Opinion ID: 707800
Heading Depth: 2
Heading Rank: 5

Heading: termination of plaintiff's job assignment

Text: 66 The plaintiff's discharge from his position as hospital porter did not violate his constitutional rights. The plaintiff had no protected interest in his job assignment, see Wallace v. Robinson, 940 F.2d 243, 248 (7th Cir.1991), cert. denied, 112 S.Ct. 1563 (1992); nor was he entitled to procedural due process in conjunction with his termination. Id. Illinois does not give every prisoner a right to hold a job, or any particular job.... [N]o statute, regulation, or practice with a force of a regulation curtails the discretion of prison officials to assign a prisoner to any job on whim. Wallace, 940 F.2d at 244-45. It was well within the defendant Cearlock's prerogative to summarily discharge the plaintiff as a result of his encounter with Sanders, or even [as the plaintiff contends], because they simply didn't want him to work there.