Clearly, CSR 2-17 does not permit any such automatic restoration. This demonstrates that the commission knows how to write a rule granting an automatic satisfactory rating if the appointing authority fails to issue a timely service rating. Satisfactory standing can only be restored by the satisfactory performance of the employee. The March amendments were drafted to reflect the Commission s ruling. MAGE urged the Commission to reject its holding in Collins and adopt the principles of automatic restoration of satisfactory standing and automatic nullification of prior unsatisfactory ratings.
Staff proposes an amendment that adopts a middle ground.
First, the staff proposal adopts the MAGE request that, if the appointing authority fails to issue a timely follow-up rating, the employee will be automatically restored to satisfactory standing. This puts the burden on the appointing authority to issue any follow-up rating within 28 days after the end of the period. Second, the staff proposal clarifies that restoration to satisfactory standing will not nullify any earlier unsatisfactory service ratings. However, there are potential consequences, but only if the employee is materially and unfairly disadvantaged by the failure of the appointing authority to give a timely follow-up rating. In such case, the hearing officer may, in the proper circumstances, restrict the use of some or all of the evidence that materially and unfairly disadvantaged the employee.