New York Civil Service Appeals Lawyer
After the Revolution, New York became a state and George Clinton was elected its first Governor in 1777. In 1829, President Andrew Jackson announced a policy he called “rotation in office,” but which later came to be known as the “spoils system.” George Plunkitt, a local leader of New York City’s Democratic Party, defended the spoils system. “You can’t keep an organization together without patronage,” he declared. “Men ain’t in politics for nothin’. They want to get somethin’ out of it.”
The “spoils system” where “officials” and “employees” were appointed to carry on the functions of the new government, of course those appointments were made by the “party in power” such appointments were made as political paybacks to people who supported the “party in power.” The appointments had nothing to do with being “qualified.”
In 1881, after President James A. Garfield was assassinated by Charles J. Guiteau that led to a public outcry for reform and an end to the “spoils system.” In 1883, the Pendleton Act was enacted, establishing a federal merit-based system of selecting government officials and supervising their work. In 1884, New York became the first state to adopt a merit-based civil service system for state workers. In 1894, New York inserted the “merit and fitness” requirement into the Constitution.
New York Civil Service Law is largely governed by two principles – the state’s Constitution’s “merit and fitness” requirements and a civil servant’s “property interest” in his/her continued employment. Operating on these two principles, civil service job offers and promotions must be based upon “merit” and permanent civil service employment may not be terminated without a hearing. The Sanders Firm, P.C., is available to advise and represent employees or applicants alleging violations of the civil service law.
New York City Civil Service Commission
The Civil Service Commission (“CSC”) is an independent, “quasi-judicial” agency authorized pursuant to Chapter 35, §813 of the New York City Charter, that may hear and decide appeals of agency determinations pursuant to §50 and §76 of the New York State Civil Service Law. The CSC may also hear and decide appeals of agency determinations pursuant to §72 of the New York State Civil Service Law when so designated by the Department of Citywide Administrative Services (“DCAS”).
The CSC hears and decides appeals of three types of agency determinations: (1) §50 Candidate Disqualifications (2) §76 Adverse Discipline and (3) §72 Involuntary Medical Leave aka Medical Separations
The CSC does not have jurisdiction to hear and decide appeals filed by uniformed NYPD police officers disciplined pursuant to 14-115 of the N.Y.C. Admin. Code. Matter of Montella v. William J. Bratton, 93 N.Y.2d 424 (1999), nor does it have jurisdiction to hear and decide appeals filed by uniformed FDNY firefighters disciplined pursuant to 15-113 of the N.Y.C. Admin. Code. Matter of Thomas Von Essen v. New York City Civil Service Commission, 4 N.Y.3d 220 (2005).
Individuals who appeal agency decisions pursuant to §50 and §76 of the Civil Service Law may file their appeals with the CSC. The CSC only hears §72 appeals when so designated by DCAS. The CSC is authorized to hold hearings, examine witnesses, and receive evidence. The CSC reviews the record and makes a determination that is final and binding on the parties. The losing party may appeal adverse CSC decisions by filing an Article 78 with the Supreme Court of the State of New York.
If you feel that you’ve had your civil service rights violated, or would like to have an attorney review your documents to ensure that your rights are protected, contact the New York Civil Service Appeals Lawyer at The Sanders Firm, P.C., 800-371-4835, today.
