The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink About1980-08-21 CSB MINUTES... PRESENT: ABSENT: OI'HERS PRESENT: I f l BJARD OF CAREER SERV ICE cn.IMISSIONERS AUGUST 21, 1980 MINUTES Judith Henning, Jo Ellen Turner, Edward White, Michael Schaffer, Robert Brundage, Ibnald Weber None Mel BeVirt, Employee Relations Director * * '* * * * * Chairperson Henning called the meeting to order. Chairperson Henning welcaned Comnissioner White back from his extended leave of absence fran the Board. Comnissioner Brundage moved, seconded by Cornnissioner Turner to approve the July 24, 1980 minutes. AYES: NAYS: Turner, Henning, Schaffer, Brundage, White None * * * * * * * Item 3 on the Agenda was the Employee Association's Choice. Mr. Ken Holland, representing the Engle\.\QOd Firefighter's Association, stated that he had nothing to present at that time. No other association representatives were present. * * * * * * * Item 4 on the Agenda was the City Manager's Choice. There was no representative present. * * * * * * * !tan 5 on the Agenda was the Employee Relations Director's Choice. Mr. BeVirt, Employee Relations Director, stated that the Board was in receipt of the City Attorney's opinion regarding the grievances filed by Police Sergeants Leydon and Medford: Mr. BeVirt indicated that it was both the City Attorney's and his opinion that the grievances were not in. contradiction of the 1980-1981 contract. He stated, however, that all concerned parties had been meet~ng with the City's insurance agents in an effort to explain and gather further infonnation which would hopefully resolve the problans which have been encountered. Sergeant Leydon stated that after meeting with the insurance agents it was . , his belief that there were definite problans with the claims which he feels are grievable. He further stated that , the insurance company also felt there were possible problems and were willing to look into the situation. He stated that neither he nor Sergeant Medford wished to withdraw their grievance to the Career Service Board but would be willing to wait for the results of the insurance canpany's findings. Chairperson Henning asked if both parties would be agreeable to postponanent of any action regarding the grievances until the next regular meeting. Both Mr. BeVirt and Mr. Leydon were in agreanent. Ccmnissioner Schaffer rrotioned, seconded by Ccmnissioner White, to table any action concerning the grievances of Police Sergeants Leydon and Medford until the next regularly scheduled meeting of the Career Service Board. AYES: NAYS: Turner, Henning, Schaff er, Brundage, White None Mr. BeVirt presented the Board with copies of Firefighter Edison's withdrawal of his grievance and stated that no action was necessary. * * * * * * * Item 6 on the Agenda was the Ccmnissioner' Choice. Chairperson Henning stated for the record that the Career Service Board has issued as of August 19, 1980 its findings in the John Blanchard case. Ccmnissioner Turner rrotioned, seconded by Ccmnissioner Brundage, that the findings of the John Blanchard case be entered into the record. (Findings Attached) AYES: NAYS: Turner, Henning, Schaff er, Brundage, White None Ccmnissioner White thanked the Employee Relations Department for forwarding all of the infonnation concerning the case to him and keeping him infonned of all proceedings. Mr. John Blanchard asked to address the Board. Mr. Blanchard stated that he respected the Board's decision and apologized for having to subject the Board, the City, and especially the firefighters in this particular incident. Ccmnissioner Brundage stated that he appreciated Mr. Blanchard 's statanents. Chairperson Henning stated that it was an extremely difficult decision for the Board and was not entered into lightly. * * * * * * * ChairperS)n Henning presented William B. Hanson with a plaque for his invaluable service v..hile a member of the Career Service Board from May, 1973 to March 1980. Chairperson Henning stated that she felt a plaque was inadequate and extended the Board's friendship and gratitude for his service. Chairperson Henning then read her following letter of resignation into the record: ''Manbers of the Career Service Board City of Englewood Englewood, Colorado My Dear Friends: - It is with a mixture of regret and vast relief that I rrrust sul:mit to you my resignation fran the Career Service Board, effective inmediately upon receipt. If hard work, long hours, seaningly endless discussion and alnost constant harass:nent can be made enjoyable, it is only because that has been done in the canpany of good friends and tireless co-workers. My years of service on this board have been enjoyable --because of you. They have been educational because of the work involved. And they have proved rewarding because of what we together have been able to accanplish. May I also pay compliments to those the board has worked with on the staff. Mel and Sharon especially have proved outstanding in their guidance and aid. Even in disagreaneJt, we have all focused on the task at hand. Equally high in my estean is the work and friendship of J?ave Goodman. Fortune cookies in a Chinese restaurant could not have been a more provident hand in helping us locate such an advisor. As you may know, in recent months I have becane more and more distressed with the situation I find developing within the city family. To hear this board described as biased nearly breaks my heart. Never have I dealt with a group of citizens more dedicated to ferreting out the equiptable and just path to tTead than this board. The entire city, and the anployees, should be thankful indeed to have people such as you willing to give their time and energy to explore ways of handling the canplex issues surrounding employee relations with the government. Though increasing danands on my time make it necessary to give up this wrk, I urge you all to continue seeking ways to make Englev.ood a city with a reputation for dealing with its citizens and its employees in a fair fashion. We cannot be perfect, nor can we please everyone. But I think you all have been true to high ideals and to canpassion for those involved in difficult and EnDtional problems. May you have success in all your future work . I will miss you. Sincere~y, Judith B. Henning" CDrnnissioner Brundage ITDtioned that with great reluctance the Board accept Judith Henning's resignation. The ITDtion was seconded. AYES: NAYS: Turner, pchaffer, Brundage, White None Carmissioner Brundage presented Judith Henning with a plaque for the outstanding service she has rendered to the Career Service Board, the City administration and employees. * * * * * * * Vice Chairperson Turner called for a motion to confinn the appointment of funald M. Weber as the fifth rnanber of the Career Service Board. The ITDtion was so moved by Camlissioner Schaffer, seconded by Carrnissioner Brundage. AYES: NAYS: Turner, Schaffer, Brundage, White None O:mnissioner Brundage ITDtioned that Carmissioner Weber be nominated as Chainnan of the Career Service Board. CDinnissioner Schaffer seconded the ITDtion. AYES: NAYS: Turner, Schaffer, Brundage, White None Chainnan funald Weber accepted the nomination and thanked the Board for their confidence. * * * * * * * Item 7 on the Agenda was the Declaration of Vacancies. Comnissioner Turner rrntioned, seconded by Carmissioner Brundage to approve the Declaration of Vacancies. AYES: NAYS: Turner, Weber, Schaffer, Brundage, White None * * * * * * * Itan 8 on the Agenda was the Approval of Eligibility Lists . Carrnissioner White motioned, seconded by Comnissioner Brundage to approve the Eligibility Lists. AYES: NAYS: Turner, Weber, Schaffer, Brundage, White None * * * * * * * Item 9 on the Agenda was the Acceptance of the Personnel Payroll Actions. Carmissioner Turner rrntioned, seconded by Cannissioner Schaffer to accept the Personnel Payroll Actions. AYFS: NAYS: Turner, Weber, Schaffer, Brundage, White None * * * * * * * Mr. Ken Holland, President of the Firefighters Association, thanked the Board for their time and consideration in the Blanchard Case. * * * * * * * Upon a rrntion by Conmissioner Turner, seconded by Conmissioner Brundage, Chairman Weber adjourned the August 21, 1980 regular rreeting of the Career Service Board at 8:00 P.M. AYFS: NAYS: Turner, Weber, Schaff er, Brundage, White None * * * * * * * Reception Followed c~_no-L(//?;lt./ d----- najd M. Weber, Chairman Career Service Board Jk~~<_/CL,_c~-c1' Valerie Christy, Recording Secretary ELIGIBILI'IY LIST: Corrrnunity Develoµnent Department: Clerical Techn ician/Building 1. Kauffman, Sherry 2. Peters, Colleen 3. Bartsch, Pamela Parks and Recreation Department: Recreation Leader (Senior Citizens) 1. Denham, N. Lin 2. Swanson, Patty 3. Miller, Nancy 4. Peterson, Susan 5. Glen, Esta 6. Greenblatt, Phyllis 7. Hart, Elizabeth ---------------------------~---~-.---~---------~--------~--------~---- NEW PROBATIONARY EJ.1Pl.DYEES Greene, Ben Lloyd, Marcy McClung, Stan ANNIVERSARY INCREASE Payne, Joseph Rhodes, Alfred Ulrich, James Wicks, Byron Dailey, Michael PROBATIONARY 'ID PERMANENT WITH INCREASE Brown, Lynn Hooker, Robert PRav!OTION Trusty, Mark Vandennee, Thanas Wishchneier,. Don Probationary Firefighter,Fire Department Effective August 25, 1980 Support Service Technician,Police Departrrent Grade Four; Effective Septanber 1, 1980 Ditch Rider, Utilities Department; Grade Three Effective Septanber 16, 1980 Supervisor-Maintenance, Wastewater Treatment Plant; Grade Seven, Effective SeptE!Ilber 16, 1980 Purchasing Agent; Finance Department; Grade Nine Effective Septenber 1, 1980 Firefighter 2nd Class, Fire Department; Effective Septenber 16, 1980 Police Officer 1st Class, Police Department; Effective SeptE!Ilber 16, 1980 Police Officer 2nd Class, Police Department; Effective Septenber 1, 1980 Violations Bureau Clerk, Municipal Court; Grade One; Effective October 1, 1980 Police Officer 2nd Class, Police Department; Effective August 1, 1980 Plant Operator B, Wastewater Treatment Planti Grade Five; Effective Septenber 1, 1980 Police Sergeant, Police Department; Effective August 16, 1980 Irrigation Technician, Parks and Recreation Department; Grade Four, Effective August 26, 1980 RESIGNATION Clark, Sandra Davis, David DISMISSAL Cushman, Jrunes RETIREMENT Culp, Betty GENERAL ADJUS'IMENT M::mtgorrery, Betty Jean RECLASSIFICATION Jarrett, Brenda Irrigation Technician, Parks and Recreation Department, Grade Four, Effective August 19, 1980 City Service Worker II-Traffice, Public Works Department; Grade 'l\vo, Effective September 5, 1980 Ditch Rider, Utilities Department, Grade Three, Effective August 28 , 1980 Sales Tax Clerk, Finance Department, Grade 'l\vo, Effective February 1, 1979 Accounts Technician-Central Cashier, Finance Department; Grade 1\\.o,(Permanent Status), Effective January 1, 1980 Accounts Technician-Central Cashier, Finance Department; Grade 'l\vo; Effective January 1 , 1980 ISSlJI; lfas the Appe J lant terminated from employment for good cause? If not, what is the appropriate remedy? CONCLUSIONS l'ursua11l" to Ch;ipl<.:L' l3tl of tl11.: c11i:lc1wod City C:harlor and ::.-1-1 of tho Englewood Municipal Code, the lloard has jLwisdi..:tion to issue a finul decision on this Appeal, which was taken in acconlance with 5-3-13 o·f tho Englewood ~lunicipal Code. In the Board's opinion, rho evidence mid testimony prasonted cl curly establishes that Appellant is guilty of tho ullcgeJ acts of misconduct imputed to him. Indeed, there is absolutely no dispute thut Appellant ongogod in oral sex 1~ith the wi.fc of Firefighter Doss while on duty. Although Appellant dc11ie,; the ch:.ll'go of drinking while 011 duty, his lack of creJi.hility (as ovi- dcnceJ l>y the ..:onfli.:tini: accounts of the i.11ci.dent given by Appellant to S:1rgcant l ';~ri. to llraunrcitur, and to thi~ Board) seriously unc.Jcrmines the I vur:1city of this denial. Ill fact, tho Board is here convinced that Appellant did i 11c.Jult:1.: i11 tlw :ii lci.:('J drin~ing . It i.s further the lloartl's opinion that. those acts of misconduct :ire LoL:tlly rc:prcl1<:11sil>l1.:, u11c<mscional>le, anJ r1.:pugnanr. 1\p!"'il11nt's a<.:tio11s w~·1·0 c o11 t r c11'}' hoth ro f'ire Department lhiles :ind lt.:1:u lations (:idoptcJ April 7, 1!:>77), -7 - ,· '.; .f " " '' 'II ., . I ~ --! 'i1 'l~ ! I :I , I I ·' ./' / I .1nd t o ordin.;ry st:1n<lards of bch:.iv i o r expect ed of public servants. In this l'"<:·' '·J, the Bo:i 1·d 1;ou lJ po.t11t out that ;111 employee who serves the public has :i <.h1;;l obli1!at ion: ht" i s responsible for fulfilling the requi r em ents and obli- g:1tions of his job, as well as meeting the needs and expectations of the par- 1 ·iculclr co11ununi t·y. The cit i :cns of thi s C:i.ty certainly have an expectation that :rny r irefi gh t er on duty wi 11 be prepared :ind able to immediately and capably n·spund to a c;ill for :1ss t5tance . /\ppel Lint did not even remotely sa tisfy this expectation . That no fire occurre d during the more than three hours that Ap- pcllant was away from his stJtion is of absolutely no signiticance. Appellant is not emp l oyed on a per fire basis. Even the suggestion that Appellant's con- d u ct :.hou l d be somhoi; mi11ir:1izl'd because rhe event took pl;1ce i;ithin earshot and 1')'<.'Shot or the l'irL' S t ;1tio11 is fr;i n k l y ;.ibs11nl . The sim ple, unavoii.blile fact is t h;it ,\ppel l:int i;:i,; not hi rcJ to tlrink 1dii l l' Ill' 1;;1s 1Vork ing, :rnd ht' 1;;1s not hired to 1'ngar,c in sex11:il ple:isure,; i;h i le 0 11 Jurv. The lloard cannot stress strongly v n oug h its :ibhoncnce al t lw irresponsi!J i l i ry to1~anl job anti public evinced by Appell1nt 's egregious conduct. Nor ca n the lloarJ strongly enough stress its approval of th e efforts of C:hicl' llc<.·so11 an.I his :id111inis t r:rtion to improve llcp;:irt111ent st:rnd;irds, r,enc rally. Beeson' s si ncere attempt to correct a 1wn:eivcd 1;rong IVithin the Dep;irtmcnt exemplifies a tlcgrce of deJication to his posit i o n and the C:ity he se r ve s. Clearly, Beeson and l1 is st:iff persevered in a difficult situation. He and hi s s taff could have remained s il en t , :ind t aken no action to corre ct thi• a berration in the IVOrk place. In s t ead , recognizing that the City and it s citizens are entitled to employ persons of the highest quality in its Vire Department, Bees on went for1Vard with .1 Cnir ;ind t ho r o u gh invcstig:ition to Jetcrnrinc if the allegations by De s mond Doss ,.;,'re t ru e. And , only after the investigat i nn lwd o ccun·ed, ha s a n objective dct·cn:rin;irion r:ra<le by City Manager t·lcCoi;:in thc1t /\ppt'l la nr should no longe r be \ot1·1irhsr:1nd111g thc\e observation,;, p11rsu:int to Artic l e XV, '.:!1.rr_J_~<OO<~ ·'~C:.'LL~'.'._>l icy _~11.'_loycc Re lati o n s , of the l lome llulc Ch:irto.:r (.Jo int Exhibit. '1), -s - ~;, ' . ' ,ro;_ .~~·~ . ,. __ . ' I H'· . . . "~) :'..; !Ii· ,"(~ . ~~ . the u Jt im "t'' July an c.1 fu n ction o f thi s Bo a rc.1 is "to insure that all City em- pJu)'l'<CS .111 d th eir n·p rese n t;:itivc:s arc fa irl y tre at e J, [and] that their requests :in: i":.J il'l y h e a r J , con s ide rc J unJ re s ol v ed .. In light of this mandate, the l\oard must q ues t ion whet h e r or not Appellant 's t e rmin a tion constituted ''fair t. rc;1:..:mcnt'." Un fortu nately , we c onclude that it did not. Fairne s s would dictate Lhat the sund:nJs set by Bees on n o t be i mp o s ed upon Appellant at this late date. l':Hen tl y , Ch i ef ll am i lton oper ated under di ffe r e nt standards. lie testified that !1;:id the entire inciden t come to hi s a tt e nti o n Ap pe llant would.not have been clisch.ir g ed, cit ing , inte r a lia, Ap p e ll an t's goo d emoloyment record. So t h ere be no mi su n dcr st anc.ling , t he Ho ard categori c ally rejects ll:imilton 's position . As ;i general r ul e , the type o f misconc.luct exhibited by .-\ppl'l lu n t "'ould be grnwH.Js for d i scharge, even ass uming a fi n e record of em- ploymcnt . Ccrt.1in conuuc t is so c l e a rly o u t ra1'eo u s th a t ony employer need not risk repetition. lvhi l c the fio3 r c.J is unonimous in it s belief th3t such conduct ,,·as presen t h en>, 1ve cannot i g nore t!t :1 t t h i s c on duct o c curred under Hamilton's ten ur e . Thus, even h:1 J al l th e fac ts been k no1m to llumilton, Appellant would no t have been r~conuncnde<l for t e r mi n at i o n. To no w apply o stan<larc.1 which would not have been applie<l when the wrong was c o mmitt ed is s imply unfair. Thi s i s espec ia lly true when there is sufficient evidence of record to sholV th 3t :it lenst two o f the Bnttal i on Ch i efs t he n wo rking for th e City had kno1declgc t h 3 t ,\ppellant e11gagc cl in s c x u3 l ac t ivit i as whi.le on Juty at the Tcjon Stat i on . The unrebuttcJ test i mony of Gl cnd;1 l lc n son (Doss) and Snrgeant George Eg:·i s:1ow s t h at P.att:ilion Chief Do.na,l d w:is told IJy f'i rcf.i ghtl'r Do s s of the en- c,1untc'r :is ea r ly as lkrcmber, 1977 :111d, yet, cho,;c not t o ;1c t ba s ed upon a gentle- men's ag r cc:ncnt with Desmonc.1 Doss . Do1;ald i;as not ca ll ed t o r e fute these reprC.'--· <cnta tions :inc.1, inc.lecJ, there is nothi.iJ in the n'cord o f th i s ca s e to s ugge s t th:1t they :ire incorrect . il:iving deterrnjnec.1 the test i mony of Gl e nda Henson (Dos s ) I :111d 'ar::l':1nt E~;ri to be trut dnd nccurate , t he 11oar d i~; un:1 ll tc to compre hend how Lili,; ::;cntlemcn'~ ar;rC'cment could have prevcn tcd l),i n a lcl f ro m meeting hi s responsi- i>il it [cs . lloiv c:rn indi~cretions of the t)"pt· l'Xhib i te d h t:ra he p:.i ss ed o v e r unJ 1\1«c:ortcn unJer Lht: r,u1sc of such an agreement? ;$ -9 - / / ( I i There js also the Lcstimony of [lalt::ilion Chief Del McCarty, who claimed to lnvc u,-.dly rcpri111a11ded Appellant in January, 1978 aftei:. le;:irning of the on Juty ·;cxu;il encounter. The: oral reprim;ind w;:is purportetlly given while Hamilton '"'~ sl"il 1 in office. Frankly, Counsel for the City has presented a logical argument why i•kL:.1rty' s Lcsti111011y co11cerni11g this or;iJ repri111and should be discrediteJ. Sig- nificantly, however, l1ls testimony is nevertheless revealing because it substan- ti;itc:; tht' conclusion that even if tho rnciJcnt; had been known by the then administration, Appellant would not have been discharged. The Iloard wishes to emphosize its disappointment and dismay with the 3Ctions anJ/or inoctions of Ilattalion Chiefs Donald and McCarty in failing to pur- q1c the m;iLLcr Lo disclwq;e. Generally spc:1king, supervisory personnel have a p;iramount obligation to the e111ployer. It .is ant·icip;:itcd that an employee in such position would i<ork more closely with management than the "rank and file." A high degree of loy:1lry is therefore rightfully demanded and relietl upon by manogement . ln fact, within :.i service org:.inization such as a fire department, it seems ap- parent that loyalty to the organizotion from all employees is vital to smooth and efficient functioning. Indeed, these observotions are incorporated into the inti·oJuction cl.1use of the Department's llules und Regulations: [These Rules and Regulations] are not intended to-limit any member in the exercise of his judgment or initiative in taking reasonable and appropriote action in extra-ordinary situotions. Q_y __ ~eccssity, much is left to the loyalty, in- !_c:y,rity, and discretion of the members. To this degree, the individual member demonstrates possession of these quolities in o c6nscientious dischar~e of his duty, ond to that degree alone will the Department measure up to the high stondards required of this se r vice. (Emphosis supplied) ft is obvious to this Ilonrd that here the City's trust was misplaced. The lb11ilton :idl'1inistration as a whole did not represent the City's or the reople's bL"lst intcrest.3 ·'· What we :it·e n'al ly talking ;1hout here is lax enforcement of rules. lie· re is a case where i\ppd lant' s on duty sexual misconduct was known by his im- ,.,,,,:i ;ite s11pcrvisor. Lie11re11:lnt Scny (Bo:1rd's Exhibit 1), as well ;1s two Battalion U11v/';. Thv llep:1rt111C'!lt':; l ~1J!cs :111tl lkgulat 1011s t:le<1rly providl! that such conduc·t ;_, ,:r<Juntls for discharge. Yet, neither investigation nor form:.il discipline oc- c111TcJ. \;'here, as here, there was lax cnforccml!nt of a rule by the•11;1mi.lton admin- 1: t ra:· ic,11, :ibscnt notice' to employees th;it tlw rule will he11ceforth be strjctly en- !.orccd ("h ich this c;1sc serves to provide), the application of this rule as o basis ,·or t1:c:c'1:1 r ge c:innot be a~Jo1Ved. See Chicago ~l:istic Co., 53 Lobor Arbitrotion ,:"!'"'ts 1~8. 429-~:>0 (!'.ell iher, 1969) ;:l1i<lti1c coses c.:ited th erein. -10 - t ,\ grc:it Jcal of testimony was offcreJ in an attempt to prove a battalion c·Jij cf 1·.';ts nvt coil:; iJercJ "Fire Administr;ltion" as that term is d efined in the 1 (ulc~ anJ l(q~ulations . llmv cver , the simple, unavoi dable fact is that Donald and ~lcCarty were supcrvi so rs , anJ there is nothi ng contained within the Rules and l!cguli<tions wh·ich says th;.H ba tt;ilion chiefs --the second highest officers in the !·ire Department --cannot bind th e Dep artment where matters of discipline are conce rneJ. ~lore important ly, however, sinc e employees of the Pirc Department look to persons servi ng in this cap a city for in s truction, guidance, and the like, their acLions or inactions (as is the situation presented here) may be considere d t:lllt:unount to the actions or inaction s of the Ch i e f. Withi n the private se ctor it is a c ommonly held principle that "parties i '1 :ire held responsible for the acts of their authorized :igents." Elkouri & Elkouri, 11 01; /\rbitr:1tion Work"._, 3 rd Ed ., p. 3H. Simply sta ted, knowledge of a supervisor is genera ll y equ:1tcJ with know ledge of a company. Thu s , in the private sector, Lile kno1dedge a!1<l lack of action by Donald and McCarty would be ta ci t acquiescence or accept:ince of i\ppell:int 's conduct. Al tho ugh 1;e a r e not here dealing with pri- vatc sector, the principles arc s ynonymous. As superviso rs, Do nald a n<l McCarty 1:C'rc ch;irr,c<l i;i•h a speci:i l responsibi.l ity to insure that the rules an<l regula- tions of the Fire Department were enforced. Indeed ,· n ot only were those indi- v l du:ib superv i sors , bu t :is direc t subordinates of the Fire Chief they were em- poh•c·rcd to issue oral rcrrimands and recomme nd invcstig;it ions i;here im proprieties "·~re discove r ed. Their co nduct , combinc<l 1<ith the observations of Hamilton re- g;irding the extent of <liscip lin e .vhic h woul<l have been imposed ha<l all fac ts been ... knoh'll, now ilcts as a constraint upon the City. Stated differently, the City may not now do to Appe l lan t i;hat the prior :i d1:1 inlstration \:011ld not have <lone ha<l al l facts a nd circ um sta nces been known at. t :1,· 1 iw~. i'l h cr" m:1ttc:rs or discipline ;ire concerned , c111pl oy "cs generul ly havo ·he~ r i .~ht to knJIV h'i.tit i·ecis o na ble assu1·ancc th at n ch;:inge in leaders hip 1dll not I con .-Jwle vthen,·ise c ould open the door to ahusl's of :i dministra tivc Jiscrction. - 1 j • c !\cconlingly, for the reasons statcJ the Board finJs that there was an """''"cc 0 1· cause for ter111i11.1tio11. /\ppelLrnt must therefore be returned to work. 1;y the s:1111c tok1:n , lhot1p,h, ,\ppcllant',; con Juct cannot be ignorcJ. This Board will not reward this wrongdoer. Indeed, Appe lla n t himself conceded he was deserv ing ni' discipl i11c, .111d the i:lo:irJ could not :1gree more. 13ut for the benefit of what this Hoard found to be the inappropriate and wholly objectionable conduct of 1:;1111cJ persons c111ployed in the prior administration , the termination of this Appellant would surely have been sustained. Pursuant to 5-3-13(f) of the un.lin;rnces for th e City of Englewood, the Board herei>ith modifies the> action of the ::ippo inting authority and orders that .-·.:--\pjk'i i;.i11l b<.: immc<liatcly l'l'insta t e d to his former position of employment·. Such t·c i11st:nc111e11t shall be without ba<.:kp::iy, but without loss o f seniority . ll"itti reg.ird to the quest.ion 01· /\ppcl lant 's promotion, the Board directs Ch ier BN•son tu review .\ppl'l lant 's re cord nine months from the date of his rein- st3tcmcnt anJ determine if App<.:l lant ls Jescrving of promotion to Driver-Operator- Engineer. /\\\'/\RD Th e /\p;:ieal is denied in p•nt and sust::iined in part. Appell::int is t o be rc>instated in accordance with the findings and conclusions s tated above. I -Jc - 'I,