get your CPAT in first you will get to interview at a later date when your number comes up. read the joinlafd website, they do a good job of explaining it there just as they have all along.
    Does every LA dept process paperwork in the order received? Or just LAFD?

    That's the issue as I see it.
    Last edited by scfire86; 03-24-2014 at 01:35 AM.
    Politics is like driving. To go forward select "D", to go backward select "R."

  3. #623
    Forum Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2013
    Posts
    10

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by scfire86 View Post
    Does every LA dept process paperwork in the order received? Or just LAFD?

    That's the issue as I see it.
    Every department does things differently. LA County, and just recently Ventura County, used a lottery system which mean the majority of people were disqualified out of sheer luck. At least LAFD processed in the order received. Whenever a department says it will open apps at a certain time or requires any information submitted at a certain time always be ready to submit 10 mins prior. This is nothing new. What's new is people complaining and threatening (with lawsuits) their way into departments.

  4. #624
    Forum Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2012
    Posts
    66

    Default

    People are asking why UFLAC thinks the mayors decision is "patently unfair". This is my response:

    Patently unfair refers to the fact that most of us - as applicants who were never benefitted by the alleged improprieties of the hiring process - have spent thousands of dollars and dozens of hours to reach the end of this process only to be disqualified because of a minor technicality. Perhaps there was misconduct on conducted by the LAFD or the City of Los Angeles Personnel Department, but that doesn't justify asking candidates to make drastic financial and life commitments for over a year, and then systematically dropping without justification. The individuals who benefitted from the insider meetings and information are likely the very cadets who are currently in the academy and have not been penalized in the slightest for their advantage. All candidates who passed the initial written test received an email on April 19, 2013 which stated that "PROOF OF CPAT WILL BE PROCESSED IN THE ORDER THAT IT IS RECEIVED. YOU MAY SUBMIT YOUR CPAT PROOF BEGINNING MONDAY, APRIL 22, 2013, AT 8:00 A.M., PACIFIC STANDARD TIME. " Many candidates with conditional job offers, including myself, understood that when there are thousands of candidates fighting for their spot in such a prestigious department, getting your certifications in as soon as possible ("8:00 A.M., PACIFIC STANDARD TIME") was common sense. Whether others received prior notice of a cutoff is irrelevant in this case, where punctuality was implicit.

    The United Firefighters of Los Angeles City have pointed out that Los Angeles is less safe because of this decision. Fire-related deaths are set to break records this year because the current amount of employes is insufficient to staff LAs fire stations in a way that maintains the wellbeing of their firefighters. They are overworked, and that results in underperformance. It furthermore contracts taxpayers to pay exponentially more for substandard service. Regardless if you are more interested in the safety and wellbeing of the men and women that respond to the worst moments of your life or the financial burden that it puts on you as a taxpayer, this decision is reckless and negligent.

    It took the city years to secure the funds to put on a recruitment of this magnitude, and they went through the process from beginning to end. It's my opinion that a minor ethical dilemma has overshadowed a lack of transparency of the financial waste that this decision incurs. Is it really necessary to completely dismiss this recruitment (flawed as it may be), instead of concurrently utilizing it to their advantage while supplementing it where it is deficient? There should be a compromise that allows the department to be relieved where it is becoming a public and personnel safety issue and reformed to address the problems that it has.

    This decision is unfair. It is unfair to the candidates who expected employment in two months. It is unfair to the overworked firefighters who put their lives on the line every day. It is unfair to the public that will suffer because of this deficit, and it is unfair to the taxpayers who have watched their hard-earned money flushed down the drain. It is PATENTLY unfair, through and through.
    brian2013 likes this.

  5. #625
    Forum Member scfire86's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2004
    Location
    HB
    Posts
    10,131

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by fireman1302 View Post
    Perhaps there was misconduct on conducted by the LAFD or the City of Los Angeles Personnel Department, but that doesn't justify asking candidates to make drastic financial and life commitments for over a year, and then systematically dropping without justification.
    If there was misconduct your beef is with those bureaucrats and not the mayor. He's not elected to look the other way when a department head screws up.
    Politics is like driving. To go forward select "D", to go backward select "R."

  6. #626
    Forum Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2012
    Posts
    66

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by scfire86 View Post
    If there was misconduct your beef is with those bureaucrats and not the mayor. He's not elected to look the other way when a department head screws up.
    I'm not saying the mayor should look the other way. I just don't think the situation is compromised enough to completely scrap such an expensive process. Utilize the people they've processed, weed out individuals that can be linked to the nepotism allegations, and do so while reforming the system. NOT hiring the 70 individuals set for the June academy puts the people of LA at risk due to underperforming Firefighters, undermines the wellbeing of the overworked fire staff, and burdens taxpayers with overtime expense. The vast majority of the individuals who got their CPATs in before the 950 spots were filled in a minute were not given any advantage, and those that were are likely already in the first academy that hasn't been penalized.

  7. #627
    Forum Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2012
    Posts
    66

    Default

    Hey everyone, I just found out that LAFD has a sub page on a website called Reddit, and their account seems to be relatively active. I started a topic there to ask their personnel questions, and I think they'll respond if we get a bit of activity over there. Here's the link: http://www.reddit.com/r/LAFD/comment...in_the_mayors/
    Last edited by fireman1302; 03-25-2014 at 01:10 AM. Reason: Fixed website

  8. #628
    Forum Member scfire86's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2004
    Location
    HB
    Posts
    10,131

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by fireman1302 View Post
    I'm not saying the mayor should look the other way. I just don't think the situation is compromised enough to completely scrap such an expensive process. Utilize the people they've processed, weed out individuals that can be linked to the nepotism allegations, and do so while reforming the system. NOT hiring the 70 individuals set for the June academy puts the people of LA at risk due to underperforming Firefighters, undermines the wellbeing of the overworked fire staff, and burdens taxpayers with overtime expense. The vast majority of the individuals who got their CPATs in before the 950 spots were filled in a minute were not given any advantage, and those that were are likely already in the first academy that hasn't been penalized.
    The purpose of the Civil Service system is to ensure a level playing field exists for all candidates. Unless you can show that all candidates were aware of the 60 second cutoff and had access to a computer at the exact time required then one cannot assume that a level playing field existed. Qualified applicants should be evaluated according to their qualifications and then ranked and hired accordingly. NOT according to how quickly they push the "send" button.

    I'm sure it does suck for those who were getting their affairs in order to start an academy. Again, that is not the mayor's fault. The fault lies with those who approved the process or looked the other way knowing full well of its ramifications.
    Last edited by scfire86; 03-25-2014 at 10:47 AM.
    Politics is like driving. To go forward select "D", to go backward select "R."

  9. #629
    Forum Member
    Join Date
    Sep 2013
    Posts
    3

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by scfire86 View Post
    The purpose of the Civil Service system is to ensure a level playing field exists for all candidates. Unless you can show that all candidates were aware of the 60 second cutoff and had access to a computer at the exact time required then one cannot assume that a level playing field existed. Qualified applicants should be evaluated according to their qualifications and then ranked and hired accordingly. NOT according to how quickly they push the "send" button.

    I'm sure it does suck for those who were getting their affairs in order to start an academy. Again, that is not the mayor's fault. The fault lies with those who approved the process or looked the other way knowing full well of its ramifications.

    I think the problem that most people are having is with the word "cutoff". Those that did not make the first round of interviews were still in the process and would be interviewed at a later date. Not everyone passed the interview, backgrounds, the panel, med/psych. Some may have been picked up by other departments. There was a good chance that more people would have been interviewed considering the amount of people the department needed to hire.

    Are people going to make a big deal if County decides to do the lottery again like they've done in the past? That really is a"cutoff".

  10. #630
    Forum Member scfire86's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2004
    Location
    HB
    Posts
    10,131

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by laort View Post
    I think the problem that most people are having is with the word "cutoff".
    Again, the purpose of the Civil Service process is to ensure a level playing field. The arbitrary one minute cutoff for academy placement negates that concept. It assumes everyone has access to a computer at the appointed time. Had the instructions specified that academy placement would occur under those parameters those criticizing the mayor might have a more valid position.

    I'm not defending his actions. I don't live in LA and don't even live in the county.

    I do know that it doesn't help that LAFD was under a federal decree for a long time because of proven favoritism and nepotism.

    If FD's were serious about an objective process to recruit and hire the most qualified they would do away with the interview and weight the written and physical and establish a list using those criteria.
    Politics is like driving. To go forward select "D", to go backward select "R."

  11. #631
    Forum Member
    Join Date
    Sep 2013
    Posts
    3

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by scfire86 View Post
    Again, the purpose of the Civil Service process is to ensure a level playing field. The arbitrary one minute cutoff for academy placement negates that concept. It assumes everyone has access to a computer at the appointed time. Had the instructions specified that academy placement would occur under those parameters those criticizing the mayor might have a more valid position.

    I'm not defending his actions. I don't live in LA and don't even live in the county.

    I do know that it doesn't help that LAFD was under a federal decree for a long time because of proven favoritism and nepotism.

    If FD's were serious about an objective process to recruit and hire the most qualified they would do away with the interview and weight the written and physical and establish a list using those criteria.

    But it was stated. CPATs WILL BE PROCESSED IN THE ORDER THEY ARE RECEIVED. People had three options: email, in person, or regular mail. It's common sense that email would be the fastest. You're going to tell me that people are able to pay $150 to take the CPAT and not willing to go to a library or spend a couple bucks to go to FedEx/Kinkos, or borrow a friend/Family members computer?
    Also, there was no one minute cut off. They reached the number of people needed for the first round of interviews in the first minute. There is a difference. One states: we will keep the window open for the first round for ONE minute. The other: we will take x number of people for the first round of interviews. It just so happened that they reached that number in about a minute. Back to CPATs WILL BE PROCESSED IN THE ORDER THAT THEY ARE RECEIVED.

  12. #632
    Forum Member scfire86's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2004
    Location
    HB
    Posts
    10,131

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by laort View Post
    But it was stated. CPATs WILL BE PROCESSED IN THE ORDER THEY ARE RECEIVED. People had three options: email, in person, or regular mail.
    If those three options were available to all candidates it isn't common sense that email submittals would be given higher priority with respect to the time submitted. If an individual snail mailed his paperwork that individual can assume (given the instructions you cited) that his/her paperwork would be considered equally as the individual who hit the "send" button at the exact time required.

    Again, the level playing field that is the purpose of Civil Service was not in play.
    Politics is like driving. To go forward select "D", to go backward select "R."

  13. #633
    Forum Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2013
    Posts
    10

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by scfire86 View Post
    If those three options were available to all candidates it isn't common sense that email submittals would be given higher priority with respect to the time submitted. If an individual snail mailed his paperwork that individual can assume (given the instructions you cited) that his/her paperwork would be considered equally as the individual who hit the "send" button at the exact time required.

    Again, the level playing field that is the purpose of Civil Service was not in play.
    If you get that rediculous with being "fair" then what about the people who didn't have a ride to the written test. Should the department be responsible to sending a car to their house to pick them up? If you want the job bad enough you'll find access to a computer at a library or something similar. Trust me, I've done it. Making an excuse for everything won't cut it in the fire service anyways. It's about going above and beyond.
    fireman1302 likes this.

  14. #634
    Forum Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Posts
    22

    Default

    I don't get why people are still arguing with this person, they've clearly made up their mind that they are right and you are wrong regardless of what your argument may be.

  15. #635
    Forum Member scfire86's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2004
    Location
    HB
    Posts
    10,131

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by And91 View Post
    If you get that rediculous with being "fair" then what about the people who didn't have a ride to the written test. Should the department be responsible to sending a car to their house to pick them up? If you want the job bad enough you'll find access to a computer at a library or something similar. Trust me, I've done it. Making an excuse for everything won't cut it in the fire service anyways. It's about going above and beyond.
    And that's the type of thinking that probably motivated the mayor to throw out the current list.
    Politics is like driving. To go forward select "D", to go backward select "R."

  16. #636
    Forum Member
    Join Date
    Sep 2013
    Posts
    3

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by OnAMission23 View Post
    I don't get why people are still arguing with this person, they've clearly made up their mind that they are right and you are wrong regardless of what your argument may be.
    I just want people that read this thread to understand that process wasn't rigged like the LA Times made it out to be. I never realized how much damage can be caused by irresponsible journalism. As candidates we do our best to make it to the next step and part of that is reading and understanding instructions. (I'm not talking about those that sent in their CPAT at 8:00 on the dot but did not get an interview.)

    I'm not saying that there shouldn't be an investigation to definitively prove/disprove that something wrong is/isn't going on. I'm just saying that wasting thousands of tax payer dollars, at a time when the department is desperate for new firefighters is wrong and irresponsible.

  17. #637
    Forum Member scfire86's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2004
    Location
    HB
    Posts
    10,131

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by laort View Post
    I just want people that read this thread to understand that process wasn't rigged like the LA Times made it out to be. I never realized how much damage can be caused by irresponsible journalism. As candidates we do our best to make it to the next step and part of that is reading and understanding instructions. (I'm not talking about those that sent in their CPAT at 8:00 on the dot but did not get an interview.)

    I'm not saying that there shouldn't be an investigation to definitively prove/disprove that something wrong is/isn't going on. I'm just saying that wasting thousands of tax payer dollars, at a time when the department is desperate for new firefighters is wrong and irresponsible.
    There is an article in today's L.A. Times that states internal emails between individuals within the department reveal that preferential treatment had been obtained. The article was not specific in the content of those of those emails that would lead the mayor and/or his staff to that conclusion.
    Politics is like driving. To go forward select "D", to go backward select "R."

  18. #638
    Forum Member
    Join Date
    Sep 2012
    Posts
    29

    Default

    Article I found on recruit911.com:

    http://www.recruit911.com/lafd-recru...-is-suspended/

  19. #639
    Forum Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2012
    Posts
    66

  20. #640
    Forum Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2013
    Posts
    10

    Default

    IAFF doing their part to get the word out on Garcetti's "fatally flawed" decision.
    http://www.iaff.org/Comm/SpotLight/14Stories/032714LACityRecruits.htm
    fireman1302 likes this.

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Similar Threads

  1. KME Awarded Contract for 23 Pumpers by City of Los Angeles
    By seagrave7 in forum Apparatus Innovation
    Replies: 6
    Last Post: 12-03-2009, 12:37 AM
  2. LODD: Los Angeles City FF killed in explosion
    By JLam77 in forum Firefighters Forum
    Replies: 25
    Last Post: 03-30-2008, 11:21 PM
  3. Los Angeles City Background
    By miramar in forum Hiring & Employment Discussion
    Replies: 4
    Last Post: 01-07-2008, 06:36 AM
  4. City of Los Angeles
    By Box2565 in forum Hiring & Employment Discussion
    Replies: 17
    Last Post: 02-06-2007, 03:28 AM
  5. Los Angeles City Fire still testing...here is the link
    By CAFFBOU in forum Firefighters Forum
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 08-03-2002, 06:25 PM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts