Hart v. Landis

California Court of Appeal Apr 6, 1951 No. Civ. 14405Published

Before: Dooling

AI Brief

AI-generated · verify before citing

Holding. The court held that the Public Utilities Commission did not abuse its discretion by crediting time served under limited tenure appointments toward seniority for the purpose of choosing runs, as the city charter contains no provision restricting such administrative decisions.

Issues

Whether the city charter requires that priority of choice for runs and vacations be based exclusively on seniority as a regular civil service employee.
Whether the Public Utilities Commission abused its discretion by counting limited tenure service toward seniority for run-choice priority.

Disposition. affirmed

Quotations verified verbatim against the opinion

“Nowhere does the charter contain any provision giving municipal railway employees a choice of barns, runs or vacations based on seniority of service as civil service employees.”

“In the absence of a controlling charter provision to the contrary the basis of choice of runs, etc., is an administrative problem and we cannot find an abuse of discretion”

DOOLING, J.—

During the late war a section was added to the charter of the city and county of San Francisco numbered 145.1 and reading in part as follows:

“When in time of war . . . eligibles are not available for appointment from registers established through the regular examination procedure . . . the civil service commission may qualify applicants for wartime appointments to entrance positions through informal and non-competitive tests. . . .

[285]

Appointments made under the provisions of this section shall be designated ‘limited tenure appointments’ and may continue only until registers of eligibles are established through the regular examination procedure. . . . Persons serving under limited tenure appointments . . . shall by reason of such service acquire no right or preference to permanent civil service status . . . which is conferred on persons completing probationary appointments made from lists of eligibles established through the regular examination procedures. ...” (Stats. 1943, p. 3132.)

Pursuant to the authority conferred by this section many persons were given limited tenure appointments as motormen, conductors and bus operators in the San Francisco municipal railroad system. Thereafter the San Francisco Civil Service Commission held a series of regular civil service examinations for these positions and those holding limited tenure appointments were superseded in their positions by the eligibles on the registers resulting from these examinations. Many of the eligibles on these registers were persons already holding limited tenure appointments and the practice in such cases was to give each such eligible when his name was reached a regular probationary appointment to the same position which he was then occupying under a limited tenure appointment. This resulted in actual continuity of service, although with a change in status commencing with each such person’s appointment from the regular civil service register.

It is the practice established by rule of the San Francisco Public Utilities Commission to give to the men holding positions as conductors, motormen and bus drivers a priority in the choice of carbarns, runs and vacation periods based upon length of service. Where persons holding limited tenure appointments were appointed from regular registers “to succeed themselves” in the same positions the public utilities commission determined to count the period of their service under limited tenure appointments in fixing the total length of their service for the purpose of determining this priority of choice.

Hart v. Landis

AI Brief

More from California Court of Appeal

Related research

AI Brief