Fitness for Duty evaluations

Recently, "fitness for duty" evaluations have become popular at the McHenry County Sheriff's Department.

There are occasional needs for an employer to determine whether an employee - any employee - is fit for duty, and there should be standards for such a determination.

The sheriff lost in one deal that has been dragging for years. The deputy is back at work, after the sheriff lost in court on at least two levels (circuit and appellate), but the sheriff has been holding up on payment of back wages - holding up for 11 months! Cal Skinner, on McHenry County Blog (www.mchenrycountyblog.com/) on February 11, reported that the Sheriff's Department's legal bills in that case, after the Appellate Court decision, have now reached $14,000.

When the Sheriff's Department orders a "fitness for duty" evaluation for a deputy, is it ordering 1) a fair evaluation to determine whether the deputy is fit for duty or 2) an evaluation designed to find that the deputy is not fit for duty? Which should it order? Which does it order?

What's the difference?

Let's say you want to get rid of an employee; let's say that deputy says he knows some things that some believe would better be kept under the carpet. And then let's say that deputy has decided to lift the edge of the carpet and let some of those things be known.

What would be an appropriate relationship between the command personnel of the Sheriff's Department and the psychologist who is to do the evaluation?

Should the Sheriff's Department say it is referring him to a psychiatrist (if the evaluator is, in fact, a psychologist) and try to create an early and negative impression in the public's mind?

Should the Sheriff be able to pick a "friendly" psychologist? What do I mean by "friendly"? Someone who might just give you the answers that you want.

You've heard about arbitrators who rule against the people who hire them (as in bank credit card disputes)? It's called "becoming unemployed"!

Should the Sheriff and the deputy's lawyer agree on a "fair" evaluator?

And then, once the "fair evaluator" is selected, what contact should there be between the Sheriff's Department and that evaluator? Should there be any contact? In order for the evaluator to be able to make a fair determination of a deputy's fitness-for-duty, should the evaluator remain impartial?

Does anyone know whether Deputy Milliman has gone for his evaluation yet?