Friday, October 30, 2009

Demotion Without Reduction in Pay is Not Appealable

In Olson v. Utah Department of Health, the Utah Court of Appeals ruled that the Career Service Review Board (CSRB), established for review of certain disciplinary actions taken against state employees, did not have jurisdiction over the appeal of a disciplinary transfer of an employee. It ruled this way even though when originally transferred the woman had also received a cut in pay. Because her employer had determined to rescind the cut in pay, the CSRB determined that it no longer had jurisdiction after her original wage was restored. The Utah Court of Appeals agreed that for the CSRB to have jurisdiction over such disciplinary transfers there must be a reduction in pay as well.

Tuesday, October 20, 2009

Salt Lake City Considering Proposed New Ordinance Prohibiting Discrimination on the Basis of Sexual Orientation and Gender Identity

Salt Lake City Mayor, Ralph Becker, has proposed that the Salt Lake City Council consider the adoption of a new ordinance that would prohibit discrimination by any Salt Lake City employer who employs more than 15 employee from discriminating against an employee because of his or her sexual orientation or gender identity. The City Council will be briefed on the proposed new ordinance by the mayor's office in the City Council's Work Session today , October 20, 2009, at 3:00 p.m. The city council has issued a fact sheet explaining how any individual may submit comments. The agenda for the meeting is also attached.

Monday, October 19, 2009

Road Workers Not Discriminated Against Because of Political Affiliation

In Trujillo v. Huerfano County Board, the Tenth Circuit Court of Appeals---the federal court having jurisdiction over Utah---ruled that two former road supervisors who had publicly supported a Democratic candidate for county commissioner had not been discriminated against when they were disciplined by a new Road Supervisor who had been installed shortly after the Republican county commissioner was sworn in. The Court ruled that the temporal proximity of the discipline was insufficient to establish political retaliation when other substantial evidence existed that showed the two other county commissioners---both Democrats---supported the changes that took place before the discipline occurred.