Opinion ID: 2508217
Heading Depth: 1
Heading Rank: 6

Heading: Legislative History of K.S.A. 75-2949f

Text: The Civil Service Act (CSA), K.S.A. 75-2925 et seq., was originally enacted in 1941, and its general purpose is to establish a system of personnel administration that meets the social, economic and program needs of the people of the state of Kansas as these needs now or in the future may be established. K.S.A. 75-2925. This system was intended to allow the State to recruit, select, develop and maintain an effective and responsible work force . . . . K.S.A. 75-2925. It was designed so that all employment decisions shall be made without regard to race, national origin or ancestry, religion, political affiliation, or other nonmerit factors but would be based on merit principles and fitness to perform the work required and shall provide fair and equal opportunity for public service. K.S.A. 75-2925 K.S.A. 75-2949d provides that permanent classified employees may be dismissed because of deficiencies in work performance as set forth in K.S.A. 75-2949e or because of personal conduct detrimental to the state service as set forth in K.S.A. 75-2949f. K.S.A. 75-2949f sets forth a nonexclusive list of the [g]rounds for dismissal, demotion or suspension of a permanent employee for personal conduct detrimental to the state service. In this case, Jones was terminated for violating K.S.A. 75-2949f(a): Gross misconduct or conduct grossly unbecoming a state officer or employee. K.S.A. 75-2949f was not part of the original CSA. Prior to 1978, K.S.A. 75-2949 provided that the appointing authority was authorized to dismiss a permanent classified employee after consideration that the good of the service will be served thereby, and for disciplinary purposes may suspend . . . but no permanent employee in the classified service shall be dismissed for political, religious or racial reasons. K.S.A. 75-2949 (Weeks 1977). In 1978, the legislature enacted K.S.A. 75-2949b, dealing with procedures prior to demotion or suspension, suspension without notice and grounds for disciplinary action, and subsection (c) provided 16 situations in which disciplinary action could be undertaken, including when an employee: (1) Was found guilty of gross misconduct or conduct unbecoming a state officer or employee. L. 1978, ch. 332, sec. 19. The legislature repealed this statute in 1981 and enacted K.S.A. 75-2949f. Senate Bills 416 and 417 were proposed to amend the CSA as it pertained to disciplinary actions before the Board. See L. 1981, chs. 334 and 335. The February 23, 1981, Senate Committee on Federal and State Affairs Minutes indicate that Art Griggs of the Department of Administration presented a request for amendments to the CSA relating to disciplinary actions and appeals to the Board, which again included the [g]ross misconduct or conduct unbecoming a state officer or employee language at issue in this case under K.S.A. 75-2949f(a). In a February 16, 1981, Memorandum to the Federal and State Affairs Committee, Norman Hanson, Director of Personnel Services of the Department of Administration, explained the reasoning for the proposed amendments in relevant part: The sections of the Civil Service Act pertaining to dismissals, suspensions, and demotions of permanent state employees, and appeals to the State Civil Service Board, were extensively revised in 1973. State administrators and state employees have had difficulty understanding these sections of the Civil Service Act. We are proposing amendment of these sections this year, with the principal objective of clarifying the language and, thus, making it easier for state agencies and state employees to know their rights and responsibilities. Minutes, Sen. Comm. on Fed. and State Affairs, February 23, 1981. At the March 24, 1981, Senate Committee on Federal and State Affairs Hearing, Griggs went over S.B. 417 section by section. Section 5 related to the statute at issue in this case, and the typed notes next to a copy of this section state: New Sec. 5 replaces K.S.A. 1980 Supp. 75-2949b. These are the same 16 examples listed in present law of reasons for disciplinary action for personal conduct detrimental to the state service. Some of the examples are reworded. Minutes, Sen. Comm. on Fed. and State Affairs, March 24, 1981; see L. 1981, ch. 334, sec. 5. Nothing in the legislative history explains why the examples were reworded. In 1985, the legislature amended K.S.A. 75-2949f(a) to state: Gross misconduct or conduct grossly unbecoming a state officer or employee. L. 1985, ch. 276, sec. 7(a). The 1985 legislature also added what are now subsections (q) and (r), which allow disciplinary actions for gross carelessness or gross negligence or grossly improper use of state property. L. 1985, ch. 276, sec. 7(q), (r). Once again, the legislative history provides little guidance as to why the term grossly was added to the statute. In a February 6, 1985, Memorandum to the House Ways and Means Committee, Griggs briefly described H.B. 2125, which included the addition of the term grossly to conduct unbecoming a state officer or employee, as modifying several CSA statutes and related personnel statutes. He indicated only that [t]he majority of the changes were suggested by the Division of Personnel Services and constitute minor revisions. Minutes, House Ways and Means Comm., February 11, 1985. Thus, the legislative history provides this court little guidance in defining these terms.