# Civil service seniority



## badboys1517 (Jan 1, 2005)

Does anyone know where I can find the law that spells out how civil service seniority is established. I may be wrong, but I thought that seniority was established by: 

1. Civil service score and date of hire.

2. If the score and hiring date are the same, then academy standing should be deciding factor. Cannot find this anywhere.

Need this info for grievance, thanks.


----------



## copchika911 (Oct 26, 2004)

CHAPTER 31. CIVIL SERVICE. 

Chapter 31: Section 33. Seniority; computing length of service.

Section 33. For the purposes of this chapter, seniority of a civil service employee shall mean his ranking based on length of service, computed as provided in this section. Length of service shall be computed from the first date of full-time employment as a permanent employee, including the required probationary period, in the departmental unit, regardless of title, unless such service has been interrupted by an absence from the payroll of more than six months, in which case length of service shall be computed from the date of restoration to the payroll; but upon continuous service following such an absence for a period of twice the length of the absence, length of service shall be computed from the date obtained by adding the period of such absence from the payroll to the date of original employment; provided, however, that the continuity of service of such employee shall be deemed not to have been interrupted if such absence was the result of (1) military service, illness, educational leave, abolition of position or lay-off because of lack of work or money, or (2) injuries received in the performance of duty for which compensation was paid pursuant to chapter one hundred and fifty-two, provided that the employee notifies the appointing authority, in writing, not later than six months after the final payment of compensation aforesaid that he is ready, willing, and able to do his former work and files with said appointing authority a certificate of a registered physician that he is able to perform the duties of his position in an efficient manner, and is restored to the payroll.

If, as a result of a reinstatement made pursuant to section forty-six, a person is restored to employment in a departmental unit other than that in which he formerly held full-time employment as a permanent employee, his length of service shall be computed from the date of his first employment under such reinstatement, but upon continuous service in such unit for three years or twice the length of his absence from the payroll, whichever is greater, his length of service shall be computed as though such earlier employment had been in the departmental unit to which he has been reinstated.

If the employment of such full-time employee is changed through an original or promotional appointment or transfer from one departmental unit of the commonwealth to another under the same appointing authority, or from one departmental unit to another within the same department in a city or town, the length of service of such employee in the unit to which the appointment or transfer is made shall be computed from the date which was used to compute his length of service immediately prior to such appointment or transfer. If the employment of such full-time employee is changed through an original or promotional appointment from one departmental unit of the commonwealth to another not under the same appointing authority, from one departmental unit to another not within the same department in a city or town, from one city or town to another, from a city or town to the commonwealth, or from the commonwealth to a city or town, the length of service of such employee shall be computed from the date of such change of employment, but if the employee completes one year of service in the new employment, from the date which was used to compute the employee's length of service immediately prior to the change of employment.

If the employment of such full-time employee is changed by transfer from one departmental unit of the commonwealth to another not under the same appointing authority, from one departmental unit to another not within the same department in a city or town, from one city or town to another, from a city or town to the commonwealth, or from the commonwealth to a city or town, the length of service of such employee shall be computed in the following manner: (1) if the transfer was made upon the request of the employee, the length of service shall be computed from the date of such transfer, but if the employee completes three years of service in the new employment, from the date which was used to compute the employee's length of service immediately prior to the transfer; (2) if the transfer was not upon the request of the employee, the length of service shall be computed from the date which was used to compute the employee's length of service immediately prior to the transfer. In determining the seniority of a firefighter for the purpose of reduction in rank or reduction in force, his ranking shall be based on his length of service in the fire department in which such reduction is to take place.

The length of service of a permanent employee appointed on less than a full-time basis shall be computed from the date of such appointment, without regard to absences from the payroll which were not voluntary on the part of such employee. Regardless of actual length of service, permanent municipal employees appointed on less than a full-time basis shall, for the purposes of determining seniority, rank below all full-time permanent municipal employees. Permanent state employees appointed on less than a full-time basis shall accrue that portion of the seniority of full-time permanent state employees that their service bears to full-time service.

Any person in such service who has received an appointment from a reemployment list, as set forth in section forty, shall carry forward their seniority as prescribed herein; provided, however, that any lay-offs occurring after a reemployment date shall have such reemployment date as the determining factor in lay-offs by seniority.

Chapter 31: Section 61 Municipal police officers or fire fighters; probationary periods; evaluation

Section 61. Following his original appointment as a permanent full-time police officer or fire fighter in a city, or in a town where the civil service law and rules are applicable to such position, a person shall actually perform the duties of such position on a full-time basis for a probationary period of twelve months before he shall be considered a full-time tenured employee in such position, except as otherwise provided by civil service rule. The administrator, with the approval of the commission, may establish procedures to ensure the evaluation by appointing authorities, prior to the end of such probationary period, of the performance of persons appointed as regular police officers or fire fighters.


----------



## badboys1517 (Jan 1, 2005)

Here is the problem:
2 officers hired the same day with the same civil service score for the same dept. Both officers go to the academy together. Academy standings come out and the 1st officer has a higher class standing, but the 2nd officer is given seniority. Neither officer has veterans preference. How is seniority decided? I am pretty sure that if the the officers where hired at same time with same score, the academy standing should be deciding factor, but I can't find this written anywhere. Hopefully someone out there knows the answer and where to find the info.


----------



## 57ragus (Jan 23, 2004)

Though I cannot quote you chapter and section, but I believe in the situation you describe above, discretion lies solely with the hiring authority.

In my case, I was hired with 15 other individuals and we all had the same civil service score (100). After graduating the academy, the seniority ranking was determined alphabetically. I don't agree with this approach but I was just happy to get hired. If it were up to me, seniority would be based on academy standings.........


----------



## PBC FL Cop (Oct 22, 2003)

I know people have fought the alphabetical system, saying it was discriminating against them because of their last name!! There is no easy answer for this issue.


----------



## Vino5SJ (Dec 25, 2002)

Badboy,

Maybe the other person had a higher "oral board score" than you.


----------

