Employee has the burden of showing the abolishment of his or her position was not made in good faith

Employee has the burden of showing the abolishment of his or her position was not made in good faith
Belvey v Tioga County, 257 AD2d 967

In January 1998 the Tioga County legislature abolished its position of Director of Data Processing and, implementing recommendations by both a private consultant and the Governor’s Task Force on Information Resource Management regarding future data processing needs for the county, created a new position -- Director, Division of Information Technology and Communication Services.

Richard J. Belvey, the then Director of Data Processing was terminated when that position was abolished. Efforts to find Belvey alternative employment with the County were unsuccessful. He sued, seeking reinstatement to either his former position or the new position or appointment to a similar one within Tioga County’s public service.

Belvey alleged that characterizing the abolition of his position as being undertaken for the purpose of economy or efficiency was a “subterfuge to avoid the statutory protection afforded to civil servants [by Civil Service Law Section 75].”

The Appellate Division disagreed, and dismissed his appeal. The court noted that the record demonstrated that the county had undertaken a needed expansion of its computer operations and required an individual “with qualifications far greater than that previously required.”

The decision also stated that the new position was in the noncompetitive class and required either a master’s degree in computer science and three years of experience or a bachelor’s degree and five years of experience. Presumably Belvey could not meet either of these requirements of training and experience.

The Appellate Division held that the county met its burden of showing that the former director of data processing position was abolished for economic or efficiency reasons. Accordingly, the burden shifted to Belvey to demonstrate that the county did not act in good faith or that his termination was based upon his job performance.

Belvey, said the court, failed to show that there the county’s decision was arbitrary or capricious by demonstrating that there were no bona fide reasons for the elimination of his position or that someone was hired to replace him as Director of Data Processing. Thus Belvey did not demonstrate that the protections afforded by Civil Service Law Section 75 were triggered when his position was abolished and he was laid off [Section 80 of the Civil Service Law].

============================================
If you are interested in learning more about layoff procedures involving employees in the public service in New York State please click here: http://nylayoff.blogspot.com/ ============================================
NYPPL