Veterans. Under Wisconsin law, veterans, or their spouses, with certain statuses or war experiences are given additional preference on the list as are females and minorities for positions which show statistical underutilization. Wisconsin law also permits non-competitive hiring of veterans with at least a 30% disability.
Applicant Management. Under the proposed rule changes, candidates invited to an interview will now have two days to respond rather than the five days previously provided. The change is reflective of current applicant management practices which allow for email and on-line scheduling rather than mailed letters which was the only mechanism available at the time of the original rule. The BMRS Director has a number of removal methods to address applicant issues during the hiring process. A new rule is being added to permit disqualification if the candidate previously resigned State service in lieu of discharge from State employment due to cause.
Candidate Pool. Post Act 150, the concepts of reinstatement and restoration were modified. Specifically, reinstatement was changed from a permissive eligibility available to employees, who left State service without delinquency or misconduct, for five years from the date of separation to a permissive eligibility available to persons laid off from state service for three years from the date of layoff. Restoration which had been a mandatory right of rehire for three years following lay off was eliminated. Restoration to the civil service remained for members of the classified service provided a leave of absence to the unclassified service and for members of the military on a leave of absence.
Illinois: Selection Process. The Director of Central Management Services (CMS) is responsible for the administration of the Personnel Code (20 ILCS 415/3). “The Director shall conduct open competitive and promotional examinations to determine the relative fitness of applicants” (80 ILADC 302.10). Vacancies in Illinois must initially be filled by available persons on a reemployment list (80 ILADC 302.10(b)). Subsequently, positions may be filled by open competition, promotion, demotion, transfer, or reinstatement (80 ILADC 302.90).
Veterans. Illinois rules provide for veterans’ preference through points added to the final grades of qualified applicants and verification is required prior to the points being applied (80 ILADC 302.30).
Applicant Management. The Director of CMS may refuse to consider applicants or remove applicants from a list of eligibles for similar reasons available in Wisconsin (80 ILADC 302.130). Illinois rules do not establish a time requirement to respond to an interview offer. Performance records of employees are considered for all personnel transactions (80 ILADC 302.260).
Candidate Pool. Reinstatement is allowed for permanent employees who left employment in good standing or have been laid off and there is no time limit on such eligibility (80 ILADC 302.610).
Iowa: Selection Process. Iowa statute section 8A.402 establishes a “central agency responsible for state human resources management” and authorizes the promulgation of rules by the Director of the Department of Administrative Services (DAS). The director may also delegate responsibilities to appointing authorities. Appointments and promotions are made solely on the basis of merit and fitness “to be ascertained by examinations or other appropriate screening methods.” (Iowa statute section 8A.411(3)).
Veterans. Iowa provides for similar non-competitive appointments of disabled veterans, though Iowa requires that the disabled veteran “satisfactorily completes a federally funded job training program” (IAC 11-57.9 (8A)). Iowa rules provide for veterans’ preference through points “applied as a percentage of the grade or score attained in qualifying examinations” and verification is required prior to the points being applied (IAC 11-54.5(2)).
Applicant Management. The Director of DAS may refuse to consider applicants or remove applicants from a list of eligibles for similar reasons available in Wisconsin. (IAC 11-54.2(5) and 11-55.2 (8A)). In Iowa, applicants have five workdays to respond to an inquiry about availability for appointment and similar rules which allow for applicant disqualification or removal due previous resignation in lieu of discharge for cause.
Candidate Pool. Vacancies in Iowa may be filled by promotion, demotion, transfer, recall, reinstatement or original appointment (IAC 11-56.1(8A)). Reinstatement is allowed for permanent employees who left employment for other than just cause or demoted and reinstatement may happen at any time (IAC 11-57.5 (8A)). The DAS maintains three types of lists of eligible applicants; (1) recall; (2) promotion; and (3) all applicant (IAC 11-55.1(8A)). Lists are issued following a request from the agency and expire 120 days after the dated issued. A hire must be effective within 60 days of the expiration of the list (IAC 11-56.2-.5 (8A)). When filling a vacancy in Iowa, consideration may be limited to current employees for promotion. (IAC 11-55.1(8A)).
Michigan: Selection Process. The State Personnel Director in the Civil Service Commission (CSC) is responsible for administration of the commission’s powers and determines qualifications of candidates for positions in the classified service “by competitive examination and performance exclusively on the basis of merit, efficiency and fitness” (MI Const 1963, art 11, § 5). Staff of the CSC “shall prepare or approve examinations for all classified positions” (Michigan Civil Service Commission Rules 3-1.1). Vacancies in Michigan must initially be filled by available persons on a recall list who had been laid off or displaced (Michigan Civil Service Commission Rules 3-2.3 and Michigan Civil Service Commission Regulations 3.04(4)(A)).
Veterans. Michigan rules provide for veterans’ preference through points added to the final scores of qualified applicants or to the scores of candidates in further screening is completed (Michigan Civil Service Commission Rules 3-8.3).
Applicant Management. Civil service staff may refuse to consider applicants or remove applicants from applicant pools for reasons similar to those available in Wisconsin. (Michigan Civil Service Commission Rules 3-2.2) Michigan rules do not establish a time requirement for applicant response to an interview offer.
Candidate Pool. Reinstatement is allowed for permanent employees who demoted or left employment in good standing for a period of three years (Michigan Civil Service Commission Rules 3-3.9). Employees are on a recall list for a period of one year from the date of layoff or demotion during layoff and can request an additional year twice for a total of three years (Michigan Civil Service Commission Regulations 3.09(5)(E)). The next step in the selection process is completing any contractual obligations resulting from collective bargaining (Michigan Civil Service Commission Regulations 3.04(4)(B). Subsequently, positions may be filled by applicant pools resulting from open competition, promotion, demotion, transfer, or reinstatement (Michigan Civil Service Commission Rules 3-3.1 to 3.10). To facilitate transfers, preauthorized lateral job change lists are established by CSC which provide “a compilation of current classifications showing, for each classification, a listing of all classifications at the same classification level to which a lateral job change may occur without prior review of qualifications by Civil Service” (Michigan Civil Service Commission Regulations 3.07(3)(B)(3)).
Minnesota: Selection Process. The Commissioner of Minnesota Management & Budget (MMB) is responsible for developing rules on the process for determining the extent of competition required for vacancies, conducting selection procedures, and making appointments (Minnesota statute section 43A.04, subdivision 3). A resume database of applicants who meet the minimum application requirements is maintained by MMB (Minnesota Personnel Rule 3900.6650). The rules provide for a 1-year eligibility period for applicants in the database with a 6-month minimum provided for by statute (Minnesota statute section 43A.09, subdivision 2b and Minnesota Personnel Rule 3900.6650). Applicants may also apply directly to the appointing authority for specific vacancies (Minnesota statute section 43A.09, subdivision 2a).
Veterans. Minnesota provides for similar non-competitive appointments including for disabled veterans (Minnesota statute sections 43A.111. 43A.15, and Minnesota Personnel Rules 3900.8200 to 3900.900). Minnesota does not require the appointing authority to interview additional individuals when making a non-competitive appointment of a disabled veteran whereas Wisconsin requires the consideration of any other interested disabled veteran prior to appointment. There is no time requirement within Minnesota statutes or rules for which appointments must be made.
Applicant Management. The Commissioner of MMB may refuse to consider applicants for reasons similar to those available in Wisconsin (Minnesota statute section 43A.10, subdivision 6b and Minnesota Personnel Rule 3900.4200, subpart 3). Applicants have a period of seven days to respond to an inquiry about availability for appointment. Minnesota allows applicants to be removed from consideration immediately upon a failure to appear for a scheduled interview, whereas Wisconsin permits one day for the applicant to provide a valid reason before being removed from consideration. Minnesota rules specifically provide for the removal from consideration of an applicant who does not follow instructions specified in a vacancy announcement.
Candidate Pool. When filling a vacancy, consideration may be limited to current employees, recall lists, reinstatement lists, and transfer candidates (Minnesota statute section 43A.10, subdivision 6a and Minnesota Personnel Rule 3900.3100).
Probation: In accordance with the changes from Act 150, the proposed Wisconsin rules now require a 12-month probationary period for original appointments and promotional appointments and provide for 12-month permissive probations upon certain transfers or demotions. Wisconsin rules, as proposed, provide for mandatory extension of probation when 348 hours of absences occur during an employee’s 12-month probation or when performance has substantially changed or there have been unanticipated changes in the job duties of the employee.
Illinois: Illinois rules require the following related to probationary periods:
- 6-month probationary period upon entry into state service, rehire when it is considered a new period of continuous service, or when appointed from an open competitive eligibility list, regardless of current status as an employee (80 ILADC 302.300;
- 4-month probationary period for promotion and reinstatement (80 ILADC 302.300);
- an employee in Illinois who is absent 15 consecutive calendar days will have their probationary period extended (80 ILADC 302.300); and
- In Illinois, an employee who fails a promotional probation, other than for just cause, is returned to the former class, regardless of whether the promotion occurred within the same agency (80 ILADC 302.340).
Iowa: Iowa rules include the following requirements for probationary periods:
- original appointments in Iowa require a 6-month probationary period compared to 12-months in Wisconsin (IAC 11-58.1 (8A));
- probation is optional for reinstatement;
- an employee who promotes or transfers during a probationary period as a result of open competition or who voluntarily demotes, shall have their time spent in the original class counted towards the probationary period for the new position (IAC 11-58.3-.5 (8A));
- an employee with permanent status who promotes within a department may be required to serve a 6-month probationary period and if removed during this probation may be returned to the former class (IAC 11-58.9 (8A)); and
- similar to the rules in Wisconsin, in Iowa probationary employees are not eligible for reduction in force (layoff), promotion, or appeal rights (IAC 11.58.1 (8A)).
Michigan: Michigan rules require the following:
- a 12-month probationary period, 18-month for less than full time, for “a newly appointed classified employee who does not have status in the classified service” and for “an employee with status who is appointed to a new classification” (Michigan Civil Service Commission Rules 3-6.1 and 6.2);
- a 6-month extension of a probationary period, possibly longer with approval of the state personnel director, is permitted for an employee who has had unsatisfactory performance (Michigan Civil Service Commission Rules 3-6.2(b)); and,
- a probationary employee in Michigan may be released at any time during the probationary period and up to 28 calendar days after the probation has ended whereas Wisconsin requires the release to happen prior to the end of the probationary period (Michigan Civil Service Commission Rules 3-6.3).
- an employee with permanent status who fails a probation in a new classification, other than for just cause, is returned to the former class, regardless of whether the movement occurred within the same agency (Michigan Civil Service Commission Rules 3-6.6).
Minnesota: Probationary periods in Minnesota may be for 30-days to 2-years, depending on the rules for that particular group of employees (Minnesota statute section 43A.16, subdivision 1). In addition:
- non-managerial employees, not covered by a collective bargaining agreement, have a standard probation of 6-months compared to 12-months in Wisconsin (Minnesota Commissioner's Plan, Chapter VII);
- probationary periods may be extended for up to 6 additional months;
- probation is optional for reinstatement, transfer to a new class, transfer to a different agency or jurisdiction, and voluntary demotion;
- an employee with permanent status who does not complete an optional probation is restored to the former class and agency. In Wisconsin, similar re-employment provisions apply following non-completion of probationary periods when the probation is a result of intra-agency movement; and
- Minnesota provides a trial period for 15 calendar days for a non-managerial employee, not covered by a collective bargaining agreement, who moves to a new class and/or agency to decide whether the employee will remain in the new position.
Grievances: In Wisconsin employees are provided a grievance process for certain personnel actions and adverse employment decisions described in Chapter 230, Wis. Stats. Chapter ER 46 of the Wisconsin Administrative Code has the grievance process for conditions of employment which existed before Act 150 and 2011 Wisconsin Act 10. The proposed changes align all grievance procedures which will create consistency and lessen process and timeline confusion. With the changes from Act 150, the process is now a three-step process which requires submission to the employee’s appointing authority and a meeting at the first step. Employees, other than those in WLEA, are required to submit the grievance themselves and only individual grievances are permitted. If unresolved at Step 1, Step 2 can occur in which the employee appeals the decision to Administrator of DPM. If the grievance is denied, the employee can appeal the denial to the Wisconsin Employment Relations Commission (WERC) for one last review. Grievance timelines were also reduced in Act 150. Illinois: The Illinois grievance process requires initial submission of the grievance orally to the employee’s immediate supervisor, followed by written submission to the next level supervisor, which is not required in the Wisconsin rules. Steps 3 and 4 in the Illinois process is the submission to the head of agency, followed by appeal to the Director of CMS similar to steps 1 and 2 provided in Wisconsin rules. In Illinois, the CMS Director appoints a grievance committee to hear the grievance and provide recommendation to the Director who will then review and make the final determination (80 ILADC 303.30). “Probationary terminations, charges seeking discharge, demotion or suspension totaling more than 30 days in any 12-month period of certified employees, appeals of allocation of duties or transfers from one geographical area in the State to another are not subject to grievance procedure” (80 ILADC 303.10 (b)). Such appeals, other than for probationary terminations, are appealed to the Illinois Civil Service Commission (80 ILADC 301.30 (c), 302.430, 302.496, and 30.750). Wisconsin requires that all grievances must first go to the appointing authority and can be ultimately appealed to the WERC if not resolved prior.
Iowa: Iowa provides an informal grievance process for employees similar to the formal grievance process in Wisconsin (IAC 11-61.1 (8A)). The Iowa process requires initial submission to the employee’s immediate supervisor, not required in Wisconsin, and then permits appeal to the Director of DAS (“grievances involving suspension, reduction in pay within the same grade, disciplinary demotion, or discharge” (IAC 11-61.1 (8A)). The time limits at each step are similar to those of Wisconsin (IAC 11-61.1(1)). Iowa permits group grievances which have been eliminated in the proposed Wisconsin rules to mirror the statutory changes from Act 150. Grievance meetings are not required at any step in the Iowa process while Wisconsin requires a meeting at step 1.
Michigan: Michigan rules and regulations provide a three step grievance process for employees similar to the former grievance process in Wisconsin pre-Acts 10 and 150 (Michigan Civil Service Commission Rules 8-1 and Minnesota Civil Service Commission Regulations 8.01). A Step 1 grievance must be filed within 14 calendar days to the “Step 1 Official” within the agency. The “Step 1 Official” is required to hold an informal conference with the grievant and must issue a written answer within 14 days. Employees who are filing a grievance related to dismissal, suspension without pay, demotion and layoff may go directly to Step 2. The grievant may file a Step 2 grievance within 14 calendar days of the issuance of the Step 1 decision to the “Step 2 Official” within the agency. There is no requirement for a conference with the employee, though it is permissible. The “Step 2 Official” must provide a written decision within 28 calendar days. The grievant may appeal the Step 2 decision to the Civil Service Hearings Office (CSHO) within 28 days of the decision. Michigan rules do not provide time requirements for the CSHO to hold the hearing on the grievance and permit the grievant to elect an arbitration rather than a hearing. Once a decision is issued, either party may file an appeal to the Civil Service Commission within 28 calendar days.
Minnesota: Minnesota provides a dispute resolution process for employees similar to that of the grievance process in Wisconsin (Minnesota statutes section 43A.33). Non-managerial employees, not covered by a collective bargaining agreement, make an initial submission of complaint to the employee’s immediate supervisor, followed by the next level supervisor if unresolved (Minnesota Commissioner's Plan, Chapter XII). The time limits at each step in the Minnesota rules are similar to those of Wisconsin. Minnesota encourages employees to use the dispute resolution process for adverse employment decisions, but the employee may appeal directly to the Bureau of Mediation Services at any time (Minnesota Commissioner's Plan, Chapter XII). Employees in Wisconsin must use the grievance procedure provided in statute.
Layoff – Layoff procedures for classified employees of the State of Wisconsin were modified in Act 150. Layoff is still determined by limiting the layoff group to the agency, employing unit, and employee classification. The order of layoff has been modified such that seniority is no longer the governing factor and has been replaced by performance, discipline records, special skills, and then seniority. Displacement or bumping was eliminated as an option and agencies are no longer required to terminate probationary employees (those serving an original probationary period) or limited term employees prior to laying off permanent employees. Layoff plans require the approval of the BMRS director and are expected to occur over a 60-day period (formal notification to layoff effective date); however, the proposed rules do include an option for a shorter timeline due to budget or funding factors. Upon layoff from state service, employees are provided a 3-year eligibility for reinstatement to a position at the same or lower level as the position of layoff. Wisconsin no longer has a mandatory restoration, or recall, from layoff other than in the Wisconsin Law Enforcement Association collective bargaining agreement.
Illinois: Illinois rules provide similar procedures for implementing a layoff of employees within an organizational unit “based on class, option, agency, county or other designation” (80 ILADC 302.520). A plan must be submitted to the Director of CMS for approval in advance of the effective date. The order of layoff is generally based on continuous service, but performance may be considered for adjustment (80 ILADC 302.530). All temporary, provisional, and probationary employees, in such order, must be released prior to layoff of a permanent employee (80 ILADC 302.530).
The notice requirement in the Illinois rules provides for 30 days compared to 60 calendar days in Wisconsin (80 ILADC 302.540). Illinois requires employees subject to layoff be offered “any vacant positions for the same title held by that employee within the same agency and county from which the employee is subject to layoff and within two additional alternate counties designated by the employee” (80 ILADC 302.545). Other transfers and demotions may be requested by the employee in writing prior to the effective date of the layoff (80 ILADC 302.550). Contrasted to Wisconsin, Illinois rules provide an employee who has been laid off shall be placed on a reemployment list for mandatory recall for up to 3 years. (80 ILADC 302.570, 302.580, and 302.590) Wisconsin rules provide for transfer and if not available, demotion in lieu of layoff and no recall rights for employees who have been laid off.
Iowa: Like Wisconsin, the Iowa rules provide procedures for implementing a reduction in force (layoff) of permanent merit system covered employees (IAC 11-60.3 (8A)). Iowa rules require the reduction in force to be by class within an agency organization unit or agency wide and a plan must be submitted to the director of DAS for approval in advance of the effective date (IAC 11-60.3(2)). The order of the reduction in force is the result of a calculation of retention points made up of a combination of points for length of service and points for performance record (IAC 11-60.3(3)). Similar to Wisconsin, discipline and special skills or abilities may be used to adjust the order of layoff (IAC 11-60.3(3)).
The notice requirement in the Iowa rules provides for at least 20 workdays compared to 60 calendar days in Wisconsin (IAC 11-60.3(2)). Transfers and reassignments to the same class or a class in the same pay grade are permissible outside of the reduction in force process and are not included as alternatives during the layoff process (IAC 11-60.3(1)). An employee affected by layoff may exercise bumping rights to a filled or vacant lower class in the same series or to a lower formerly held class (IAC 11-61.3(5)). The notice to the employee will include the classes the employee may have bumping rights to and the employee is responsible for notifying the appointing authority of the class in which class the employee’s wishes to bump (IAC 11-60.3(2) and (3)). The employee receives written confirmation of the ability to bump and then has five calendar days to provide written acceptance of the position or be laid off (IAC 11-60.3(5)).
Wisconsin rules provide for transfers and demotions as alternatives in lieu of lay off to vacant positions, regardless of whether the employee has held the class previously, and do not allow for the bumping of filled positions. Contrasted to Wisconsin, Iowa rules provide an employee who has been laid off, exercised bumping rights, or had hours reduced shall be eligible for recall to the class and layoff unit occupied at the time of the reduction in force for a period of one year from the effective date. (IAC 11-60.3(6))
