George v. New Hampshire Dept. of Educ.

• Decision Date: 17 May 1982
• Docket Number: No. 81-214,81-214
• Citation: 122 N.H. 434,445 A.2d 1131
• Parties: , 4 Ed. Law Rep. 769 Connie GEORGE et al. v. NEW HAMPSHIRE DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION.
• Court: New Hampshire Supreme Court

Page 1131

445 A.2d 1131

122 N.H. 434, 4 Ed. Law Rep. 769

Connie GEORGE et al. v.NEW HAMPSHIRE DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION.

No. 81-214.

Supreme Court of New Hampshire.

May 17, 1982.

Linda L. Murtha, Gen. Counsel, Concord, State Employees' Ass'n of New Hampshire, Inc., on brief, for petitioners.

Gregory H. Smith, Atty. Gen., James E. Townsend, Asst. Atty. Gen., on brief, for the State of New Hampshire.

PER CURIAM.

In the spring and summer of 1980, the seven petitioners, classified State employees teaching at the New Hampshire Technical Institute, sought promotion to a higher instructional level.Dr. David Larrabee, president of the Institute, denied their promotions, in part because of budgetary constraints arising from a "top heavy" professional staff.The petitioners' appeal to the personnel commission was unsuccessful, as is this appeal.

Nothing in our State law or policy prevents a supervisor from denying classified employees promotion to a higher grade because of budgetary restraints.SeePetition of Gorham School Board, 121 N.H. 878, ---, 436 A.2d 74, 76(1981).There is no per se vested property right in such employment.Desmarais v. State Personnel Comm'n, 117 N.H. 582, 588, 378 A.2d 1361, 1364(1977).Furthermore, even ostensibly "qualified" candidates for advancement may be denied promotion if the appointing authority finds certain professional and personal qualities to be lacking.SeeAppeal of Golding, 121 N.H. 1055, ---, 438 A.2d 292, 294(1981).Dr. Larrabee testified that three of the seven promotions were denied on the basis of merit considerations.

...