RISING STAR ! The ultimate source to ace your NYPD Sergeant, Lieutenant, and Captain Exam Visit www.RisingStarPromotion.com to subscribe to our mailing list and get info on the next Sgt, Lt. or Captain Exam!
So at today's Compstat, the PC spoke and addressed amongst other things...the last LT exam. He said Saturday exams are a thing of the past. He also stressed a strong push to get questions tossed in order to increase list size. It was filmed so I'm sure it will be on the intranet soon.
(No...he didn't say what questions they were trying to throw out or how many. Said it was questions students were not told would be on exam).
"You are living in a fantasy, There is no easter bunny, there is no tooth fairy, and there is no queen of England! this is the real world and you need to wake up" - Titan
It also says that answers drawn from after the cut off date are null and void......... I could have just made that up, but you see where I'm going with this
If DCAS would of done that from the beginning none of these lawsuit would of happen. Especially them knowing they gave questions past the cut off date.
If DCAS would of done that from the beginning none of these lawsuit would of happen. Especially them knowing they gave questions past the cut off date.
So simple, If dcas didn't have their heads up vucinaj's ass things would've gone a lot more smoothly
If you read civil service law it states a judge cannot order questions be changed or thrown out.
So what does this judge have the authority to do in this case if she cant throw out questions ? Perhaps this lawyer is just blowing smoke up their asses . From what I remember the NOE had a catch all statement like "and other department directives" or some bs . I would have to read it again
There are 2 outcomes. List will not change. Either they'll eventually start promoting everyone (except maybe a few cases where it can be easily proven that someone was scamming) or throw the whole list out. Period.
from the way bratton was talking, it seems they have the ability to change a few questions, but what do i know. Im not the police commissioner or anything....
There are only three possible outcome for this whole ordeal, 1 throw out of the whole list 2- throwout of questions not on the NOE and past the cut off date 3- list stays the same. If number 2 wasnt an option why would bratton make that statement on NY1.
There are only three possible outcome for this whole ordeal, 1 throw out of the whole list 2- throwout of questions not on the NOE and past the cut off date 3- list stays the same. If number 2 wasnt an option why would bratton make that statement on NY1.
To make himself look good. He presses DCAS to do something they can't do by law. Thus making NYPD look good and DCAS bad.
If number 2 wasnt an option why would bratton make that statement on NY1.
Good question. This statement is exactly the opposite of what he said in the email everyone got. One of the statements has to be wrong. Bratton is getting old a senile I think.
7.Court review of examination questions and answers. Where the state civil service commission or appropriate municipal civil service commission has, following its duly established review procedures, which in the case of the city of New York are set forth in section fifty-a of this chapter, made a final determination as to the answers that are acceptable on a particular examination, such determination shall not be subject to further review in any court. Court review shall be limited to be a determination of whether such duly established review procedures were followed, and the court shall have no authority to determine whether the commission's determination was correct.
A simple Google search.
-- Edited by IShredMajors on Monday 23rd of May 2016 02:42:30 PM
Thats interesting. One thing I noticed is that it says no court can overturn the answers on a particular exam. However, it doesnt say whether the court can throw out a question altogether due to it being improperly included in the exam. Could be the angle they are going for. Could be nothing...just an observation.
-- Edited by Tme97 on Monday 23rd of May 2016 03:42:19 PM
Thats interesting. One thing I noticed is that it says no court can overturn the answers on a particular exam. However, it doesnt say whether the court can throw out a question altogether due to it being improperly included in the exam. Could be the angle they are going for. Could be nothing...just an observation.
-- Edited by Tme97 on Monday 23rd of May 2016 03:42:19 PM
Court review shall be limited to be a determination of whether such duly established review procedures were followed
Its pretty obvious to me and bratton and anyone with half a brain that the review procedures werent properly followed considering that they failed to change any of the improper questions. This should be a slam dunk for the judge and the plantiffs....
The "review procedures" you are referring to are established in CVS 50-a and are vague and ambiguous, mostly dealing with the timeframe of certain actions...not the actual TVB proceedings. Normally, the court is not allowed to review the actual TVB proceedings with regard to individual questions. However, in an Article 78 proceeding, part of what a court looks at is if the government agency acted in a manner that was "arbitrary and capricious" in its ruling (basically if there was an abuse of power or a ruling completely against rational thought). This is a very high bar for the plaintiffs to achieve. That being said, I can't see how it was rational to test on procedures after the cut off date.
The plaintiffs' best hope is to attack the NOE for failure to list the subject of the examination. Unfortunately past cases based on defective NOEs have led to the voiding of both the list and the test. However, these past cases did not attack the NOE for failure to list subjects of the examination, but rather for failure to state the weights of different testing sections. Failure to state the weights in the NOE cannot be corrected after the fact so the test must be void, failure to state the subjects can be corrected after the fact by throwing out the corresponding questions. Since there is little to no case history on failure to state examination subjects, there is no way of telling how the judge will rule if it is determined the NOE is defective. But again, it is a very high bar for the plaintiffs to achieve; courts give a lot of deference to government agencies.
With such little case history there is no way of knowing how the judge will interpret certain wording in the NOE. For example, the term "subjects of examination" is debatable...one interpretation can be that "subjects" means the Patrol Guide, Admin Guide, etc., but another interpretation could be that the Patrol Guide and Admin Guide are sources for questions and the terms in bold on the NOE are the "subjects". The latter interpretation would make it harder for the plaintiffs to succeed.
Again, I rarely come on this site but I have to put to bed some flawed logic I keep observing which is quite disturbing because it is not complicated. The following is the paragraph right out of our NOE regarding testing subjects:
"The test MAY INCLUDE questions which require mastery of technical knowledge based on SUCH MATERIALS AS the NYCPD Patrol Guide, Administrative Guide, Interim Orders, Legal Bureau Bulletins, New York State Penal Law, Criminal Procedure Law, Family Court Act, Vehicle & Traffic Laws (VTL) and Mayor's Executive Order No. 16 of 1978, as amended, and MAY ADDRESS any of the following areas: Aided Cases; Accidents; Complaints; Summonses; Arrests; Prisoners; Property; Court and Agency Appearances; Patrol Supervision; Special Patrol Operations; Disciplinary Matters; Personnel Matters; Uniforms, Equipment and Department Property, in effect up to and including January 18, 2015.
The test MAY ALSO INCLUDE questions which require the use of any of the following abilities:"
Now look how open-ended "MAY INCLUDE QUESTIONS" on "SUCH MATERIALS AS" is and also the areas the test "MAY ADDRESS." It clearly is not a definitive statement and it implies that the items listed are NOT all-inclusive. MAY and SUCH AS and MAY ADDRESS as used here clearly mean "here are some examples." What this boils down to is that other items in addition to what are listed may also be on the test, like Ops Orders or CCRG.
And regarding the one question that had the correct answer that included the one person/unit that was added after the cutoff date, please keep in mind that we are instructed to pick the MOST CORRECT answer. Given that the other 3 answer choices were so wrong, and the NOE tells us that we are also required to used "Analytical Thinking," "Judgement and Decision-Making," and "Adaptability/Flexibility" then based on those required skills the answer DCAS gave us IS the MOST CORRECT. No, it wasn't the ABSOLUTE correct answer, but because the other 3 choices were so wrong, you would be forced to pick the right answer based on the skills the NOE said you must use.
I do wish the 8 Sgts who are suing good luck in their careers and a happy life, but as far as the NOE goes, they are really stretching interpretation to its limits here. They need to let us move on. Commissioner Bratton already stated there will be no more Saturday tests which was the crux of this issue for decades. The exam itself and TVB were not flawed, they were just rediculiously hard and particular.
regarding the question after the cut off date, if im told to study a menu that has turkey, bacon, peas, and carrots listed during the study period and on test day one of the answers says turkey, bacon, peas, carrots, and mashed potatoes, well my friend on a test like this where its designed to trick you with one little word especially lists, then mashed potatoes should come out at you and slap you in the face and say dont pick me, Im the wrong answer! As it did to me on test day. If you want to play the well choose what you think would be the most logical answer given that every single answer was wong, you could argue that other answers could feasibly be more correct and you wouldnt be wrong ( such as the second supervisor on scene makes sure the proper notifications were made, we know its the first supervisor, but analytically thinking you bet your butt that as the incident commander you would want to make sure all the proper notifications were made). For you to argue which wrong answer is most correct is an exercise in ridiculousness. Fact of the matter is they had a question with only wrong answers and they failed to admit their mistake which has lead to a giant catastrophy, and has probably given a lot more life to this lawsuit than it would have if they just corrected the most blatant abuse of the test review process. Now that we can see such an obvious violation of their own rules, we know that the TVB acted in a manner that was "arbitrary and capricious" and it has opened the door on the other questions they failed to change due to whatever agenda they had.....
