Muncie Fire Merit Commission tables proposed changes to promotional scoring (Rule and Procedure No. 8)

The Muncie Fire Merit Commission on July 6 reviewed proposed revisions to Rule and Procedure No. 8 that would remove past-performance evaluations from promotional scoring and add a new attendance and preparation certification scored component.

The proposed change, as read to the commission, eliminates past-performance evaluations during promotional processes and ‘‘introduces a new section titled attendance and preparation certifications’’ with a starting score of 10 that may be adjusted for attendance and punctuality. Chief reported the draft had been distributed to the department and said Miss White compiled the certifications and recertifications included in the packet.

Commissioners raised several concerns about the draft language and its distribution. Commissioner Eric Graham said the copy circulated to commissioners appeared to predate a March rule change and did not reflect prior amendments regarding lieutenant and chief-inspector time counting in promotional calculations. He also asked that the commission consider whether the ability to test should be reciprocal across ranks (for example, whether a captain could test for chief inspector and whether a chief inspector could test for battalion chief). Chief noted the department contract already requires new firefighters to be EMTs and that overtime work is limited to personnel who hold EMT certification.

Commission discussion addressed how EMS credentials should factor into promotions. Commission members noted the department is trending toward a higher proportion of EMS runs and that most new hires are now required to hold EMT certifications; one speaker observed that the workforce composition means the EMT requirement may become universal as older non-EMT members retire. Commissioners also discussed written-exam weighting: a proposal to increase the written tests contribution to the composite score from 50% to 60% to recover 10% removed from past-performance scoring was mentioned and taken under advisement.

Because members identified inconsistencies between the version emailed to commissioners and the changes approved last March, and asked for time to refine cross-rank testing language and score-weighting references, the commission moved to table the matter for further review. A motion to table was made, seconded and approved by voice vote.

The commission did not adopt the proposed changes at the meeting; members directed staff to meet with commissioners to correct and clarify the draft language before returning it for a future vote.