Home -> Law Blog Directory -> Labor & Employment Law Blogs -> New York Public Personnel Law
(866) 635-2689 for Personal Injury or (866) 635-9402 for Criminal Defense
Find a Local Lawyer
Divorce (866) 635-6190
Personal Injury (866) 635-2689
Criminal Defense (866) 635-9402
Labor & Employment Law
: New York Public Personnel LawMeans used to place candidates with tied scores on eligible list may impact on seniority for the purposes of layoff
Fiffe v Cohoes Civil Service Comm., 262 AD2d 762, Motion for leave to appeal denied, 93 NY2d 819
Thomas Fiffe was one of seven candidates appointed to firefighter positions in Cohoes, all effective July 25, 1994. He was one of four candidates who had an examination score of 85 and was ranked fifth on the eligible list. But the Cohoes Civil Service Commission later revised this ranking and placed Fiffe seventh on the list. After losing his job in a layoff, Fiffe claimed this change was arbitrary and capricious, and that he had greater seniority than retained employees. The Appellate Division found in favor of the Commission, sustaining its action revising the list as rational and declined to disturb it.
The Commission claimed its original ranking was in error. It explained that at the time Fiffe applied for the examination, its seniority policy for civil service purposes differentiated applicants with the same examination score by ranking the applicants according to the date of receipt of each application and fee. As the result of an error, said the Commission, when the original eligibility list was issued, the candidates with tie scores were randomly placed on the list as among themselves rather than in the order of their application/fee date. In January 1997 -- 11 months before the layoff -- the Commission revised the eligible list ?to reflect the correct date of application in accordance with its established policy.?
Fiffe contending that the issuance of a revised eligible list, and the resulting change in his rank and seniority, was arbitrary and capricious. He asked the court to change the date of his application to April 1, 1993. This, of course, would give him greater seniority for the purposes of layoff.
Fiffe argued that the April 1 date should be used because that was the date on which he had originally submitted his application for examination. His application was initially rejected by the Commission because of Fiffe?s date of birth but it was subsequently accepted and processed. The Commission used the later date rather than April 1, when determining his rank on the eligible list.
The Appellate Division sustained the Commission?s action, reflecting the fact that a local civil service commission can use any rational method of ranking to break scoring ties on eligible lists, as long as it is consistent in applying its rule.
============================================
If you are interested in learning more about layoff procedures involving employees in the public service in New York State please click here: http://nylayoff.blogspot.com/
============================================
.
Full post as published by New York Public Personnel Law on October 20, 2010 (boomark / email).
DC Madame Phone List
Telephone Records of Deborah Jeane Palfrey's Escort Service (Pamela Martin and Associates)
Mirrors
Recalled Due to Impact and Laceration Hazards
Bush Administration
class action settlement ensures Medicaid beneficiaries can continue to purchase prescription drugs at minimum cost when they become eligible for Medicare.
$5.4 Million Quebec Breast Cancer Wait List Class Action Settlement Approved
$5.4 Million Quebec Breast Cancer Class Action Settlement Approved

ELECTION REFLECTIONS: The "Withdrawn" Candidate Impact on the Primary
New York Governor David Paterson Rejects All-Male Judicial Appointment List of Candidates
Law Firms, Compensation Cuts, and Public Interest Deferrals...







