People ex rel. Redman v. Bd. of Trustees of Univ. of Illinois

• Decision Date: 05 June 1918
• Docket Number: No. 11951.,11951.
• Citation: 283 Ill. 494,119 N.E. 595
• Parties: PEOPLE ex rel. REDMAN v. BOARD OF TRUSTEES OF UNIVERSITY OF ILLINOIS et al.
• Court: Illinois Supreme Court

283 Ill. 494

119 N.E. 595

PEOPLE ex rel. REDMAN

v.BOARD OF TRUSTEES OF UNIVERSITY OF ILLINOIS et al.

No. 11951.

Supreme Court of Illinois.

April 17, 1918.

Rehearing Denied June 5, 1918.

Appeal from Circuit Court, Champaign County; Franklin H. Boggs, Judge.

Petition for mandamus by Charles H. Redman against the Board of Trustees of the University of Illinois and others. From dismissal of the petition, petitioner appeals. Affirmed.Green & Palmer, of Urbana (Oris Barth, of Urbana, of counsel), for appellant.

Edward Harker, of Champaign (Clarence U. Boord, of Chicago, of counsel), for appellees.

CARTER, C. J.

At the September term, 1917, of the circuit court of Champaign county a petition for mandamus was filed on the relation of Charles H. Redman to compel the board of trustees of the University of Illinois to cause to be drawn a pay roll or account containing the name of Redman for five months' salary as a civil service employé doing carpenter work at said University, and to require said board to file said pay roll or account with the state civil service commission; that said commission be required to approve said pay roll and certify thereon that Redman was entitled to said pay, and to file the said certified account or pay roll with the auditor of public accounts, and to present to said auditor itemized vouchers for compensation for the pay of Redman, and that said auditor and the state treasurer be required to draw a warrant and to pay the same to the relator. All the defendants entered their appearance and general demurrers were filed in their behalf. The trial court sustained these demurrers and dismissed the petition. From that order an appeal was perfected to this court.

From the allegations in the petition it appears that in July, 1915, Redman took an examination for the position of carpenter at the University of Illinois in pursuance of the provisions of the state Civil Service Act; that he passed the examination and was placed upon the list of those eligible to the position of carpenter for said University, and was duly certified by the state civil service commission for that position at a salary to be paid by said University of not less than $60 a month; that in September, 1915, he began work under said appointment of the state civil service commission, and by an arrangement with the authorities of said University he was to be paid monthly at the rate of $3.60 per day (40 cents per hour for nine hours a day), with an employment of six days each week; that he continued in such employment until December 27, 1916, when he was informed by his foreman that he was laid off; that he reported thereafter numerous times for work, and requested and offered to go to work, but was refused; that the authorities of the University did not report the attempted lay-off or discharge to the state civil service commission, but about January 15, 1917, reported to said commission that Redman would probably be re-employed in the near future, as it was expected there would be work available of the type which he could handle; that shortly thereafter the University authorities made requisition on the state civil service commission for carpenters, and on February 2d said commission certified two other persons to the University to act in that capacity; that at no time were there any written charges filed to remove or discharge the relator, nor was the commission notified that it was necessary to reduce he number of carpenters at the University under said civil service or the number of the employés to be laid off. The petition further alleges that thereafter the University authorities, after reporting to the commission that they intended to put Redman back to work and after receiving the certification of other persons for employment as carpenters at the University, reported to the commission in March, 1917, that the relator had been laid off because of inefficiency, physical unfitness, and inattention to the instructions of his foreman; that the commission thereupon notified the University authorities to either prefer charges against the relator, or to alter the record made concerning the reason for his lay-off, and this they refused to do, claiming the right to discharge Redman; that in June, 1917, the University authorities notified Redman to report for work on June 28th; that on that date he apperared at his working place and stated that he was ready to go to work, but wanted some understanding about his back pay, and the foreman stated that he would not discuss that question; that the matter was then taken up with the acting comptroller of the University, and Redman was notified that the University was under no obligation whatever to him. The petition further alleges that Redman had received no pay whatever from the time he was laid off on December 27, 1916, to June 28, 1917, and that he was entitled to pay for services as carpenter at the rate at which he was employed, for the time between those two dates. The petition conceded that under section 12 of the state Civil Service Law the University authorities were authorized to suspend Redman for a period not exceeding thirty days, and that therefore he was entitled to pay for five months and not six months, the time he was out of employment.

Special counsel appearing for the State University authorities argue earnestly and at length that the employés of the University are not employés of the state of Illinois under the provisions of the state Civil Service Act. Section 3 of the State Civil Service Act in force the first six months of 1917 provides, among other things, that the state civil service commission shall, within six months after the act goes into effect, classify all offices and places of employment in the state service, except as provided in section 11 of the act, with reference to the duties thereof, for the purpose of establishing grades and for the purpose of fixing and maintaining standards of examinations hereinafter provided for; that such classification shall include all offices and places of employment now in existence or which may hereafter be created in the state service of the state of Illinois, except those expressly exempted from the operation of the act in section 11 thereof. Hurd's Stat. 1916, p. 563. Section 11 of the same act specifically exempts the president, professors, instructors and other teachers in the University of Illinois.

Counsel who appeared for the University, in his oral argument before the court, conceded that the Illinois Legislature had authority to place all the employés of the University of Illinois under civil service, and that the only question was whether the Legislature intended, under the state Civil Service Act, to require the employés of the University to be under civil service. The argument of counsel is to the effect that a large amount of land was granted by the United States government for the benefit of the University in 1862, and that in 1881, and thereafter, appropriations have been made and increased from time to time by the federal government; that they now aggregate approximately $100,000 annually, and are expended by the board of trustees of the University without control or attempted control by the state authorities, this appropriation being controlled by said trustees, and that the question here underconsideration is to be decided upon the basis whether the employés of the University are in state service or in the service of the board of trustees.

This court has decided that although the state has created a body corporate to control the Illinois Industrial University and its property and affairs, yet the state still retains the power of appointing its trustees, and may, through other agents than the trustees, sell and dispose of the property of the institution or amend or repeal the charter, as public policy or the interest of the University may require. Board of Trustees v. Champaign County, 76 Ill. 184. It has also been held that the income provided by the state for the University belongs to the state (Thomas v. Industrial University, 71 Ill 310), and that the University is a public institution of the state (Spalding v. People, 172 Ill. 40, 49 N. E. 993).

It is true, as argued by counsel for the University, that the mere placing of certain employés of the University in the excepted class does not necessarily prove that the Legislature intended to put the other employés under state civil service. In order to obtain the true intent of the Legislature upon this question it is necessary to consider section 3 in connection with section 11 and all the other provisions of the act. In construing a certain provision of a statute the whole act should be considered, since the words and meaning of one part may furnish an explanation of another. Maiss v. Metropolitan Amusement Ass'n, 241 Ill. 177, 89 N. E. 268;People v. Giles, 268 Ill. 406,109 N. E. 14. Reading these two sections together, in connection with the rest of the act, it seems clear that the Legislature considered that the employés of the University were state employés, otherwise there would have been no necessity to place the exception in section 11 as to the teachers and professors. Moreover, section 3 refers specifically to section 11, so that it is absolutely essential to read section 11 in connection with section 3 to understand the intention of the Legislature as to who are to be considered state employés. Reading these sections and the entire act together we cannot escape the conclusion that the Legislature considered the employés of the University as state employés, and to be under the Civil Service Act, except as provided...