Reed v. Civil Serv. Comm'n

• Decision Date: 17 March 1942
• Docket Number: No. 85.,85.
• Parties: REED et al. v. CIVIL SERVICE COMMISSION et al.
• Court: Michigan Supreme Court

301 Mich. 137

3 N.W.2d 41

REED et al.

v.CIVIL SERVICE COMMISSION et al.

No. 85.

Supreme Court of Michigan.

March 17, 1942.

Suit by Wayne Reed and others against the Civil Service Commission of the State of Michigan and others for an injunction and to determine validity of certain rules adopted by the State Civil Service Commission. From an order denying a motion to dismiss the bill of complaint, the defendants appeal in the nature of certiorari.

Case remanded with directions to enter decree dismissing bill of complaint.

CHANDLER, C. J., and BUSHNELL, J., dissenting in part.Appeal from Circuit Court, Wayne County, in Chancery; Homer Ferguson, judge.

Before the Entire Bench, except WIEST, J.

Herbert J. Rushton, Atty. Gen., Edmund E. Shepherd, Sol. Gen., Robert H. Dunn, Legal Adviser to Civil Service Commission, and Asst. Atty. Gen., and Daniel J. O'Hara, Asst. Atty. Gen., for appellants.

Voorhies, Long, Ryan & McNair, of Detroit (R. Gerveys Grylls and Wm. John Spicer, both of Detroit, of counsel), for appellees.

George Meader, of Ann Arbor (James A. Kennedy, of Detroit, of counsel), for Michigan Merit System Assn., amicus curiae.

BOYLES, Justice.

Plaintiffs herein have filed a bill of complaint in the circuit court for Wayne county, in chancery, on behalf of themselves and approximately 2,700 other State employees, to test the validity of certain rules adopted by the State civil service commission. Defendants' motion to dismiss the bill of complaint on certain designated grounds was denied by the circuit court, and this is an appeal in the nature of certiorari from the order denying the motion. Under these circumstances, well-pleaded allegations in the bill of complaint must be taken as ture.

The bill of complaint alleges that the plaintiffs are citizens of this State, residents of Wayne county, employees of the State at the present time as well as prior to January 1, 1941, and that plaintiffs represent 2,785 other State employees in a similar status who have a common interest with plaintiffs; that the defendant civil service commission is a duly constituted body provided for by an amendment to the State Constitution, and that the individual defendants are members of or the personnel director of said commission. The bill alleges that plaintiffs and the employees they represent were given civil service status by virtue of their being in State employment on January 1, 1941, under the express terms of the civil service amendment; that the commission has violated the provisions of the amendment, exceeded the powers therein conferred upon it and discriminated against the plaintiffs and others in a similar situation by promulgating rules II B and II C; that in pursuance of rule II C an attempt is being made to compel plaintiffs and those whom they represent to pass competitive examinations in order to attain the same permanent civil service status accorded approximately 14,000 other State employees under rule II B, and thus unreasonably and arbitrarily to divide State employees into differing civil service status to the unjust detriment of plaintiffs' employment. The bill alleges that a great majority of State employees were given permanent civil service status under rule II B by virtue of ‘qualifying examinations' under previous legislative and commission acts, while plaintiffs and those they represent are compelled by rule II C to take open competitive examinations with all candidates for State employment who were not State employees on January 1, 1941. Plaintiffs allege that under this system they will be required to pass these competitive examinations among the three highest in order to attain a civil service status comparable to the permanent status grantedby the commission to approximately 14,000 other State employees by virtue of rule II B. The bill alleges there is no reasonable justification for the commission's attempted classification of State employees in that manner, that this discrimination is contrary to the mandate of the amendment and a violation of its provisions. The bill further charges that this method of classification violates the amendment wherein it provides that no removals from or demotions in the State civil service shall be made for partisan, racial, or religious considerations, that it is a political subterfuge to blanket in to civil service a large number of State employees for political considerations and, for a similar reason, to militate against plaintiffs' employment. Plaintiffs ask that the defendants be enjoined from taking any action based upon such a civil service examination as required by rule II C, and from disturbing the status of plaintiffs as State employees.

A temporary injunction was granted by the court below restraining the commission from requiring any examination of plaintiffs or the members of the class represented by them, and from discharging the plaintiffs or preventing them from receiving compensation as State employees pending further order of the court. Leave to appeal from an order denying the motion to dismiss the bill of complaint was granted by this court and the injunction was modified by this court to the extent of allowing the commission to continue to hold examinations and classify employees, but restraining the commission from discharging plaintiffs or the individuals included in the class represented by them until further order.

The amendment under consideration (Michigan Constitution [1908], art. 6, § 22, effective January 1, 1941) is as follows:

‘The state civil service shall consist of all positions in the state service except those filled by popular election, heads of departments, members of boards and commissions, employees of courts of record, of the legislature, of the higher educational institutions recognized by the state constitution, all persons in the military and naval forces of the state, and not to exceed two other exempt positions for each elected administrative officer, and each department, board and commission.

‘There is hereby created a non-salaried civil service commission to consist of four persons, not more than two of whom shall be members of the same political party, appointed by the governor for eight-year, overlapping terms, the four original appointments to be for two, four, six and eight years respectively. This commission shall supersede all existing state personnel agencies and succeed to their appropriations, records, supplies, equipment, and other property.

‘The commission shall classify all positions in the state civil service according to their respective duties and responsibilities, fix rates of compensation for all classes of positions, approve or disapprove disbursements for all personal services, determine by competitive performance exclusively on the basis of merit, efficiency and fitness the qualifications of all candidates for positions in the state civil service, make rules and regulations covering all personnel transactions, and regulate all conditions of employment in the state civil service. No person shall be appointed to or promoted in the state civil service who has not been certified as so qualified for such appointment or promotion by the commission. No removals from or demotions in the state civil service shall be made for partisan, racial, or religious considerations.

‘The administration of the commission's powers shall be vested in a state personnel director who shall be a member of the state civil service and who shall be responsible to and selected by the commission after open competitive examination.

‘To enable the commission to execute these powers, the legislature shall appropriate for the six months' period ending June 30, 1941, a sum not less than one-half of one per cent, and for each and every subsequent fiscal year, a sum not less than one per cent, of the aggregate annual payroll of the state service for the preceding fiscal year as certified to by the Commission.

‘After August 1, 1941, no payment for personal services shall be made or authorized until the provisions of this amendment have been complied with in every particular. Violation of any of the provisions hereof may be restrained or observance compelled by injunctive or mandamus proceedings brought by any citizen of the state.

‘This amendment shall take effect on the first day of January following the approval thereof.’

Some time after its appointment and after assuming the duties of office, the civil service commission adopted rule II purporting to classify all employees of the State (except those exempted by the amendment) who held employment on January 1, 1941, when the amendment went into effect, and to define their status in State civil service. This rule is as follows:

‘II. Positions in State Civil Service on January 1st, 1941.

‘A. Definition. Persons holding positions in the State civil service on January 1st, 1941, are those who on that date or on the day following were on the State payroll as regular employees receiving pay therefor, including those on leave of absence and those engaged in intermittent or seasonal work.

‘B. Persons Granted Permanent Status. Every person who on January 1st, 1941, was legally occupying either a classified or unclassified position placed in the State civil service by the amendment to the Constitution, and who had theretofore taken either a qualifying or competitive examination conducted by the State civil service commission, and obtained a passing grade therein and had acquired status in that position, or who had been included in such service under the merit system maintained by the Michigan unemployment compensation commission, the Michigan State police, or the State conservation department, shall be entitled to continue to occupy such position without further examination or certification for such employment and shall become subject to the provisions of these rules.

‘C. Persons Granted Temporary Status. Every other person who on January 1st, 1941, was legally occupying...