Home -> Law Blog Directory -> Labor & Employment Law Blogs -> New York Public Personnel Law

Labor & Employment Law

: New York Public Personnel Law

County Personnel Department refuses to certify the payroll following the appointment of an individual not among the three highest on the eligible list

County Personnel Department refuses to certify the payroll following the appointment of an individual not among the three highest on the eligible list
Matter of Gramando v Putnam County Personnel Dept., 2009 NY Slip Op 00537, Decided on January 27, 2009, Appellate Division, Second Department

The Carmel Central School District appointed Joseph Gramando to the position of Director of School Facilities, Operations, and Transportation.

When Paul Eldridge, Director of the Putnam County Personnel Department, refused to certify the payroll appointing Gramando to the position, Gramando filed a petition in the nature of mandamus seeking a court order compelling Eldridge to certify the payroll appointing him to the position.

Supreme Court, granted Gramando?s petition and directed Eldridge:

1, To certify the payroll with respect to Gramando?s appointment to the position ?until a new civil service examination for the position is administered? and

2. To administer a new civil service examination for that position.

Supreme Court?s order also permanently enjoined instituting civil or criminal proceedings ?against the Carmel Central School District Board of Education in connection with the payment of Gramando?s salary.?**

The case arose when the Carmel CSD appointed Gramando to the position despite the fact that he was not was not among the three individuals "standing highest on such eligible list" as mandated by Section 61(1) of the Civil Service Law. The District?s justification for its action: ?Gramando was one of only two potential candidates on the eligible list who actually satisfied all of the minimum qualifications for appointment to the position to be filled.?

Although the announcement for the examination that was ultimately certified for appointment to the position required that successful candidates possess a Supervisor Asbestos License at the time of appointment, Eldridge subsequently determined that possession of that license at the time of appointment was unnecessary because a successful candidate could obtain such license within a reasonable time after being selected for the appointment.

Finding that Eldridge acted properly and within his authority when he determined that the possession of the license at the time of appointment was not a requirement for appointment to the position and candidates on the eligible list who would not possess the license at the time of his or her appointment could lawfully certify as eligible for appointment, the Appellate Division decided that the District ?acted illegally in appointing Gramando on the basis of his possession of the license, since more than three individuals who were certified for appointment ranked ahead of him on the list.?

Thus, said Appellate Division, the County Personnel Department ?had a rational basis for refusing to certify the payroll as to Gramando ? and its actions in so doing were not arbitrary or capricious,? vacating the lower court?s determination to the contrary in this regard.

Finally, the Appellate Division ruled that ?Under the particular circumstances of this proceeding, the Supreme Court improperly directed the County to administer a new civil service examination.?

** §101 of the Civil Service Law makes it a misdemeanor to pay salary or compensation for which certification has been refused by the State Department of Civil Service or the municipal civil service commission having jurisdiction.

The full text of the decision is posted on the Internet at:
http://www.courts.state.ny.us/reporter/3dseries/2009/2009_00537.htm

Full post as published by New York Public Personnel Law on February 04, 2009 (boomark / email).