My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
Item A - ICMA/PERF Report
COE
>
City of Eugene
>
Council Agendas 2005
>
CC Agenda - 03/09/05 WS
>
Item A - ICMA/PERF Report
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
6/9/2010 12:57:10 PM
Creation date
3/2/2005 3:34:53 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
City Council
City_Council_Document_Type
Agenda Item Summary
CMO_Meeting_Date
3/9/2005
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
100
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
View images
View plain text
can offer personnel in these positions an opportunity to advance to police officer if <br />they meet the department requirements. <br /> <br />Although no longer used, the Eugene Police Department had such a program, <br />known as the Community Service Officer (CSO). CSOs were unarmed, uniformed <br />civilian employees assigned to the Patrol Division. CSOs provide a wide variety of <br />services to the department and to the public, including non-emergency dispatched <br />call response, telephone/lobby report taking, prevention / community services, <br />special events/major incident support, and service of subpoenas. <br /> <br />The selection criteria for CSOs was different than for sworn officers, and as civilian <br />positions, fall under different personnel guidelines than police officers. The <br />candidates were required to have a high school education, pass a situational exam, <br />appear before a selection board for an interview, and were subjected to less rigorous <br />background checks than those performed for police officers. They were given a <br />psychological exam, but their suitability rating was specifically for the position of a <br />CSO, not a police officer. <br /> <br />Though the program was not specifically intended to serve as a stepping stone to <br />police officer positions, it is reasonable to expect that good quality applicants could <br />surface. The only time this process was used, the HR function within the former <br />unified public safety department was instrumental in identifying and advancing <br />four individuals from their position as CSOs to police officers. At issue is the <br />transition from CSO to police officer, which allowed for an abbreviated hiring <br />process. The shortcut, referred to by most of the people interviewed as <br />"fastracking," proved to be flawed in its basic design. In reviewing the files of one of <br />the officers hired under this process, it became clear that minimum qualifications for <br />CSO and police officer were different. Key selection process steps for CSO were <br />significantly less demanding than those required of a police officer. The review <br /> <br /> 43 <br /> <br /> <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.