Quantcast

Ohio Supreme Court hears Cincinnati employee layoff challenge amid pandemic

LEGAL NEWSLINE

Monday, November 25, 2024

Ohio Supreme Court hears Cincinnati employee layoff challenge amid pandemic

State Supreme Court
Webp 3a9m5c6ddxv5elrp3u0b3wi3fndn

Justice Jennifer Brunner | Ohio Supreme Court Website

Two employees of the city of Cincinnati, Jeffrey Harmon and David Beasley, have challenged the city's handling of layoffs during the COVID-19 pandemic. They argue that the city did not adhere to civil service rules when placing them on leave under a temporary emergency leave (TEL) program in 2020.

The TEL program was initiated by the city in response to a decline in municipal revenue caused by the pandemic. Harmon and Beasley, who were put on leave for three months, claim that their seniority and performance should have been considered according to layoff rules. Harmon had been with the city for 29 years, while Beasley had served for 16 years.

Both employees are members of the Cincinnati Organized and Dedicated Employees (CODE), which represents about 1,000 city workers. While they pursued their case with the Cincinnati Civil Service Commission, CODE filed a grievance against the city regarding the TEL program on behalf of all affected unionized employees.

The civil service commission ruled that it could not hold hearings on Harmon and Beasley's claims since TEL was neither a layoff nor a separation under civil service rules. However, this decision was overturned by Hamilton County Common Pleas Court, which found that TEL constituted a layoff and entitled them to a hearing before the commission. The First District Court of Appeals upheld this ruling.

The City has appealed to the Supreme Court of Ohio, arguing that such disputes fall under collective bargaining agreements requiring arbitration rather than appeals through multiple forums. An amicus brief from the Ohio Municipal League supports this view, suggesting that allowing appeals in different places would complicate employment dispute resolutions.

Harmon and Beasley maintain that TEL was indeed a layoff as per their bargaining agreement's provisions allowing appeals to civil service commissions over procedural aspects of layoffs. They also argue that their appeal is distinct from CODE's grievance concerning TEL's legitimacy based on bargaining agreement terms.

The Supreme Court will hear oral arguments for Harmon and Beasley v. City of Cincinnati along with two other cases on January 9th at 9 a.m., streamed live online at supremecourt.ohio.gov and broadcasted on Ohio Channel.

In addition to this case, State v. Maldonado involves reviewing whether an appellate court must first rule en banc after conflicting decisions within its panels. Another case between Phoenix Lighting Group and Genlyte Thomas Group questions if trial courts can exceed directives regarding attorney fees set by higher courts.

ORGANIZATIONS IN THIS STORY

More News