Because relator's positions were eliminated due to good-faith budget cutbacks by respondent City of Champlin, his demotion to another position did not violate the act. We affirm the commissioner's decision. We review de novo relator's claim that the commissioner misapplied the law. Relator does not challenge the commissioner's finding that the city acted in good faith when it abolished his positions as part of its budget cutbacks. Instead, relator argues that the good-faith exception does not apply because he was demoted, not removed.
Demotion can violate the statute when it is the functional equivalent of removal from a job.
Here, however, there is no question that relator's previous positions were eliminated and those acts of removal were protected by the good-faith exception. The fact that the city was able to place relator in another position when it was forced to eliminate his previous positions is not actionable under the statute. To hold otherwise would encourage public employers to dismiss veterans from employment instead of encouraging employers to retain veterans as employees. Such a result would be contrary to the purpose of the Veteran's Preference Act. Return to Vol.