Laserfiche WebLink
I of the Santa Ana Police Department as they apply to off-duty employees, except such <br /> 2 representative ill not be required to report for duty for any purpose. Defendants <br /> 3 breached of the MOU by ordering Mr. Serrano to appear for a FFDE and to report to the <br /> 4 police station. <br /> 5 86. Moreover, the Police Department Fitness for Duty policy indicates that its <br /> 6 purpose and scope is directly related to the exercise of peace officers powers, but the <br /> 7 MOU releases Mr. Serrano from any such exercise. Furthermore, the Fitness for Duty <br /> 8 policy governs on-duty conduct, not off-duty. <br /> 9 87. Plaintiff initiated a grievance, but that matter was futile as it was to be <br /> 10 heard by the City Manager that had ordered Serrano not to have contact with her. <br /> 11 Defendants then had Defendant Motsick conduct the grievance hearing even though he <br /> 12 was the one that initiated the FFDE by claiming Serrano's e-mail was threatening. <br /> 13 88. On September 1, 2021, the SAPOA disclosed the results of the Vote of <br /> 14 No Confidence. More than a majority of the members that voted indicated that they had <br /> 15 no confidence in the Chief of Police. That same day Defendant Valentin responded to <br /> 16 the membership vote by targeting Serrano. Defendant Valentin falsely attributed the <br /> 17 SAPOA's actions as Serrano's personal pension dispute and not about the facts giving <br /> 18 rise to the Vote. Defendant Valentin accused Serrano of making false and frivolous <br /> 19 claims, and engaging in crimes and corruption when Defendant Valentin knew these <br /> 20 allegations against Serrano were false. <br /> 21 89. With the grievance over the FFDE pending and unresolved, Defendants <br /> 22 ordered Serrano to appear for the exam and undergo hours of questioning by the <br /> 23 contract doctor. The Defendants did not pay Serrano for his time at the FFDE <br /> 24 examination. <br /> 25 90. On September 14, 2021, Serrano was found to be fit for duty and <br /> 26 removed from administrative leave. After Serrano was found to be fit for duty Defendant <br /> 27 Motsick finally held a grievance meeting and later summarily rejected the grievance. <br /> 28 Finally, even though Plaintiffs raised issues of retaliation and hostile environment <br /> 21 <br /> COMPLAINT <br />