Civil Service Board Meeting

Civil Service Board Meeting — June 23, 2026 - 10:19 AM

good morning everyone and welcome to the JUNE 23rd, 2026 civil service board meeting. We will begin with the pledge of allegiance. To the united states of america. Under GOD. Indivisible with liberty and justice for all. Adoption of the agenda will entertain a motion. Motion. Second. >> we have an addendum. We have an amendment. I'm sorry. On my agenda. I don't see it. So it's not on the agenda. Um so we in our last meeting we had a request for a hearing. Oh sorry. Let me turn this one on. Sorry. Um, in our last meeting we had a request for a hearing that we tabled um and with consideration with today's hearing on the agenda. I was hoping to amend the agenda to add a decision on that uh, tabling. Does that make sense? >> okay. So it sounds like we're saying that there's a hearing on today's docket on the agenda, but based on last meeting on tabling, uh, hearing you wanted to proffer to see if it was possible to amend this agenda to. Determine to make a determination on whether a hearing is appropriate or not. We tabled the decision. Okay. >> understood. So you want to see if we can, uh, decide whether we should move forward or not with the tabled item? That's correct. Okay. >> um. Motion to amend the. So we have a motion by board member cabrera to amend the agenda to bring up what was tabled from last meeting. I second that motion. >> second by board member solomon. All in favor? Aye. >> aye. >> okay. So now to begin the meeting after the pledge. Good morning to everyone. And now we will entertain a motion to adopt the agenda. Motion. Motion by board member lannier second. Second by board member suleiman. All in favor? Aye. >> aye. Wonderful approving of the minutes. I'll entertain a motion. Motion. >> motion by board member lannier. Second. >> second by board member jimenez. All in favor? Aye. >> d disciplinary matters d one board members take note. E general items board members take note e1e2f1 hearings pending list board members can take a look. Um. As of right now our next scheduled board meeting is JULY the 7th and. Pending a settlement on on the one hearing we have there from what I see. Is that something that we don't know it's still pending as far as the settlement on that. Yes sir. It's still pending. Okay. >> all right board members any questions on any of the hearings pending list. The um. The settlement is in SEPTEMBER. Is it JULY? Let me see the settlement for JULY 7th to 20 hour suspension. >> that's our next that's our next board meeting. I just asked the executive secretary and we're still pending a settlement on that. So it's still pending. Okay. That's our next scheduled board meeting and that that hearing is pending. I'm sorry. I think we have an update. Yes. >> board members. Please look at item e1e1 not mistaken that is the actual settlement correct? Okay so. >> we're just confirming that is the same case because she had. Okay. >> yeah. >> yes that was my question. Sorry. Yeah it is it is that one. Bingo. All right. No okay so so board members as of right now our next scheduled board meeting we have no hearings scheduled for that day. Um is that something that we wish to continue with that meeting or would we like to table that that the the regular business to our next board meeting on JULY 21st where we have two hearings pending since we have no pending hearing as of the time. Motion to table the hearing for JULY 7th. >> I. Will be. It would be we would probably want to cancel at that point. >> and then okay. Automatically would table the the regular business to 21st. So okay revise the motion to cancel the meeting for JULY 7th. >> we have a motion to cancel the JULY 7th meeting by board member solomon. Second second by board member cabrera. Any discussion? All in favor? Aye aye. All right so. Excuse me chair I said JULY 7th I apologize JULY 9th. No. >> JULY 7th. Oh I'm sorry. [Laughter] JULY 9th. >> you have other other matters. Okay. >> all right. Sorry. Uh, JULY. So, uh, please take note after today our next board meeting civil service board meeting will be on JULY 21st. So far we have two hearings pending, uh, scheduled for that day. Any other questions by board members on the pending hearings pending list? No seeing none. We'll move forward to today's hearing. H one appeal hearing on behalf of alfonso davila, former heavy equipment mechanic helper concerning of a termination effective JULY 11th, 2026. Ready to proceed. Good morning, good morning. Ready to proceed. If you could please state your name and position for the record? My name is alfonso davila, heavy equipment mechanic helper. Thank you sir. City. Yes. >> the city is ready. City is ready to proceed. Yes. >> all right. Uh, do we need maybe ten minutes to get ready for for the hearing or so? Five five minutes, five minutes, five minutes to get ready for the hearing. All right. Um. MR. Davila, you have, um, exhibits ?Yes. >> could you give it to, um, trish? It was fine. I've only had five. I brought one for each board member. Yes, I understand that. Did you have something. For the attorney? Excuse me. Do you have a set for. >> the attorney? No I don't. Okay. >> all right. We're in recess for five minutes. And we're ready to begin with today's hearing. H one. Good morning, ladies and gentlemen. My name is alfonso davila again heavy equipment mechanic helper for gsa administration. Good morning. On behalf of the city. Okay. >> um, if I can ask both. Um, do you have any witnesses today? Yes. How many do you have? One. One city? I do i have five witnesses. >> five witnesses? Yes. Okay. >> all right. All right, I guess the we'll proceed. If you want to do an opening, you can do it. Yes. Okay. Go ahead. MADAM Chair. Members of the board, let's start with the job. Abandonment actually is it is when an employee at ruptly stopped showing up for work and fails to communicate with their employer for a prolonged period, typically three or more consecutive scheduled days. It is a an employer prolonged period typically three or more consecutive scheduled days. It's a no call no show. The employee goes silent unreachable to every call, email and text from management or hr and it requires intent a prolonged absence showing no intention of ever returning. Not one piece of that applies to me. I am here to prove it element by element. My supervisor robert rionda signed a request for leave form approving my vacation JULY 7th through the 11th 2025. That approval is in his own city own outlook scheduling system exhibit five the absence was authorized. Element one fails no written revocation was ever served to me. I received nothing telling me to report rinder's own email. Exhibit four is his written admission that he failed to deliver any updated form to me, element two fails. The day I received the termination letter I submitted a written dispute immediately a person who attends to abandon a position does not fight for it the same day element three fails when all three elements of charge fail the charge fails itself. This termination has no legal foundation. Consider the logic of it this job had accommodated me in parts for medical reasons that under hipaa I am not required to disclose and I will not. I had a schedule built around my daughters, my daughters, my wife's demanding work hours, flexible leave and fmla. What reasonable person walks away from a job built around his family's needs, his medical accommodation and federal leave protection? It makes no sense because it did not happen. The city MAY point to a leave of absence of 8.5 hours across two evaluation periods. Exhibit seven rionda himself recorded 27 days without pay in a single cycle with a satisfactory evaluation no discipline. Not once has a day went without. Not once has a day without pay been called abandonment until now until after something changed that is selective enforcement. There's a second fatal defect the personal action form that proposed my removal. My removal identifies as more deadly. As the proposing authority. Not a supervisor, not a director, not an appointing authority. This this termination was proposed by someone with no legal right to propose it. It was void the moment she signed it. Every approval that followed was built on a foundation that does not exist. There was a there was already tension before any of this. I had a modified schedule. My schedule was 6 to 2. I was modified from 730 to 3. Built around my combination. other mechanics noticed I personally heard complaints about it more than once including her husband fernando martinez whose husband in the same department questioning why I had that schedule and they did not and they didn't. That resentment existed before I ever said a word about MISS Puig's own conduct. Now why martinez proposed this termination I had personally witnessed her leaving workstation out of authorized break visit to visit her husband at his station in the early morning before designated breaks and again lunch outside of scheduled break time. This was a pattern I made comments to my fellow mechanics and coworkers about exactly what I witnessed her leaving her post on city time to. See her to any of these allegations. This has nothing to do with his job abandonment this is all allegations against an employee and the city is not on notice of any of these facts anything and I'm going to object to any of this coming [Laughter] In. This is an argument as well. Excuse me. Let me. >> let me hear from the council. For him to rule on the objection and to me issue an opinion. Um he's claiming that there is an abuse of authority and this seems to be relevant to that in a sense um that he said that he submitted a leave request form and he's giving the rationale as to why he's giving a rationale as to why he thinks that the leave request form was ignored and he's being terminated. So I think it is relevant. Yes. >> thank you. Overruled. >> those comments spread through the workplace. Her husband who already resented my schedule heard that was being said by his wife and through him it got back to her. What followed was not a coincidence. In the same time frame after her husband told her what I said she a payroll liaison with a system access and zero termination authority initiated my removal. She bypassed every procedural protection a classified employee has turned and approved vacation week into a weapon. She had the motive. She had the access. Her husband told her what I said about her conduct and she made it personal. There is one word for that retaliation. That's the reason why I for the abuse of power on JUNE 9th I came I didn't want to state that JUNE 9th because it would have ruined the integrity of my case. A favorable ruling is not enough. If I return, I return to a department where a payroll liaison can violate city time policy without consequence and use administrative access to end an employee's livelihood for speaking honestly, no classified employees should have to choose between his rights and his job. Finally I subpoenaed three witnesses. I have no need to cross-examine them. Their own emails already contradict each other on the record. The ladies and gentlemen from the board you have that there on the exhibit. If the board has any questions for them, ask directly. I am asking the board to render a decision that reflects on what the record demands. Thank you city. Oh. >> I'm one issue. Do you agree to his exhibits? Can they be entered? What are we doing on that? Um just make sure. yes they are here. No no I'm going to start I'm going to do the exhibit. My duplicates of my own exhibits. Yeah. >> so do you object to them? I have no objection. All right so. I've seen everything. For the record the employees exhibits um there's no objection to them so they're all coming in exhibit one through seven. Okay. >> noted. So employees uh employees exhibits there's no objection to them. I'll ask the employee do you have any objections to the city's exhibits that they're proffering? I just noticed one about another employee named anthony irizarry. That was a no call no show that he abandoned his job but he never intended to even fight for his job back. That's the last exhibit which it should be which I never had a copy of that. Are you going to object to the exhibit as a question or you don't care? >> no, I don't care. [Laughter] Okay then there's no objection. There's no objection. No objection exhibits no. Okay now so now with that city. Yes. >> good morning everyone. This is a very simple case. It's a no call no show which means no notice, no job. There's no excuse here. MR. Davila requested 40 hours vacation and instead he was approved eight hours vacation. Just because you request 40 hours does not mean that it's approved. He was only approved eight hours and he was also told of this explicitly three specific times. And you're going to hear the testimony today from the witnesses that are present. The three times that he was told this was once by his direct supervisor and twice by the payroll liaison. Common sense tells you that if you don't have the time approved you have to come back to work. And MR. Davila failed to come back to work. He obviously had no intention of returning to work. What reasonable person doesn't show up for work after they've been told multiple times that they don't have approved vacation? Objection. >> it's very clear. I was never once verbally told and I had no written revocation to return no email, no phone call, no text message. Thank you. Again the evidence will show that MR. Davila was told multiple times that his vacation was approved only for eight hours. That was the only time that he could take. And there's also an exhibit that also shows that from the city now it's the city's position that article 17 of the collective bargaining agreement to which MR. Davila was a union member applies in this case specifically 17.1 subsection three abandonment of position an employee absent for a period of three work days without notification of valid reason to the city and who has no legitimate reason for not notifying the city of his or her absence MAY be considered as having resigned, it's clear MR. Davila was absent from work for more than three days four days specifically never called and never told anyone that he wasn't going to show up to work. I'm sorry. Excuse me, can you tell us which exhibit is the one that shows that MR. Davila was informed that his vacation was denied? Um. >> there is. Let me see. So exhibit number 12 is the original request for leave that MR. Davila submitted. Now if you notice this exhibit is only signed by MR. Davila and his direct supervisor. This hasn't gone up the chain of command and I'll explain all of that through our witnesses. And then exhibit 14 is the final request for leave that is the documented one city documents and records official records that show only eight hours were approved. Objection. >> if you look at the bottom it says 8.5 hours but where the two boxes say approved or disapproved none were checked. Again the exhibit speaks for itself and I also have a witness two witnesses that will testify to the verbal notification that they gave MR. Davila regarding his approved eight hours of vacation. >> all right. We'll just go ahead and overrule everybody will look at the exhibit and we'll hear from the witness so it'll be clear. And if I MAY as well um further it's the city's position that article 17 was also violated because section five also discusses unexcused failure to return to work after the expiration of a formal leave of absence. An employee who fails to return from a formal leave of absence will be considered as having resigned again. He was approved eight hours did not show up for work for the rest of the week. He's he has been resigned. Objection. >> then can I just want to finish my opening statement? Yeah. >> there'll be. No um well job abandonment does require intent and as soon as my director jennifer ramirez sent me an email I responded within ten minutes time. What authority do you have to say that job abandonment requires intent? That's that's the definition of job abandonment. From where. Google it says anywhere you can look it up. Okay. >> uh let's overrule let's let her finish the opening statement and then we'll get into the discussion with the witnesses further. It's the city's position that civil service rule 14 has also been violated. And if the board looks at subsection b um MR. Davila it is clear and it will come out through all of the testimony that you will hear today and all the evidence that's going to be presented that he is guilty of misuse of sick leave privilege or excessive tardiness or absenteeism without good cause as well as subsection q which is has been absent from duty without leave or has failed to report for work after the leave of absence has expired or after the said leave of absence has been disapproved or revoked or canceled. So again ladies and gentlemen, this is a very simple case. MR. Davila was approved eight hours of vacation. He decided he wanted to take the rest of the week. Um and it's the city's position that he has effectively resigned from his position. He never called never notified anyone that he was not going to be showing up for work. Thank you. Ladies and gentlemen of the board I just want to say um it I don't need to give a call to anybody in the department if I was on an approved leave signed by my direct supervisor which 8 P.M. 287 clearly states that approval comes from your direct supervisor or your director. And not once did my director jennifer ramirez refuse my vacation and neither did my supervisor robert rionda, which is in the exhibits. Wonderful. >> okay, so we have opening statements in so I guess we'll proceed forward with the hearing. Um so uh, would you like to call your first witness? Yes, I want to call. And he's going to give his testimony. Good morning. Good morning. Can you please state your name? My name is. I live in the city of miami. I'm a former employee of the usa department recently terminated. Okay, wonderful. Um, can you please raise your right hand? >> yes, sir. Uh, do you swear to tell the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth so help you GOD? Wonderful. Let's move forward with the first witness, MR. David. Sir, you have to ask him questions. Yeah. If you want, you can take this podium or whichever one you're more comfortable in and then he can take the other so you can ask him the questions on the record. Well basically I didn't have any questions. I just wanted him to speak on the exact same things that we had going on because not only I have been targeted but he as well by the same person martinez puig. Okay. >> you can't get in evidence that way. You have to ask him. Questions in order to follow the the procedure of the way it works you would have to have like a it's called ask answered. So you would ask him a question like you know you would have to ask him questions kind of uh where you want to get your point across. Okay. >> well basically this would be just for the JUNE 9th. Uh, the only question I have for you as well do you believe that martinez puig hr fully liaison does she abuse her power.? >> totally not only with him but with me. MR. Davila if you could just stand on this one, ask him the questions. And so it comes out on the record, both of you so we can hear both of you. And you both need to speak into the mic so that we can get a record record. >> excuse me guys, I'm not a lawyer. I'm a I'm a heavy equipment mechanic helper so I'm trying to do my best. Got it. Well basically I think the only question I have for you sir is have you undergone the same exact abuse of power as well as gsa? Can you please state that and can you please state the person that does that as well. Please in our department is a total abuse of power violates every kind of policy there from the city. The city doesn't even know about what's really going on in that shop with that lady. Uh, if you want me to talk about the list, I could talk about the list if you allow me to. I have and I have also, um one more question was I right or wrong with this? Puig walks up and down the shop as she pleases with without the authority of anyone she just does as she pleases in the shop. She's walking all over the place like she was that director actually with her husband next to her. Um there's some kind of a big situation there in the shop uh, husband and wife in the same department, you know, and hearing what people say and all kinds of stuff going on there if you let me allow me to talk about the list, I will tell you about what's really going on with the list. And I got one more question did you know I was going on vacation from JULY 7th to the 11th? You told me you were because you asked me where I was going to go on vacation. I'm staying home and then you told me that you were, you know, had approved 40 hours of vacation and you were going to go with your family on vacation. >> thank you. Any any other questions? No, sir. City. MR. Chapelton, you recently stated that you were a former employee of the city of miami, correct? Yes. >> and you worked in the gsa department just like MR. Davila. Correct. >> as an automotive mechanic, yes. But you were in the light fleet department if division. >> I was in the light fleet light fleet, which is a cars and he worked in the fleet which is trucks. Right. >> and they're not in the same department in the same division. Right. We are in the same garage, same shop. But it's a different division. You report to a different supervisor or reported to a different supervisor than MR. Davila. Yes. >> under the same director and under the same liaison, MRS. Puy. But different direct supervisors, correct? Yes. >> were you ever MR. Davila direct supervisor? If I was his supervisor. Were you ever his direct supervisor? >> no no no no. So you never had to evaluate his performance as an employee, right? No, I never did. You never you never had to approve any of his requests for leave, right? No, no, I have no authority to do that. That's not my position. So today you are just stating that MR. Davila told you that he was approved for 40 hours and he was going to go on vacation and this is what you believed because he told you, right? What I'm saying is that when we have a free time like lunch time and all that that we talk together and all that, you know, he says, hey, what are you doing for vacation? The holidays uh, JULY you know, 4th of JULY and all that said no, I'm I'm staying home, you know, with my family says I got approved to go on vacation a week. Because that's what he told you, right? Yes. >> okay. >> now um MR. Chapelton you also you were terminated recently from the city, correct? I was. What you were terminated from the city? Yes. Correct. Yes. >> and you have a pending hearing? >> I do. Have this board that will happen sometime this year. >> yes I do have a sometime in the future. Yes. Okay. >> um now wasn't there a workplace violence investigation that was done against you by the human resources department here in the city? Am I allowed to talk about the list? This a yes or no answer? That was uh that's why I want to talk about the list. So we come. >> to I'm just asking you whether you were investigated for workplace violence in the city of miami. >> I was investigated but I never committed any kind of violence. And you were substantiated for distributing any kind of disruptive behavior in violation of the a p m of workplace violence. Correct. So whistleblower okay. Sir, that's not my question. >> no, the question is that as a whistleblower I have complained to my supervisors and even to my director about what really is going on in the shop. That's why I said do you allow me to talk about the list? So the panel here the board will know what really is going on in our shop. And I'm sure you're going to be able to go into all of that at your specific hearing. I'm just here to