DocketNumber: JM-582
Judges: Jim Mattox
Filed Date: 7/2/1986
Status: Precedential
Modified Date: 2/18/2017
THE ATTOR,YEY GENERAL Olp TEXAS Honorable Dale Henna opinion No. al-582 Johnson County Attorney 1st Floor, Courthouse Re: Eligibility of a firefighter Cleburne. Texas 76031 to take a promotional examination under article 1269m, V.T.C.S. Dear Mr. Hanna: You have requested the opinion of this office regarding the interpretation and application of section 14,(A)(3)of article 1269m, V.T.C.S., which is the FIxemen's and Policemen's Civil Service Act. Specifically. you ask whether only firemen in the highest salary step in the classification immediately below a classification with a vacant position are eligible tc take the promotion examination that is required for filling the vacancy, or whether all firemen with at least two years of continuous service in the next lower classification qualify to take the promotional test. The voters of the city of Cleburne. which has e population of approximately 20,000, adapted the provisions of the Firemen's and Policemen's Civil Service Act in 1948. There are five ranks or classifications within the Cleburne Fire Department. namely, "firefighter," which is txe entry level classification, followed by "firefighter engineer," "lieutenant," "captain," and nassistant chief." There is one pa)' grade or salary range for each of those classifications, and en aut:omaticsalary increase based on longevity is granted within the classification. For the rank of firefighter, longevity steps and salary increases occur after 6 months, 12 months, 24 months, and 36 months. Article 1269m provides that all persons in each classification shall be paid the same salary and authorizes longevity pay in addition ':othe same basic salary. See V.T.C.S. art. 1269m, §SA(d). Some of the firemen in the Cleburnexre Department contend that only firemen Ln the firefighter classification who have attained the highest longevity step are eligible to take promotion examinations for positions !;nthe firefighter engineer classification. It is our opinion that all firemen with at least two years continuous service in the classification of firefighter qualify to take e promotion examination for positions in the next higher classification of firefighter engineer. p. 2602 Honorable Dale Henna - Page 2 (JM-582) The original enactment in 1947 of the civil service act for firemen end policemen provided that [nlo person shall be eligible for promotion unless he has served in :suchDepartment for et least two (2) years immediately preceding the date of such promotional examination, in the next lower position to that for which such examination is to be held. . . . Acts 1947, 50th Leg., ch. 325, $14 et 555. As emended in 1949, section 14(A) provided, in pert: A. All promotional examinations shell be open to all policemen end firemen who have held a position for two (2) years or more in the ,classi- fication immediz.tely below in salary of that classification for which the examination is to be held. . . . Acts 1949, 51st Leg., ch. 572, 514(A), at 1116. Subsequently in 1979, the legislature separated 1:hephrase "in salary" from the rest of the sentence with comma so that section 14(A)(3) of article 1269m. V.T.C.S., now reads: In any city having a population of less then 1.500.000, accor(i:lngto the most recent federal census, all promctional examinations shell be open to all firefighixrs who have ever held a con- tinuous position for two (2) years or,more in the classification icm~ediatelybelow, in salary, that classification for which the examination is being held. . . . §14(A), at 3048; Acts 1979, 66th Leg., Acts 1985, 69th Leg., ch. !)l.O, ch. 753, 514(A)(2), at 1861. We conclude that the phrase "in the classification immediately below, in salary. that classification for which the examination is being held" means the classification thet, as determined by the salary range for each classificatjon, is immediately below the classification for which the examination L:Ibeing held. It is our opinion that the legislature intends the words "immediately below, in salary" to be a description of the classLfication, rather than a description of individual firemen within the classification. Interpreting the language in section 14(A)(X) to Include any person holding e position within the classification for at least two years, regardless of whether the person's longevity pay is the highest within the p. 2603 Honorable Dale Hanna - Page,3 (JM-582) classification, is reasonslyle when that language is read in the context of the entire civil.service act. With an exception r;ot applicable to Your inquiry, section 14(D)(5) of article 1269m :!rovidesthat a firefighter is not eligible for promotion unless he bar; served in the~department for at least two years prior to the day of the promotional examination "in the next lower position or the pol;itions specified by the Commission." As previously stated, the act expressly authorizes longevity PaY in =ddition to the same salary paid all persons in each classification. Nowhere does the act prov1i.ethat promotions or promotion examinations are limited to persons in the highest longevity step within the next lower position or classific:a.tion.on the other hand, section 14(B) of article 1269m expressly prclvides,that [e]ach fire fight,ershall be given one (1) point for each year of ;seniorityin his Department, but never to exceed ten (10) points. . . . Section 14(D)(3) of srticlc 1269m states that Itlhe grade which shall be placed on the eligi- bility list for $ach fire fighter applicant shall be computed by adding the fire fighter applicaqt's points for seniority to his grade on the written examination. . . . we are not aware of irny case in which a Texas court considered whether article 1269m limi~:spromotions to persons in the next Lowest classification who are re':eiving the highest longevity pay. Texas courts, however, have stated that firemen's civil service examinations are open to all persons employed for two (2) years in the next lower grade except that a civil s,ervicecommission may extend examinations to members in both the fi::st and second lower grades to provide an adequate number to take an examination, and those courts made no mention Of a requirement tt.ata fireman be in the highest salary step within either classificat:.on. See Stahl v. Cit of Houston,397 S.W.2d 318
(Tex. Civ. App. - Houston 1965, m-08 v. City of Houston, 375 S.W.23 952, 957 (Tex. Civ. App. - Houston 1964, writ ref'd n.r.e.) (commisa:ionmay extend the examination to “members in the second lower posil:;:onin salary, which is Grade 6, Arson Investigator"). Cf. City c'fHouston v. Landrum,448 S.W.2d 816
(Tex. Cl". App. - Houstr[14th Dist.] 1969, writ ref'd n.r.e.) (position of Pipeman and Ladderman is immediately below that of ~Ch&ffer but applicant who had not been c,Lassifiedas Pipeman and Ladderman for two years was refused examination). The provisions of article 1269m relating to promotion examina- tions have been described since 1976 in 22 Texas Practice, Municipal p. 2604 Honorable Dale Henna - Page 4 (JM-582) Law & Practice, where sec::%on 243 states that, "to be eligible for examination the employee nust have been two years in the next lower classification" without suj:pestingadditional requirements or limita- tions. It is our opinion thet if the legisleture had intended only firemen in the highest salary step within a classification to qualify to take e promotion exeminstion, it would have expressly so provided in the stetute. You ask additional questions which we do not enswer, because they are not relevant to our conclusion on the eligibility of firemen to take promotion examinations for positions in higher classifications. SUMMARY Under the Ztremen's and Policemen's Civil Service Act, ert:.cle1269m, V.T.C.S., all firemen with at least twclyears continuous service in the classification inm~ediatelybelow a classification for which a prcmotion examination is held ere eligible to take the promotion examination. LLh Very truly your , . JIM MATTOX Attorney General of Texas JACK HIGHTOWER First Assistant Attorney General MARY KELLER Executive Assistant Attorney General RICK GILPIN Chairmen, Opinion Committee Prepared by Nancy Sutton Assistant Attorney General p. 2605