 |
Impact
of Discipline on Promotional Scoring
The impact
of discipline on promotional
scoring is
substantial. It has
been shown that many Departments disciplining activities rise just
prior to the announcement of a promotional test. Although safeguards
have been set in place within the various state testing agencies, the
scores can still be impacted with purpose to dictate the outcome of the
list. The Departments goal is just to get the desired
candidate within the top three (Rule of Three) to promote.
Discipline
is
subtracted from all
candidates scores. Although slightly different in each state,
many
states take more than one deduction for discipline. Scores
are calculated from a variety of areas to include seniority, the actual
test score and training, all of which are factored together to arrive
at a final score. In New Jersey, discipline is subtracted first from
seniority and then recent discipline, imposed within the past 5 years,
is used to reduce the raw score by a percentage.
The
result of
imposing discipline
just prior to testing increases the deduction from the candidates score
by a higher percentage. Discipline imposed within 3-5 years
is deducted at a higher rate. Worse, the amount of discipline
is not taken into consideration. If
a promotional test
candidate receives a single day suspension during the 3-5 years prior
to the test, his raw score is going to be reduced at the same
rate as
the candidate who received the 20 day suspension.
A look at the promotional test candidate list and a comparison of the candidates recently received discipline records as well as recent training courses attended is a fairly good indicator of the Departments motives. This usually explains the nuisance charges where officers are charged with infractions that are usually not used. These include equipment violations, poor grooming and/or communication related charges. Insubordination becomes an administrative favorite prior to promotional testing as it is an indicator that the candidate cannot take or follow orders which would indicate poor supervisor qualities.