Laserfiche WebLink
<br />,. <br />, <br /> <br />e <br /> <br />e <br /> <br />1. <br />AN AMENDMENT SPECIFYING CERTAIN <br />QUALIFICATIONS FOR HEARING <br />EXAMINERS UNDER CHAPTER 143 <br /> <br />~:urrent Law <br /> <br />Chapter 143.057 allows a police officer or fire fighter to appeal a disciplinary action <br />to a third party hearing examiner. The only qualification necessary under state law <br />is that the hearing examiner be a member of either the American Arbitration <br />Association or the Federal Mediation and Conciliation Service. <br /> <br />Proposed Change <br /> <br />This amendment would require that a third party hearing examiner receive special ./ <br />training resarding Chapter 143 or that the hear~ng examiner be a retired or former <br />judge who IS a member of the State Bar. <br /> <br />Reasons for Proposed Change <br /> <br />Several cities have experienced problems with third party hearing examiners not <br />understanding the nature of police or fire work. PolIce officers and fire fighters, <br />because of the very nature of their work, interact with citizens everyday. Therefore, <br />when a police chIef decides to indefinitely suspend a police officer because the <br />officer has shown a history of unnecessary violence in arrest situations, violation of <br />criminal laws, or for other reasons, the examiner often fails to understand the <br />liability the city faces by keeping that officer on the force. <br /> <br />In an attempt to reach a compromise between the city and an officer who has been <br />disciplined, hearing examiners have reduced the punishment even though there is no <br />dispute as to what the officer did. Since there is no appeal from a decision except in <br />very limited situations, the city is often forced to return an obviously bad officer or <br />fire fighter to the force. <br />