Fraternal Order of Police, Lodge No. 64 v. Personnel Board of Jefferson Cty.
Annotate this Case
Justia Opinion Summary
Want to stay in the know about new opinions from the Supreme Court of Alabama?
Sign up for free summaries delivered directly to your inbox. Learn More ›
You already receive new opinion summaries from Supreme Court of Alabama. Did you know we offer summary newsletters for even more practice areas and jurisdictions? Explore them here.
The Fraternal Order of Police, Lodge No. 64, and three employees of the Jefferson County Sheriff's Office appealed the grant of summary judgment in favor of the Personnel Board of Jefferson County, and Jefferson County Sheriff Mike Hale in the employees' action regarding the suspension of merit pay raises for classified employees of the Jefferson County Sheriff's Office. Upon review of the matter, the Supreme Court affirmed the judgment of the circuit court.
Download PDF
REL: 08/24/2012 Notice: T h i s o p i n i o n i s s u b j e c t t o f o r m a l r e v i s i o n b e f o r e p u b l i c a t i o n i n t h e advance s h e e t s o f Southern R e p o r t e r . R e a d e r s a r e r e q u e s t e d t o n o t i f y t h e R e p o r t e r o f D e c i s i o n s , A l a b a m a A p p e l l a t e C o u r t s , 300 D e x t e r A v e n u e , M o n t g o m e r y , A l a b a m a 3 6 1 0 4 - 3 7 4 1 ( ( 3 3 4 ) 2 2 9 ¬ 0 6 4 9 ) , o f a n y t y p o g r a p h i c a l o r o t h e r e r r o r s , i n o r d e r t h a t c o r r e c t i o n s may b e made b e f o r e t h e o p i n i o n i s p r i n t e d i n Southern R e p o r t e r . SUPREME COURT OF ALABAMA SPECIAL TERM, 2012 1100430 F r a t e r n a l Order o f P o l i c e , Lodge No. 64, e t a l . v. Personnel Board o f J e f f e r s o n County e t a l . Appeal from J e f f e r s o n C i r c u i t Court (CV-10-902359) MURDOCK, J u s t i c e . The Fraternal employees of Order o f P o l i c e , the Jefferson Lodge County No. 64, a n d t h r e e Sheriff's Office -- S g t . R o b e r t Thompson, L t . W.D. M c A n a l l y , a n d C a p t . A u b r e y Leon Finley (hereinafter " t h e employees") -- appeal from t h e 1100430 summary j u d g m e n t i n f a v o r o f J e f f e r s o n C o u n t y ( " t h e C o u n t y " ) , the Personnel Board"), and sheriff") 1 Board of Jefferson Jefferson County County Sheriff ("the Mike i n t h e employees' a c t i o n r e g a r d i n g Personnel Hale ("the the suspension of m e r i t pay r a i s e s f o r c l a s s i f i e d employees o f t h e J e f f e r s o n County Sheriff's circuit Office. We affirm t h e judgment of the court. I. Facts and P r o c e d u r a l History In the c i r c u i t court, the p a r t i e s s t i p u l a t e d that c e r t a i n f a c t s were u n d i s p u t e d a n d t h a t t h i s c a s e c o u l d be d e c i d e d as a m a t t e r o f l a w . A memorandum o p i n i o n court i n conjunction with the entry i s s u e d by the c i r c u i t o f i t s judgment s t a t e s : " 1 . I n 1935, t h e A l a b a m a L e g i s l a t u r e p a s s e d A c t 1935-284, w h i c h c r e a t e d a u n i f i e d c i v i l service system f o r employees o f J e f f e r s o n County, t h e C i t y of Birmingham, and many of the County's m u n i c i p a l i t i e s . ( S e e A c t 1935-284, 1935 A c t s o f A l a b a m a a t p. 6 9 1 . ) T h i s A c t was r e v i s e d a n d re-enacted i n 1945, a n d s u b s e q u e n t l y h a s b e e n amended f r o m t i m e t o t i m e . ( S e e A c t 1945-248, 1945 J e f f e r s o n C o u n t y a n d t h e s h e r i f f have f o r g o n e t h e r i g h t t o f i l e t h e i r own b r i e f s i n t h i s a p p e a l a n d i n s t e a d have c h o s e n t o a d o p t t h e a r g u m e n t s made b y t h e P e r s o n n e l B o a r d i n its brief. I n s u m m a r i z i n g t h o s e a r g u m e n t s we r e f e r o n l y t o the " P e r s o n n e l Board." 1 2 1100430 A c t s o f A l a b a m a a t p. 3 7 6 . ) T h i s known as t h e ' E n a b l i n g A c t . ' A c t i s commonly [ 2 ] "2. The J e f f e r s o n C o u n t y P e r s o n n e l B o a r d i s t h e body c r e a t e d b y t h e E n a b l i n g A c t t o i m p l e m e n t t h e m e r i t system. (Id.) "3. The P e r s o n n e l Board i s authorized to e s t a b l i s h Rules and R e g u l a t i o n s t o implement t h e p r o v i s i o n s o f t h e E n a b l i n g A c t . Such R u l e s a n d R e g u l a t i o n s , when s o p r o m u l g a t e d , ' s h a l l have t h e f o r c e and e f f e c t o f law u n l e s s they a r e c o n t r a r y t o t h e p r o v i s i o n s o f [ t h e E n a b l i n g A c t ] . ' (See E n a b l i n g A c t , § 12.) "4. Two o f t h e i n d i v i d u a l p l a i n t i f f s (W.D. McAnally and Aubrey Leon Finley) are regular classified employees of the Jefferson County Sheriff's Office, are subject to the Enabling Act, are o t h e r w i s e e l i g i b l e f o r step i n c r e a s e s , and b u t for the Sheriff's decision to withhold step i n c r e a s e s f o r h i s employees, would r e c e i v e step i n c r e a s e s . The t h i r d i n d i v i d u a l p l a i n t i f f , R o b e r t Thompson, i s compensated a t Step 10 o f t h e a p p l i c a b l e pay grade and t h e r e f o r e c o u l d not r e c e i v e a s t e p i n c r e a s e i n any e v e n t . [ 3 ] A c t No. 248, A l a . A c t s 1945, a g e n e r a l l a w o f l o c a l a p p l i c a t i o n , i s n o t c o d i f i e d i n t h e A l a b a m a Code. 2 As d i s c u s s e d below, see note 8 and accompanying t e x t , § 2 o f A c t No. 248, A l a . A c t s 1945, g r a n t s t h e P e r s o n n e l B o a r d a u t h o r i t y w i t h r e s p e c t t o "employees i n the c l a s s i f i e d s e r v i c e of t h e county." One o p i n i o n o f t h i s C o u r t , s e v e r a l d e c i s i o n s o f t h e C o u r t o f C i v i l A p p e a l s , a n d a t l e a s t one o p i n i o n o f t h e Alabama A t t o r n e y G e n e r a l reason t h a t s h e r i f f ' s d e p u t i e s , l i k e t h e s h e r i f f s w i t h whom t h e y s e r v e , a r e n o t e m p l o y e e s i n t h e s e r v i c e of t h e i r r e s p e c t i v e counties f o r purposes of the county's l o c a l m e r i t system and t h e r u l e s and r e g u l a t i o n s promulgated and implemented by t h e p e r s o n n e l board o f t h e county. See Hooks v . H i t t , 539 So. 2 d 157 ( A l a . 1 9 8 8 ) ; B l o u n t C n t y . Comm'n v . S h e r r i l l , 77 So. 3d 1196 ( A l a . C i v . App. 3 3 1100430 "5. On A p r i l 27, 2010, Hon. Ray F i t z p a t r i c k , an a t t o r n e y r e p r e s e n t i n g the J e f f e r s o n County F r a t e r n a l O r d e r o f P o l i c e , Lodge No. 64, s e n t a l e t t e r t o L o r r e n O. O l i v e r , [ P e r s o n n e l B o a r d ] D i r e c t o r o f Personnel, a r g u i n g t h a t m e r i t pay i n c r e a s e s a r e mandatory each year p u r s u a n t t o v a r i o u s p r o v i s i o n s o f t h e E n a b l i n g A c t and t h e [ P e r s o n n e l B o a r d ] R u l e s and R e g u l a t i o n s , c o n d i t i o n e d o n l y on t h e e m p l o y e e ' s satisfactory job performance. In short, Mr. Fitzpatrick argued that [Personnel Board] R u l e 8.2(c) and S e c t i o n 12 o f t h e E n a b l i n g A c t provide t h a t a s a t i s f a c t o r y performance r a t i n g i s t h e s o l e and e x c l u s i v e f a c t o r t h a t may be c o n s i d e r e d by an A p p o i n t i n g Authority in exercising i t s [ 4 ] 2 0 1 0 ) , Mack v. A r n o l d , 929 So. 2d 480, 483-84 ( A l a . C i v . App. 2 0 0 5 ) ; W h i t t e n v. Lowe, 677 So. 2d 778, 780 ( A l a . C i v . App. 1 9 9 5 ) ; and Op. A t t ' y Gen. No. 2001-217. I n t h e p r e s e n t c a s e , a l l p a r t i e s t r e a t t h e e n a b l i n g a c t and t h e a s s o c i a t e d r u l e s and r e g u l a t i o n s o f t h e P e r s o n n e l B o a r d as a p p l i c a b l e t o t h e employees. For the reasons s e t out h e r e i n , acceptance of the p o s i t i o n assumed by t h e p a r t i e s l e a d s t o t h e same r e s u l t as w o u l d be r e a c h e d a b s e n t t h a t a s s u m p t i o n . F o r p u r p o s e s o f t h i s c a s e , we a c c e p t t h i s a s s u m p t i o n and p r o c e e d t o a d d r e s s t h e arguments p r e s e n t e d . S e c t i o n 1 o f A c t No. 248, " a p p o i n t i n g a u t h o r i t y " as a 4 A l a . Acts 1945, defines an "person, o f f i c e r , board, c o u n c i l , commission or o t h e r b o d y ... whose l a w f u l j u r i s d i c t i o n o r p o w e r s are confined wholly or primarily within the t e r r i t o r i a l l i m i t s o f s u c h c o u n t y and who o r w h i c h possesses final power to appoint persons to services, jobs, offices or positions, the compensation of which i s p a i d i n whole or i n p a r t from the p u b l i c funds of such county or from the public funds of a m u n i c i p a l i t y i n such county subject to t h i s Act." The p a r t i e s a g r e e t h a t t h e s h e r i f f i s t h e a p p o i n t i n g a u t h o r i t y in this action. 4 1100430 d i s c r e t i o n t o award or w i t h h o l d m e r i t increases. Mr. F i t z p a t r i c k r e q u e s t e d t h a t t h e D i r e c t o r ' t a k e such actions as are required to ensure that i m p l e m e n t a t i o n o f a l l m e r i t i n c r e a s e s w h i c h have become due i n t h e p e r i o d s i n c e J u l y 14, 2009 w i t h the provision of appropriate backpay.' (See A f f i d a v i t o f L o r r e n O l i v e r , Ex. 1.) "6. On May 11, 2010, the D i r e c t o r i s s u e d a w r i t t e n l e t t e r d e t e r m i n a t i o n . The D i r e c t o r c o n c l u d e d t h a t ' S e c t i o n 12 o f t h e E n a b l i n g A c t does n o t make m e r i t s t e p i n c r e a s e s m a n d a t o r y ' and t h a t ' S e c t i o n 12 ... does [not] p r o v i d e t h a t an A p p o i n t i n g A u t h o r i t y may n o t c o n s i d e r i t s own f i s c a l c i r c u m s t a n c e s and c o n d i t i o n s i n determining whether to e x e r c i s e i t s d i s c r e t i o n a f f o r d e d under Rule 8 . 2 ( c ) . ' "7. By l e t t e r o f May 18, 2010, Mr. F i t z p a t r i c k r e q u e s t e d t h a t t h i s m a t t e r be p l a c e d on t h e agenda f o r c o n s i d e r a t i o n by t h e f u l l B o a r d . "8. A t i t s r e g u l a r l y s c h e d u l e d J u n e 8, 2010, b u s i n e s s m e e t i n g , t h e three-member P e r s o n n e l B o a r d received oral argument from Mr. Fitzpatrick, r e p r e s e n t i n g the J e f f e r s o n County F r a t e r n a l Order of P o l i c e , Lodge No. 64, and f r o m Hon. Rob R i l e y and J a y M u r r i l l , r e p r e s e n t i n g t h e S h e r i f f . The Board u p h e l d t h e D i r e c t o r ' s May 11 d e t e r m i n a t i o n . "9. The J e f f e r s o n C o u n t y S h e r i f f ' s D e p a r t m e n t i s not the o n l y employer s u b j e c t to the E n a b l i n g Act that has suspended merit step increases. The P e r s o n n e l B o a r d i t s e l f has s u s p e n d e d s u c h i n c r e a s e s f o r i t s own e m p l o y e e s f o r t h e p a s t two f i s c a l y e a r s . "Stipulated Facts "On December 1, 2010, the plaintiffs and Defendant Personnel Board entered i n t o a s t i p u l a t i o n of f a c t s . ... [T]he f o l l o w i n g s t i p u l a t e d f a c t s a r e deemed t o be u n d i s p u t e d ... : 5 1100430 "'The three-member P e r s o n n e l B o a r d h a s a d o p t e d R u l e 8.2(c) g o v e r n i n g t h e p r o v i s i o n of m e r i t r a i s e s f o r c l a s s i f i e d employees. "'The B o a r d ' s D i r e c t o r h a s a u t h o r i z e d o t h e r g u i d a n c e documents p u b l i s h e d b y t h e [ P e r s o n n e l Board] and has d i r e c t e d s t a f f t o apply procedures for the a d m i n i s t r a t i o n of merit raises as explained in this p a r a g r a p h . T h o s e p r o c e d u r e s have n o t b e e n s p e c i f i c a l l y a p p r o v e d b y t h e three-member B o a r d . The p r o c e d u r e s t h a t a r e a p p l i e d b y t h e D i r e c t o r a n d s t a f f g e n e r a l l y work as f o l l o w s . Each R e g u l a r C l a s s i f i e d Employee has h i s o r h e r own ' a n n i v e r s a r y d a t e ' on which step i n c r e a s e s may be g i v e n . A R e g u l a r C l a s s i f i e d E m p l o y e e may n o t r e c e i v e more t h a n one s t e p i n c r e a s e i n a y e a r . I f the A p p o i n t i n g A u t h o r i t y i s g r a n t i n g step i n c r e a s e s f o r t h e y e a r , and i f t h e employee otherwise q u a l i f i e s f o r a step increase ( e . g . , i s n o t a l r e a d y a t t h e maximum s t e p f o r t h e a p p l i c a b l e pay grade, and has a q u a l i f y i n g performance e v a l u a t i o n ) , then the step i n c r e a s e i s implemented by t h e Appointing A u t h o r i t y i n i t i a t i n g a Personnel A c t i o n i n t h e Lawson S y s t e m . The P e r s o n n e l A c t i o n f o r a s t e p i n c r e a s e i s e n t e r e d on Lawson s c r e e n PA-52.1. When t h e P e r s o n n e l Action i s initiated, t h e Lawson S y s t e m l o g i c a u t o m a t i c a l l y routes the a c t i o n f o r n e c e s s a r y a p p r o v a l s a n d v a l i d a t i o n s . When t h i s i s complete, t h e employee's s t e p and corresponding r a t e o f compensation a r e i n c r e a s e d . The e m p l o y e e ' s a n n i v e r s a r y d a t e remains unchanged. I n t h e case o f t h e Sheriff's Office, the step increase personnel a c t i o n s a r e i n i t i a t e d by t h e S h e r i f f ' s O f f i c e t o t h e J e f f e r s o n County Human R e s o u r c e s D e p a r t m e n t , w h i c h then 6 1100430 t r a n s m i t s the a c t i o n s v i a i n t e r f a c e f i l e to the Personnel Board. I f the Appointing A u t h o r i t y does n o t i n i t i a t e a s t e p i n c r e a s e for an employee i n t o the system, the e m p l o y e e does n o t r e c e i v e i t . "'The [Personnel Board] Rules and R e g u l a t i o n s were r e v i s e d d u r i n g t h e t e n u r e of Dr. Ronald R. Sims, appointed as R e c e i v e r by o r d e r s e n t e r e d i n U n i t e d S t a t e s v. J e f f e r s o n C o u n t y , No. CV-75-666 (N.D. Ala.). The Receiver was given broad authority over the Personnel Board, i n c l u d i n g t h e p o w e r s o f t h e D i r e c t o r as provided f o r i n the E n a b l i n g A c t . The R e c e i v e r was n o t g i v e n a u t h o r i t y t o t a k e any a c t i o n c o n t r a r y t o t h e r e q u i r e m e n t s o f the E n a b l i n g A c t . Through a s e r i e s of orders, the federal court has since r e s t o r e d a u t h o r i t y t o t h e t h r e e member B o a r d and i t s D i r e c t o r . "'During the R e c e i v e r s h i p , the Rules and R e g u l a t i o n s were r e v i s e d i n January 2003, May 2003, and A p r i l 2005. A f t e r t h e R e c e i v e r s h i p , p o r t i o n s o f t h e R u l e s were amended by the three-member Board in J a n u a r y 2009. The c u r r e n t v e r s i o n o f R u l e 8.2(c) i s d e r i v e d f r o m t h e f o r m e r Rule 2.13(d). ... The language, '[a]t the d i s c r e t i o n of the A p p o i n t i n g A u t h o r i t y , ' a p p e a r s t w i c e i n R u l e 8.3(c) [ s i c ] . The f i r s t i n s t a n c e was added w i t h t h e A p r i l 2005 R u l e revision, while the second i n s t a n c e was a d d e d i n t h e J a n u a r y 2009 R u l e r e v i s i o n ; both i n s t a n c e s remain a p a r t of the Rule. "'In 2007, the [Personnel Board] D i r e c t o r p u b l i s h e d g u i d a n c e documents t h a t p r o v i d e t h a t A p p o i n t i n g A u t h o r i t i e s have d i s c r e t i o n t o g r a n t or suspend m e r i t step 7 1100430 i n c r e a s e s on an a c r o s s - t h e - b o a r d b a s i s . Such g u i d a n c e documents have n o t been a p p r o v e d by t h e B o a r d as p a r t o f t h e R u l e s and R e g u l a t i o n s . "'The D i r e c t o r of P e r s o n n e l i s not aware o f any i n s t a n c e f r o m t h e f a l l o f 2002 t h r o u g h J u l y 2009, i n w h i c h any A p p o i n t i n g A u t h o r i t y s u s p e n d e d m e r i t s t e p i n c r e a s e s on an a c r o s s t h e b o a r d b a s i s . "'As R u l e 8.2(c) i s a p p l i e d by t h e B o a r d , e a c h e m p l o y e e has h i s o r h e r own ' a n n i v e r s a r y d a t e ' on w h i c h a s t e p i n c r e a s e may be g i v e n . A f t e r an across-the-board s u s p e n s i o n i s ended, the next s t e p i n c r e a s e s h a l l be g r a n t e d on t h e same a n n i v e r s a r y date f o r the employee i f the employee's performance i s s a t i s f a c t o r y . "'The [Personnel Board] has not identified any criteria governing the c o n d i t i o n s i n which a j u r i s d i c t i o n may e l e c t to suspend, h a l t , stop or f r e e z e m e r i t or step i n c r e a s e s across the board. The B o a r d c o n t e n d s t h a t R u l e 8.2(c) p l a c e s that discretion i n the hands of the Appointing Authority. "'The [Personnel Board] has not identified any criteria governing p r o c e d u r e s t h a t a j u r i s d i c t i o n must a d h e r e t o a f t e r an ' a c r o s s t h e b o a r d ' s u s p e n s i o n o f m e r i t r a i s e s i s ended. However, t h e [Personnel Board] D i r e c t o r of Personnel believes that a suspension of merit i n c r e a s e s s h o u l d s t a n d i n p l a c e f o r one full year. When step increases are r e i n s t a t e d , the [Personnel Board] D i r e c t o r o f P e r s o n n e l w o u l d n o t p e r m i t two s t e p s t o be g i v e n a t o n c e , b u t a j u r i s d i c t i o n c o u l d a u t h o r i z e an a c r o s s - t h e - b o a r d i n c r e a s e i n 8 1100430 the e n t i r e s a l a r y schedule under p r o v i s i o n s of t h e law and R u l e s g o v e r n i n g changes i n the s a l a r y s c h e d u l e . "'The [Personnel Board] has n o t i d e n t i f i e d any f i n a n c i a l c r i t e r i a g o v e r n i n g t h e c o n d i t i o n s i n w h i c h a j u r i s d i c t i o n may s u s p e n d m e r i t r a i s e s . The B o a r d c o n t e n d s t h a t R u l e 8.2(c) p l a c e s t h a t d i s c r e t i o n i n t h e hands o f t h e A p p o i n t i n g A u t h o r i t y . ' " (Footnote In omitted.) a d d i t i o n to the foregoing undisputed that before the r e c e i v e r appointed facts, by t h e f e d e r a l we note court i n U n i t e d S t a t e s v. J e f f e r s o n C o u n t y , No. CV-75-666 (N.D. A l a . ) , adopted the revision to the Personnel Board Rules R e g u l a t i o n s i n 2005, i . e . , sometime i n 2004, c o u n s e l and f o r the r e c e i v e r c i r c u l a t e d a memorandum s u m m a r i z i n g t h e r u l e c h a n g e s . With respect t o the r e v i s i o n of Rule 8 . 2 ( c ) , which added t h e language " a t the d i s c r e t i o n of the A p p o i n t i n g A u t h o r i t y , " the memorandum s t a t e d : " R u l e 8.2(c) -- S a l a r y A d v a n c e m e n t - T h i s R u l e was rewritten to clarify that an Appointing A u t h o r i t y may, i n i t s d i s c r e t i o n , p r o v i d e p a r t - t i m e e m p l o y e e s w i t h s a l a r y a d v a n c e m e n t . The R u l e was a l s o r e w r i t t e n t o e m p h a s i z e t h a t an e f f i c i e n c y review w i l l be r e q u i r e d f o r a l l s a l a r y a d v a n c e m e n t s . T h i s requirement ensures t h a t s a l a r y advancements a r e b a s e d on m e r i t o r i o u s p e r f o r m a n c e . " 9 1100430 We as the a l s o n o t e t h a t a document r e f e r r e d t o by a " g u i d a n c e document" was personnel published d i r e c t o r i n order to i n September 2007 provide c i v i l - s e r v i c e employment i n J e f f e r s o n C o u n t y . s t a t e d the f o l l o w i n g concerning merit the p a r t i e s an overview This by of document raises: "A regular classified employee is eligible to r e c e i v e a one s t e p ' m e r i t ' i n c r e a s e i n pay on h i s o r h e r a n n i v e r s a r y d a t e . Such i n c r e a s e s may be d e n i e d to an e m p l o y e e b a s e d on d o c u m e n t e d p e r f o r m a n c e p r o b l e m s o r a j u r i s d i c t i o n may c h o o s e n o t t o g r a n t step i n c r e a s e s across the board i f such r a i s e s are not f i n a n c i a l l y f e a s i b l e . In the normal course of b u s i n e s s , e m p l o y e e s may n e i t h e r be p a i d b e l o w S t e p 1 nor beyond the top step a s s i g n e d t o t h e i r grade. A d d i t i o n a l l y , t h e r e i s no p r o v i s i o n i n t h e M e r i t System f o r o f f - c y c l e s a l a r y a d j u s t m e n t s e x c e p t those a s s o c i a t e d w i t h promotions or demotions." (Emphasis added.) published after On A l l versions 2010, the violated § a c t " ) ; they argued 12 of m e r i t that of Act document explanation. t h a t t h e y were b e i n g c o m p e n s a t i o n as m e r i t - s y s t e m suspension employees guidance the employees f i l e d the i n s t a n t a c t i o n a g a i n s t the defendants contending of the September 2007 i n c l u d e d t h i s June 30, their full of the No. pay 248, A l a . Acts s o u g h t d e c l a r a t o r y and 10 e m p l o y e e s as a r e s u l t r a i s e s by suspension denied the of sheriff. merit 1945 pay ("the The raises enabling injunctive relief, a writ 1100430 of mandamus r e q u i r i n g t h e i m p l e m e n t a t i o n o f m e r i t p a y r a i s e s , and b a c k p a y and compensation for lost salary. On September 1, 2010, t h e P e r s o n n e l B o a r d f i l e d a m o t i o n for a summary judgment, j o i n e d and adopted. a response motion which the s h e r i f f to the defendants' motion, summary j u d g m e n t . p a r t i e s s t i p u l a t e d to the pertinent judgment December i n which 10, 2010, the i t granted as w e l l as a for a partial filed cross- As n o t e d a b o v e , t h e facts. circuit court the defendants' entered motion summary j u d g m e n t as t o a l l c l a i m s a n d d e n i e d t h e cross-motion County On December 1, 2010, t h e e m p l o y e e s for a partial On and t h e summary j u d g m e n t . for a employees' The e m p l o y e e s appeal. II. Standard o f Review "Our s t a n d a r d o f r e v i e w i s s t r a i g h t f o r w a r d when, as h e r e , t h e f a c t s a r e u n d i s p u t e d : "'An o r d e r g r a n t i n g o r d e n y i n g a summary j u d g m e n t i s r e v i e w e d de novo, a p p l y i n g t h e same s t a n d a r d as t h e t r i a l court applied. American Gen. Life & A c c i d e n t I n s . Co. v. Underwood, 886 So. 2d 807, 811 ( A l a . 2 0 0 4 ) . I n a d d i t i o n , " [ t ] h i s 11 a 1100430 a case are e s s e n t i a l l y undisputed, this C o u r t must d e t e r m i n e w h e t h e r t h e trial c o u r t m i s a p p l i e d the law t o the undisputed facts, a p p l y i n g a de novo s t a n d a r d of r e v i e w . C a r t e r v. C i t y o f H a l e y v i l l e , 669 So. 2d 812, 815 ( A l a . 1995). Here, i n r e v i e w i n g t h e [ e n t r y ] o f a summary j u d g m e n t when t h e f a c t s a r e u n d i s p u t e d , we r e v i e w de novo t h e t r i a l c o u r t ' s i n t e r p r e t a t i o n o f s t a t u t o r y l a n g u a g e and o u r p r e v i o u s c a s e l a w on a c o n t r o l l i n g q u e s t i o n o f l a w . ' " M c K i n n e y v. N a t i o n w i d e Mut. 1206-07 ( A l a . 2009) Fields, 926 So. 2d 1033, 1034-35 authorize suspend authority. pay In 33 So. (Ala. 3d 1203, that Personnel raises pertinent First, a u t h o r i t y s u c h as t h e for employees part, of Personnel the Board sheriff Rule " "c. Salary A d v a n c e m e n t. advancement w i t h i n e s t a b l i s h e d Pay to appointing E m p l o y e e s h a l l be p a i d a t one f o r t h i n t h e Pay P l a n f o r t h e o r she s e r v e s , i n a c c o r d a n c e the s p e c i a l p r o v i s i o n s f o r Plan. 12 they B o a r d R u l e 8.2(c) does provides: "Each C l a s s i f i e d o f t h e Pay G r a d e s s e t p o s i t i o n i n w h i c h he w i t h t h e s e R u l e s and a d m i n i s t e r i n g t h e Pay v. 2005)). a r g u m e n t s on a p p e a l . an a p p o i n t i n g merit Co., Analysis e m p l o y e e s make two argue, a l b e i t b r i e f l y , not Ins. ( q u o t i n g C o n t i n e n t a l N a t ' l Indem. Co. III. The Fire Annual salary G r a d e s s h a l l be 8.2 1100430 b a s e d on m e r i t o r i o u s p e r f o r m a n c e on t h e j o b and s h a l l be i n a c c o r d a n c e w i t h t h e s p e c i a l p r o v i s i o n s f o r a d m i n i s t e r i n g t h e Pay P l a n . An e f f i c i e n c y r e v i e w reflecting satisfactory performance shall be r e q u i r e d f o r advancement. A t the d i s c r e t i o n of the A p p o i n t i n g A u t h o r i t y , a C l a s s i f i e d Employee w i t h c o n t i n u e d s a t i s f a c t o r y s e r v i c e s h a l l be e l i g i b l e f o r f u t u r e o n e - s t e p a n n u a l i n c r e a s e s u n t i l s u c h t i m e as t h e C l a s s i f i e d E m p l o y e e r e a c h e s t h e maximum Pay S t e p f o r t h e Pay G r a d e . " A t t h e d i s c r e t i o n o f an A p p o i n t i n g A u t h o r i t y , an e m p l o y e e w i t h one o r more b e l o w s t a n d a r d r a t i n g s on h i s o r h e r e f f i c i e n c y r a t i n g may be d e n i e d a Pay Step increase until such time the employee's p e r f o r m a n c e i m p r o v e s . Such d e l a y e d Pay S t e p i n c r e a s e shall n o t be retroactive and s h a l l extend the employee's a n n i v e r s a r y date one year from the e f f e c t i v e d a t e o f t h e Pay S t e p i n c r e a s e . E f f i c i e n c y Ratings are not s u b j e c t t o appeal t o the Board." (Emphasis added.) In the c i r c u i t court, defendants contended, above-emphasized authority and t h e c i r c u i t language the d i s c r e t i o n suspension of employees argued provides t h e P e r s o n n e l B o a r d and t h e o t h e r merit that c o u r t agreed, t h a t i n R u l e 8.2(c) t o implement pay raises the language to g i v e s an a p p o i n t i n g an " a c r o s s - t h e - b o a r d " i t s employees. emphasized t h a t an a p p o i n t i n g a u t h o r i t y the above 5 The merely can a s s e s s w h e t h e r an We a r e n o t p r e s e n t e d h e r e w i t h an a r g u m e n t t h a t t h e d i s c r e t i o n g i v e n the a p p o i n t i n g a u t h o r i t y extends to the e l i g i b i l i t y o f e m p l o y e e s f o r r a i s e s on an i n d i v i d u a l , r a t h e r t h a n on an a c r o s s - t h e - b o a r d , b a s i s . 5 13 1100430 employee had " s a t i s f a c t o r y the enabling circulated act. service" The e m p l o y e e s by counsel as p e r m i t t e d b y § 12 o f note that t h e memorandum f o r t h e r e c e i v e r i n 2004 e c h o e d i n t e r p r e t a t i o n of t h e language. They i n s i s t this that the "plain i n t e n t " o f R u l e 8.2(c) does n o t a f f o r d an a p p o i n t i n g a u t h o r i t y the d i s c r e t i o n t o d i s c o n t i n u e m e r i t The circuit court rejected this raises. argument, reasoning follows: "The R u l e does n o t p r o v i d e t h a t s t e p advancement i s a mandatory consequence o f a s a t i s f a c t o r y e f f i c i e n c y review; rather, the Rule provides that a s a t i s f a c t o r y e f f i c i e n c y r e v i e w ' s h a l l be r e q u i r e d f o r advancement' i . e . , i s a n e c e s s a r y p r e r e q u i s i t e f o r r e c e i v i n g a s t e p i n c r e a s e . The R u l e f u r t h e r makes i t c l e a r t h a t a s a t i s f a c t o r y e f f i c i e n c y r e v i e w makes t h e e m p l o y e e ' e l i g i b l e f o r , ' n o t n e c e s s a r i l y 'entitled to,' a step increase. The phrases ' e l i g i b l e f o r ' and ' e n t i t l e d t o ' a r e d i f f e r e n t , and t h e y mean d i f f e r e n t t h i n g s . See, e . g . , I m m i g r a t i o n And N a t u r a l i z a t i o n S e r v i c e v . C a r d o z a - F o n s e c a , 4 80 U.S. 421, 444 (1987) ('We do n o t c o n s i d e r i t a t a l l anomalous that out of the e n t i r e class of ' r e f u g e e s , ' t h o s e who c a n show a c l e a r p r o b a b i l i t y of p e r s e c u t i o n a r e e n t i t l e d t o mandatory suspension of deportation and e l i g i b l e for discretionary a s y l u m , w h i l e t h o s e who c a n o n l y show a w e l l - f o u n d e d fear of persecution are not e n t i t l e d to anything, but are e l i g i b l e f o r the d i s c r e t i o n a r y r e l i e f o f asylum.') (emphasis i n o r i g i n a l ) . I n a d d i t i o n , t h e phrase ' [ a ] t the d i s c r e t i o n of the Appointing Authority' leaves with the Appointing A u t h o r i t y the 'discretion' to decide whether t o grant step i n c r e a s e s , p r o v i d e d t h e mandatory p r e c o n d i t i o n o f a satisfactory efficiency review is satisfied. 14 as 1100430 F i n a l l y , t h e B o a r d i t s e l f has i n t e r p r e t e d t h i s R u l e t o a l l o w t h e s u s p e n s i o n o f m e r i t s t e p i n c r e a s e s , and t h e B o a r d ' s i n t e r p r e t a t i o n o f i t s own Rule is e n t i t l e d to s u b s t a n t i a l deference. See Personnel B o a r d o f J e f f e r s o n C o u n t y v. B a i l e y , 475 So. 2d 863, 866 ( A l a . C i v . App. 1985) ( ' [ S ] u b s t a n t i a l deference s h o u l d be g i v e n t o [ t h i s ] a g e n c y ' s i n t e r p r e t a t i o n o f i t s own r u l e s and r e g u l a t i o n s . ' ) . " We agree w i t h the c i r c u i t c o u r t . " ' [ L ] a n g u a g e u s e d i n an a d m i n i s t r a t i v e r e g u l a t i o n s h o u l d be g i v e n i t s n a t u r a l , plain, o r d i n a r y , and commonly u n d e r s t o o d m e a n i n g , j u s t as l a n g u a g e i n a statute.'" So. 2d 422, v. Beverly 1987)). Ex p a r t e W i l b a n k s 427 ( A l a . 2007) Enters., Under 521 a plain So. H e a l t h Care S e r v s . , I n c . , 986 ( q u o t i n g Alabama M e d i c a i d Agency 2d 1329, reading of 1332 Rule (Ala. Civ. 8.2(c), the App. phrase " [ a ] t the d i s c r e t i o n of the A p p o i n t i n g A u t h o r i t y " i n t r o d u c e s e v e r y t h i n g t h a t succeeds i t i n the sentence, a p p o i n t i n g a u t h o r i t y has m e r i t pay circuit regulation by noted, "the agency c a r r i e s weight unless i t i s p l a i n l y erroneous o f P r i c h a r d , 664 Brunson Constr. So. 2d 885, S t a t e s v. L a r i o n o f f , 431 U.S. M o r e o v e r , as interpretation the promulgating regulation."'" an d i s c r e t i o n as t o w h e t h e r t o p r o v i d e r a i s e s to i t s e l i g i b l e employees. court meaning t h a t an agency '"controlling or i n c o n s i s t e n t w i t h the & E n v t l . S e r v s . , I n c . v. 890 864, 15 of ( A l a . 1995) 872 the City (quoting United (1977), q u o t i n g i n t u r n 1100430 B o w l e s v . S e m i n o l e Rock Co., 325 U.S. 410, 414 Personnel Board i n t e r p r e t s Rule (1945)). 8.2(c) t o g i v e an a p p o i n t i n g a u t h o r i t y t h e d i s c r e t i o n t o suspend m e r i t pay r a i s e s the-board t o i t s employees, interpreted the rule and t h e p e r s o n n e l i n this The way since across- director 2007. Thus, has we c o n s t r u e R u l e 8.2(c) as p e r m i t t i n g an a p p o i n t i n g a u t h o r i t y t o suspend m e r i t pay r a i s e s The employees' f o r i t s employees. second and p r i m a r y argument however, i s t h a t , t o t h e e x t e n t t h a t R u l e suspension on appeal, 8.2(c) p e r m i t s t h e o f m e r i t p a y r a i s e s , i t c o n f l i c t s w i t h § 12 o f t h e enabling act. Both s i d e s have o b s e r v e d that the l e g i s l a t u r e amended p o r t i o n s o f t h e e n a b l i n g a c t , i n c l u d i n g § 12, t h r o u g h two a c t s , b o t h o f w h i c h , e f f e c t i v e a t 6:00 p.m. No. 684, A l a . A c t s acts a f t e r a p p r o v a l by t h e governor on May 23, 1977: 1977. A c t No. 680 a n d A c t The v e r s i o n s o f § 12 i n t h e s e a r e somewhat d i f f e r e n t , but the p a r t i e s § 12 t h e employees contend conflicts two agree t h a t the d i f f e r e n c e s do n o t a f f e c t t h e i s s u e on a p p e a l . of became 6 with The p o r t i o n Rule 8.2(c) T h i s C o u r t h a s n o t h a d an o c c a s i o n t o d e t e r m i n e w h i c h v e r s i o n o f § 12 i s c o n t r o l l i n g , t h o u g h t h e C o u r t d i d s t a t e i n W i l l i s v. K i n c a i d , 983 So. 2d 1100, 1106 ( A l a . 2 0 0 7 ) , t h a t A c t No. 684, A l a . A c t s 1977, c o n t a i n s " t h e c u r r e n t v e r s i o n o f § 12." 6 16 1100430 provides as Personnel follows in shall[:] regulations, and The No. 680: "The [p]rovide[], o r d e r s f o r the e a c h c l a s s o r g r a d e on service." Act the same p o r t i o n basis Direct[or] by proper advancement o f s a l a r y o f e f f i c i e n c y and o f § 12 i n A c t No. of rules, within of provides 684 length as follows: "The d i r e c t o r of p e r s o n n e l [ , ] s u b j e c t to the p r o v i s i o n s o f t h i s s u b d i v i s i o n and a p p r o v a l o f t h e p e r s o n n e l b o a r d [ , ] s h a l l : ... P r o v i d e , by p r o p e r rules, regulations, and orders and special p r o v i s i o n s i n t h e pay p l a n f o r t h e advancement o f s a l a r y w i t h i n e a c h c l a s s o r g r a d e on t h e b a s i s o f e f f i c i e n c y and l e n g t h o f s e r v i c e , and for other s p e c i a l c o n d i t i o n s and premium r a t e s o f pay." In a n u t s h e l l , the as e m p l o y e e s ' argument can be summarized follows: "The p l a i n language of the s t a t u t e r e q u i r e s the P e r s o n n e l Board to implement a system f o r ' s a l a r y a d v a n c e m e n t ' t h r o u g h t h e pay steps w i t h i n a pay g r a d e . ... But, having established a system f o r s a l a r y advancement, the B o a r d i s not a u t h o r i z e d , by r u l e or o t h e r w i s e , t o g i v e each A p p o i n t i n g A u t h o r i t y the o p t i o n of whether to implement the required s y s t e m f o r s a l a r y advancement i n a g i v e n fiscal year. The trial court erroneously found that A p p o i n t i n g A u t h o r i t i e s have t h e o p t i o n o f s u s p e n d i n g merit r a i s e s at w i l l . " In o t h e r words, the employees contend t h a t P e r s o n n e l B o a r d and appointing pay authorities r a i s e s t o q u a l i f i e d e m p l o y e e s and 17 § 12 requires to provide the merit t h a t the l e g i s l a t u r e d i d 1100430 not g i v e those e n t i t i e s the d i s c r e t i o n to h a l t such r a i s e s f o r any reason. The employees f u r t h e r contend that " [ t ] h e r e i s no a m b i g u i t y i n t h a t l a n g u a g e . And t h e r e i s n o t h i n g t o suggest t h a t the system f o r step grade i n c r e a s e s may be a t t h e o p t i o n o f e a c h A p p o i n t i n g Authority to accept or reject. There are two c r i t e r i a f o r a d v a n c e m e n t : (1) ' e f f i c i e n c y ' and (2) ' l e n g t h of s e r v i c e . ' While the P e r s o n n e l Board i s g i v e n r u l e making a u t h o r i t y to implement those two c r i t e r i a , i t does n o t have t h e a u t h o r i t y t o add t o or d i m i n i s h those r e q u i r e m e n t s by r u l e m a k i n g or o t h e r p o l i c y m a k i n g a c t i o n . I t c e r t a i n l y does n o t have t h e a u t h o r i t y t o g i v e A p p o i n t i n g A u t h o r i t i e s the o p t i o n of whether t o comply w i t h the s t a t u t o r y d u t y t o i m p l e m e n t a Pay P l a n t h a t i s c o n s t r u c t e d w i t h s u i t a b l e g r a d e s and s t e p s w i t h i n g r a d e . " For its part, the Personnel Board contends R u l e 8.2(c) c o n s t i t u t e s a l a w f u l i m p l e m e n t a t i o n by that i t of s t a t e d r e q u i r e m e n t s o f § 12 o f t h e e n a b l i n g a c t w i t h r e g a r d " t h e advancement o f s a l a r y . " for r a i s e s w i t h i n the performance, service. do As t h a t the p l a i n the to I t notes t h a t the r u l e p r o v i d e s grades satisfactory the of i.e., the schedule efficiency employees, the l a n g u a g e o f § 12 pay Personnel supports and based on length of Board contends i t s position: " [ T ] h e E m p l o y e e s s i m p l y c a n n o t p o i n t t o any l a n g u a g e i n t h e E n a b l i n g A c t t h a t e n t i t l e s them t o m a n d a t o r y s t e p i n c r e a s e s as o f r i g h t , n o r s t e p i n c r e a s e s o f any p a r t i c u l a r f r e q u e n c y , n o r s t e p i n c r e a s e s i n any p a r t i c u l a r amount. The E m p l o y e e s ' i n t e r p r e t a t i o n o f Section 12 implies negative restraints on the Personnel Board's rulemaking power, and 18 1100430 n o n d i s c r e t i o n a r y d u t i e s on t h e p a r t o f A p p o i n t i n g A u t h o r i t i e s , that simply c a n n o t be f o u n d i n t h e text." B o t h s i d e s a r e c o r r e c t t h a t i n i n t e r p r e t i n g a s t a t u t e we are bound by t h e " I n Ex ( A l a . 2000) 2d 960, 964 p l a i n language of the s t a t u t e . p a r t e Dorough, 773 So. 2d 1001, 1003 ( c i t i n g Ex p a r t e P f i z e r , I n c . , 746 So. ( A l a . 1999)), t h i s Court stated: "'"'When t h e l a n g u a g e o f a s t a t u t e i s p l a i n and unambiguous, ... c o u r t s must e n f o r c e t h e s t a t u t e as w r i t t e n b y g i v i n g t h e words o f t h e s t a t u t e t h e i r o r d i n a r y p l a i n m e a n i n g t h e y must i n t e r p r e t t h a t l a n g u a g e t o mean e x a c t l y what i t s a y s a n d thus give e f f e c t t o the apparent i n t e n t o f t h e L e g i s l a t u r e . ' ... "'"'In meaning o f a looks to the words as legislature. determining the s t a t u t e , t h i s Court p l a i n meaning o f t h e written by the As we have s a i d : "'"'"'Words u s e d i n a s t a t u t e must be g i v e n their natural, plain, ordinary, a n d commonly u n d e r s t o o d meaning, and where p l a i n l a n g u a g e i s u s e d a c o u r t i s bound to interpret that language to mean e x a c t l y what i t s a y s . I f the language of the s t a t u t e i s unambiguous, t h e n t h e r e i s no room f o r j u d i c i a l 19 1100430 construction and the c lear ly e x p r e s s ed i ntent of th e legislature must be given e f f e c t . ' " ' " ' "(Citations omitted.)" Ex p a r t e C i t y o f Orange B e a c h 51, 56 Bd. o f A d j u s t m e n t , 833 So. 2d ( A l a . 2001). B o t h s i d e s have b a s e d t h e i r c o m p e t i n g i n t e r p r e t a t i o n s o f § 12 n o t so much on t h e t e x t what i t does n o t s a y . does The e m p l o y e e s not e x p l i c i t l y power t o a l l o w raises, the appointing § allowing appointing 12 legislature Both that made does not as t h e P e r s o n n e l B o a r d has the t o suspend payment of Personnel Board prohibit the on merit such the pay raises contends that Personnel Board from a u t h o r i t i e s t o suspend m e r i t r a i s e s , the intended to allow the Personnel Board d i s c r e t i o n subject. sides cite rules of statutory s u p p o r t of t h e i r d i v e r g e n t arguments the however, c o n t e n d t h a t b e c a u s e § 12 authorities Conversely, the because on t h i s state legislature mandatory. of the s t a t u t e , statute. construction The employees maxim o f e x p r e s s i o 20 construction in b a s e d on t h e s i l e n c e o f rely upon the unius est exclusio statutory alterius, 1100430 " t o e x p r e s s o r i n c l u d e one t h i n g i m p l i e s t h e e x c l u s i o n other." Black's Law D i c t i o n a r y 661 ( 9 t h e d . 2 0 0 9 ) . of the See a l s o J e f f e r s o n C n t y . v. A l a b a m a C r i m i n a l J u s t i c e I n f o . C t r . Comm'n, 620 So. 2d 651, 658 ( A l a . 1993) (stating that i n c l u s i o n of requirements i n the law i m p l i e s exclude other "the express an i n t e n t i o n t o r e q u i r e m e n t s n o t so i n c l u d e d " ) . The e m p l o y e e s r e a s o n t h a t t h e i n c l u s i o n i n § 12 o f t h e e n a b l i n g a c t of the requirement scheme f o r salary that the Personnel advancements legislature necessarily to exclude advancements Board implies t h e power f o r any r e a s o n . This create a an i n t e n t i o n b y t h e t o suspend logic does such salary not follow, however. The maxim a t i s s u e g e n e r a l l y or rule u t i l i z e s applies nature only a listing when as " o t h e r s " o r group o f t h i n g s . the "things" that a p p l i e s o n l y when a s t a t u t e expressed have been Further, i t a r e o f t h e same excluded. I n B a r n h a r t v. Peabody C o a l Co., 537 U.S. 149, 168 ( 2 0 0 3 ) , t h e U n i t e d Supreme C o u r t States explained: "As we have h e l d unius e s t exclusio statutory l i s t i n g when the items 'associated group repeatedly, t h e canon expressio a l t e r i u s does n o t a p p l y t o e v e r y o r g r o u p i n g ; i t has f o r c e only expressed a r e members o f an or series,' justifying the 21 1100430 i n f e r e n c e t h a t i t e m s n o t m e n t i o n e d were e x c l u d e d d e l i b e r a t e choice, not inadvertence." (Emphasis added.) 876 n.13 See a l s o C a r v e r ( 9 t h C i r . 2009) Norman J . S i n g e r v. Lehman, ( t o same e f f e c t & J.D. Shambie S i n g e r , by 558 F.3d 869, as B a r n h a r t ) ; Sutherland 2A Statutory C o n s t r u c t i o n § 47:23 ( 7 t h e d . 2009) ( e x p l a i n i n g t h a t t h e maxim "has force only when t h e i t e m s expressed a r e members o f an a s s o c i a t e d group or s e r i e s , j u s t i f y i n g the i n f e r e n c e t h a t the items not mentioned were excluded by deliberate choice" (emphasis a d d e d ) ) . Here, there i s only a adopt scheme Personnel Board salary." The e n a b l i n g specific attributes implication attributes that a general requirement f o r "the the scheme the l e g i s l a t u r e not e x p r e s s l y so intended authorized as must a d v a n c e 7 of or prescribe to justify to exclude or p r e s c r i b e d . o t h e r t h i n g s , i t c o n t a i n s no s p e c i f i c s as t o t h e s c h e d u l e which s a l a r i e s the advancement a c t does n o t a u t h o r i z e of that o r i n what amounts. an other Among upon In short, The o n l y r e f e r e n c e t o t i m i n g o r frequency i s found i n § 12 o f t h e e n a b l i n g a c t as amended by A c t No. 684, w h i c h p r o v i d e s f o r t h e g r a d i n g a n d c l a s s i f i c a t i o n o f p o s i t i o n s by t h e P e r s o n n e l B o a r d " a t l e a s t once e v e r y f i v e y e a r s . " 7 22 1100430 t h e r e i s no g r o u p o r s e r i e s o f t h i n g s e x p r e s s e d provides i n a way t h a t a p r e d i c a t e f o r t h e o p e r a t i o n o f t h e maxim. I n a d d i t i o n , t h e maxim i s o f l i t t l e h e l p i n t h i s c a s e f o r an e v e n more f u n d a m e n t a l reason: " ' S e v e r a l L a t i n maxims masquerade as r u l e s o f interpretation while doing nothing more than d e s c r i b i n g r e s u l t s r e a c h e d b y o t h e r means. The b e s t example i s p r o b a b l y e x p r e s s i o u n i u s e s t e x c l u s i o a l t e r i u s , which i s a r a t h e r e l a b o r a t e , mysterious s o u n d i n g , a n d a n a c h r o n i s t i c way o f d e s c r i b i n g t h e n e g a t i v e i m p l i c a t i o n . F a r from b e i n g a r u l e , i t i s not even l e x i c o g r a p h i c a l l y a c c u r a t e , because i t i s s i m p l y n o t t r u e , g e n e r a l l y , t h a t t h e mere e x p r e s s c o n f e r r a l o f a r i g h t o r p r i v i l e g e i n one k i n d o f s i t u a t i o n i m p l i e s the d e n i a l of the equivalent r i g h t o r p r i v i l e g e i n o t h e r k i n d s . Sometimes i t does and s o m e t i m e s i t does n o t , and w h e t h e r i t does o r does not depends on t h e p a r t i c u l a r circumstances of context. Without contextual support, therefore, there i s n o t even a mild presumption here. A c c o r d i n g l y , t h i s maxim i s a t b e s t a d e s c r i p t i o n , a f t e r t h e f a c t , o f what t h e c o u r t h a s d i s c o v e r e d f r o m c o n t e x t . ' R. D i c k e r s o n , The I n t e r p r e t a t i o n and A p p l i c a t i o n o f S t a t u t e s 234-35 ( 1 9 7 5 ) . " United States v. C a s t r o , 837 F.2d 441, 443 n.2 (11th C i r . 1988). The Personnel Board cites t h e more specific rule that " [ t ] h e p e r s o n n e l board's i n t e r p r e t a t i o n o f [the e n a b l i n g a c t ] , although deference not conclusive, from legislative this intent." i s nonetheless Court Smith with respect v. C i t y 23 entitled to great to the question of Pleasant Grove, of 672 1100430 So. 2d 501, 506 ( A l a . 1995). helpful i n this instance, deference given a statute does not exceed So. 2d the r u l e i s not exists ... agency's 1102 traditional agency's i n t e r p r e t a t i o n of when t h e statutory Ex p a r t e S t a t e H e a l t h 1098, particularly however, because " [ t ] h e administrative appropriately jurisdiction)." 855 an This interpretation authority Planning ( A l a . 2002). The (i.e., & Dev. Agency, whole t h r u s t of e m p l o y e e s ' argument i s t h a t t h e P e r s o n n e l B o a r d does n o t the statutory authority power t o s u s p e n d m e r i t to grant pay S e t t l i n g the d i s p u t e of the silence of the appointing effect statute." Divining the to the over the statute two context authorities a r g u m e n t s on t h e requires adherence to basis "[t]he 801 intent So. in 2d 7, 9-10 of the enabling act as a whole. by the one Mobile County Personnel act that created i s o l a t e d and narrowly As this 24 Board that board: construed a (Ala. 2001). l e g i s l a t u r e ' s i n t e n t e n t a i l s e x a m i n i n g § 12 v i o l a t e the e n a b l i n g taking and enacting rule did "Instead sentence in Court s t a t e d i n a p r e v i o u s case i n which i t determined t h a t a promulgated the [which] i s t o a s c e r t a i n Legislature's Ex p a r t e B e r r y h i l l , the have raises. p o l e s t a r of s t a t u t o r y c o n s t r u c t i o n give the of not of [a 1100430 section in the statute], we should look to the entire f r a m e w o r k o f t h e a c t , t h e i n t e n t s and p u r p o s e s o f t h e a c t and t h e means by w h i c h i t has b e e n g i v e n c o n s t r u c t i o n , e f f e c t and operation during i t s years Mobile, e.g., 260 A l a . 393, Berryhill, 801 401, So. language (emphasis (Ala. used as So. 2d from parte (observing 513, as may the Jackson, that Jordan 520 v. C i t y (1954). See, be inferred from reason f o r the act" 614 "[b]ecause So. 2d 405, 406 the meaning s t a t u t o r y l a n g u a g e depends on c o n t e x t , a s t a t u t e i s t o be as a of ( s t a t i n g t h a t we must " g i v e i n t e n t ... w e l l as o m i t t e d ) ) ; Ex 1993) 71 2d a t 11 e f f e c t to the l e g i s l a t i v e the of e x i s t e n c e . " of read whole"). " A c t No. 248 [ t h e e n a b l i n g a c t ] , e n a c t e d i n 1945 as a ' g e n e r a l l a w o f l o c a l a p p l i c a t i o n , ' p r o v i d e s f o r t h e c r e a t i o n and e s t a b l i s h m e n t o f a c o u n t y - w i d e civil s e r v i c e s y s t e m and a personnel board i n c o u n t i e s h a v i n g a p o p u l a t i o n o f 400,000 o r more, whose d u t i e s i n c l u d e t h e d e t e r m i n a t i o n o f ' s a l a r y income' f o r c l a s s i f i e d c i v i l s e r v i c e employees." C o u n t y Comm'n o f J e f f e r s o n C n t y . v. F r a t e r n a l O r d e r o f P o l i c e , Lodge No. 64, 558 So. 2d 893, 895 ( A l a . 1989) . This Court has s t a t e d t h a t the e n a b l i n g a c t v e s t s the P e r s o n n e l Board b r o a d power and regulations necessary to a u t h o r i t y t o e s t a b l i s h r u l e s and govern and control 25 ' a l l employees "with holding 1100430 p o s i t i o n s i n the all classified municipalities Arrington, 392 So. service of' within 2d 806, that 808 J e f f e r s o n County county." ( A l a . 1980) Henderson administrative generally on Bd. the administrative rules addressing co-extensive question.'" with (quoting Marcet v. Thus, we interpret the legislature for "includ[ing] classified act Jefferson the 938 of the 48, the with J e f f e r s o n C n t y . , 558 So. conferred to an A s s ' n v. 'is speak Personnel ( A l a . C i v . App. 50, So. 2d 333, that we i n mind 'salary must system, Comm'n for of 895. a c t and administrative the b r o a d powers agency -- and p e r s o n n e l b o a r d s i n p a r t i c u l a r -- t h e r e u n d e r , i t s h o u l d n o t 26 the powers income' County & 335 that civil-service employees." 1998) Examination 29 idea of G i v e n t h e n a t u r e o f an e n a b l i n g generally adopt concern Personnel Board broad County's 2d a t pursuant l e g i s l a t u r e to recognition the determination service of Plumbers Ala. s t a r t with sought to give civil 2d 932, Board enabling regulating t h a t of the So. R e g i s t r a t i o n o f A l a b a m a , 249 (1947)). area Mobile F i r e Fighters o f M o b i l e C n t y . , 720 a c t and a g e n c y ' s power t o an v. (emphasis added). I n f a c t , " w i t h i n t h e f r a m e w o r k o f an e n a b l i n g t o i t s d i r e c t i o n s , an and to be 1100430 surprising that on two separate occasions our courts r e j e c t e d arguments s i m i l a r t o t h a t of the employees, contention t h a t the failure have i . e . , the o f an e n a b l i n g a c t t o e x p r e s s l y s t a t e t h a t a p e r s o n n e l b o a r d p o s s e s s e d a c e r t a i n power meant t h a t i t was p r o h i b i t e d from t a k i n g a c e r t a i n action. " I n J o r d a n [v. C i t y o f M o b i l e , 260 A l a . 393, 400, 71 So. 2d 513 ( 1 9 5 4 ) ] , o u r Supreme C o u r t u p h e l d the v a l i d i t y of [Mobile County P e r s o n n e l ] Board Rule 14.7, p r o v i d i n g t h a t appeals to the Board from disciplinary decisions made by appointing a u t h o r i t i e s s h a l l be h e a r d de novo, and t h a t t h e B o a r d can r e s c i n d , m o d i f y , a l t e r , o r a f f i r m t h e p e n a l t y i m p o s e d o r i m p o s e an a d d i t i o n a l o r d i f f e r e n t p e n a l t y as may be w a r r a n t e d by t h e e v i d e n c e a d d u c e d at the h e a r i n g . N o t a b l y , the Jordan c o u r t upheld R u l e 14.7 d e s p i t e t h e a b s e n c e o f any l a n g u a g e i n § XXII of the A c t , which p e r t a i n s to d i s m i s s a l , t h a t w o u l d e x p r e s s l y a l l o w t h e B o a r d t o do a n y t h i n g o t h e r than r e i n s t a t e a d i s m i s s e d employee." M o b i l e F i r e F i g h t e r s A s s ' n , 720 the Jordan Court So. 2d a t 938. Specifically, stated: "We do n o t c o n s i d e r t h a t t h e mere f a c t t h a t t h e l e g i s l a t u r e saw f i t t o d e c l a r e by S e c t i o n 22(a) what t h e j u d g m e n t o f t h e b o a r d s h o u l d be when a c h a r g e a g a i n s t an e m p l o y e e i s p r o v e n u n w a r r a n t e d , t h a t t h i s i n h i b i t s the b o a r d or l i m i t s i t s powers t o adopt rules governing cases where the grounds for dismissal are t e c h n i c a l or the cause therefor t r i v i a l , f o l l o w e d by s e v e r e and e x c e s s i v e p u n i s h m e n t by t h e a p p o i n t i n g a u t h o r i t y , n a m e l y , t h e c i t y o r t h e county." 27 1100430 260 A l a . a t 400, 71 So. 2d a t 519. Fighters Ass'n, the Court reasoning i n Jordan, section sets Likewise, of C i v i l concluded i n Mobile Fire Appeals, emulating the that the f a c t " [ t ] h a t the Act's [ A c t No. 470 o f t h e 1939 A l a b a m a L e g i s l a t u r e , w h i c h forth Mobile t h e p o w e r s and d u t i e s County] provide labeled for final of the Personnel 'Promotion' does not s e l e c t i o n of a c e r t i f i e d Board of specifically candidate b y an a p p o i n t i n g a u t h o r i t y does n o t l i m i t t h e B o a r d ' s d i s c r e t i o n t o provide Mobile f o r such a result through i t s rulemaking power." F i r e F i g h t e r s A s s ' n , 720 So. 2d a t 939. A perusal of the p r o v i s i o n s of the enabling a c t confirms t h a t t h e l e g i s l a t u r e c o n f e r r e d b r o a d d i s c r e t i o n a r y p o w e r s upon the Personnel in part, Board. that The t i t l e the purpose of the enabling act provides, o f t h e a c t was " [ t ] o create and e s t a b l i s h i n each county i n Alabama w h i c h has a p o p u l a t i o n o f 400,000 o r more ... a c o u n t y - w i d e C i v i l S e r v i c e S y s t e m ... a n d to create a Personnel Board and other agencies f o r the s u p e r v i s i o n and a d m i n i s t r a t i o n o f s a i d System i n each o f such counties "Personnel " Section 2 of the enabling act, entitled B o a r d : e x t e n t o f i t s a u t h o r i t y d e f i n e d , " as amended by A c t No. 677, A l a . A c t s 1977, p r o v i d e s 28 i n part that 1100430 " [ i ] n and f o r e a c h s e p a r a t e c o u n t y o f t h e S t a t e of Alabama w h i c h has a p o p u l a t i o n o f f o u r hundred t h o u s a n d o r more p e o p l e a c c o r d i n g t o t h e l a s t o r any f u t u r e f e d e r a l c e n s u s , t h e r e s h a l l be a p e r s o n n e l b o a r d f o r t h e g o v e r n m e n t and c o n t r o l b y r u l e s a n d r e g u l a t i o n s and p r a c t i c e s h e r e i n a f t e r s e t o u t o r a u t h o r i z e d o f a l l employees and a p p o i n t e e s h o l d i n g p o s i t i o n s i n the c l a s s i f i e d s e r v i c e of such c o u n t i e s and the m u n i c i p a l i t i e s therein ... and such p e r s o n n e l b o a r d i s v e s t e d w i t h s u c h power, a u t h o r i t y and j u r i s d i c t i o n . " Act No. 677, A l a . A c t s 1977, § 2. is vested employees with the i n the authority civil-service Thus, t h e P e r s o n n e l B o a r d 8 to govern system and through control the rules and r e g u l a t i o n s i t promulgates. S i m i l a r t o t h e s i t u a t i o n w i t h § 12 o f t h e e n a b l i n g a c t o u t l i n e d above, two d i f f e r e n t v e r s i o n s o f § 2 o f t h e e n a b l i n g a c t a l s o e x i s t b e c a u s e t h e l e g i s l a t u r e l i k e w i s e e n a c t e d two a c t s a m e n d i n g t h a t s e c t i o n a t t h e same t i m e . S e c t i o n 2, as amended b y A c t No. 782, A l a . A c t s 1977, r e a d s almost i d e n t i c a l l y t o § 2 as amended b y A c t No. 677, i n r e g a r d t o t h e quoted passage, p r o v i d i n g : 8 "In and f o r each s e p a r a t e county o f t h e S t a t e o f Alabama which has a p o p u l a t i o n o f f o u r hundred t h o u s a n d o r more i n h a b i t a n t s a c c o r d i n g t o t h e l a s t o r any f u t u r e f e d e r a l c e n s u s , t h e r e s h a l l be a p e r s o n n e l b o a r d f o r t h e government and c o n t r o l , by r u l e s and r e g u l a t i o n s and p r a c t i c e s h e r e i n a f t e r s e t out or authorize [sic], o f a l l employees and appointees holding positions i n the c l a s s i f i e d s e r v i c e o f s u c h c o u n t i e s , ... a n d s u c h p e r s o n n e l b o a r d i s v e s t e d w i t h such powers, a u t h o r i t y and jurisdiction." Act No. 782, A l a . A c t s 1977, § 2. 29 1100430 Both versions 680 o f § 12 o f t h e e n a b l i n g a c t a n d A c t No. 684 provide further i n A c t No. confirmation that the l e g i s l a t u r e e n t r u s t e d t h e P e r s o n n e l B o a r d w i t h b r o a d powers i n regard to regulating Section 12, as amended i n A c t No. 680, i s e n t i t l e d "Pay P l a n , " and the c i v i l - s e r v i c e i t provides i n pertinent part as employment system. follows: "The D i r e c t [ o r ] o f P e r s o n n e l s h a l l E s t a b l i s h , a f t e r consultation or o f f e r of consultation with the governing bodies affected, a s a l a r y schedule f o r a l l p o s i t i o n s which s h a l l contain a minimum r a t e , a maximum r a t e and s u c h i n t e r m e d i a t e r a t e s as a r e deemed n e c e s s a r y b y t h e P e r s o n n e l B o a r d [ , ] w h i c h s h a l l become e f f e c t i v e w i t h i n t h i r t y d a y s a f t e r s u b m i s s i o n t o t h e g o v e r n i n g body c o n c e r n e d , p r o v i d e d that the governing body of each county and m u n i c i p a l i t y a f f e c t e d h e r e b y may r a i s e o r l o w e r s u c h s c h e d u l e b y a p p l y i n g t h e same p e r c e n t a g e i n c r e a s e o r d e c r e a s e , o r f l a t sum o f i n c r e a s e o r d e c r e a s e , o r any c o m b i n a t i o n t h e r e o f , t o each p o s i t i o n i n the entire schedule; .... Changes i n t h e s a l a r y s c h e d u l e o f one c l a s s o r a number o f c l a s s e s l e s s t h a n a l l may a l s o be made b y o r d e r o r r e s o l u t i o n o f a g o v e r n i n g body as f o l l o w s : A c e r t i f i e d c o p y o f s u c h o r d e r o r r e s o l u t i o n s h a l l be f i l e d w i t h t h e P e r s o n n e l Board, and u n l e s s t h e s a i d r e s o l u t i o n o r o r d e r be d i s a p p r o v e d b y s a i d P e r s o n n e l B o a r d w i t h i n thirty days a f t e r t h e date o f f i l i n g of such c e r t i f i e d c o p y t h e same s h a l l be v a l i d a n d o p e r a t i v e a c c o r d i n g t o i t s terms. ... P r o v i d e d [ s i c ] , b y proper rules, regulations, and o r d e r s f o r the advancement o f s a l a r y w i t h i n e a c h c l a s s o r g r a d e on the b a s i s o f e f f i c i e n c y and l e n g t h o f s e r v i c e . I t s h a l l be u n l a w f u l f o r an A p p o i n t i n g A u t h o r i t y o r disbursing o f f i c e r t o p a y o r c a u s e t o be p a i d a s a l a r y t o any e m p l o y e e g r e a t e r t h a n o r l e s s t h a n t h e s a l a r y t o w h i c h such employee i s e n t i t l e d t o so 30 1100430 r e c e i v e . Such s a l a r y s c h e d u l e s , c l a s s e s and g r a d e s may from time to time be amended, added t o , c o n s o l i d a t e d o r a b o l i s h e d by t h e B o a r d . " (Emphasis added.) Section 12, as amended in "Duties of p e r s o n n e l d i r e c t o r , " p a r t as Act and No. 684, is entitled i t provides i n pertinent follows: "The d i r e c t o r o f p e r s o n n e l s u b j e c t t o t h e p r o v i s i o n s o f t h i s s u b d i v i s i o n and a p p r o v a l o f t h e p e r s o n n e l b o a r d s h a l l : ... A t l e a s t once e v e r y f i v e y e a r s , grade and classify or d i r e c t the grading and c l a s s i f i c a t i o n o f a l l p o s i t i o n s i n t h e c o u n t y and i n e a c h c i t y i n t h e c o u n t y and f o r e a c h a p p o i n t i n g a u t h o r i t y w i t h r e s p e c t t o s a l a r y t o t h e end t h a t e a c h e m p l o y e e s h a l l r e c e i v e t h e same c o m p e n s a t i o n as a l l o t h e r employees of the s a i d county or c i t y or a p p o i n t i n g a u t h o r i t y r e c e i v e f o r t h e same g r a d e and c l a s s o f s e r v i c e . The q u e s t i o n w h e t h e r o r n o t an e m p l o y e e has b e e n a s s i g n e d t o t h e p r o p e r c l a s s and g r a d e s h a l l be a m a t t e r s u b j e c t t o t h e d e c i s i o n o f the board. E s t a b l i s h , a f t e r c o n s u l t a t i o n w i t h the g o v e r n i n g b o d i e s a f f e c t e d , a pay p l a n and s a l a r y schedule f o r a l l p o s i t i o n s which s h a l l c o n t a i n a minimum r a t e , a maximum r a t e and s u c h i n t e r m e d i a t e and p r e m i u m r a t e s as a r e deemed n e c e s s a r y by t h e p e r s o n n e l b o a r d , w h i c h s h a l l become e f f e c t i v e w i t h i n t h i r t y d a y s a f t e r s u b m i s s i o n t o t h e g o v e r n i n g body c o n c e r n e d , p r o v i d e d t h a t t h e g o v e r n i n g body o f e a c h c o u n t y and m u n i c i p a l i t y a f f e c t e d h e r e b y may r a i s e o r l o w e r s u c h s c h e d u l e by a p p l y i n g t h e same p e r c e n t a g e increase or decrease to the entire schedule, p r o v i d e d , h o w e v e r , no g o v e r n i n g body s h a l l raise s u c h e n t i r e s c h e d u l e w i t h i n t w e l v e months a f t e r t h e a d o p t i o n o f a new s a l a r y s c h e d u l e , n o r w i t h i n t w e l v e months i m m e d i a t e l y p r e c e d i n g any p r i m a r y o r g e n e r a l e l e c t i o n s i n w h i c h t h e members o f t h e s a i d g o v e r n i n g body a r e t o be e l e c t e d , e x c e p t upon t h e a p p r o v a l o f 31 1100430 t h e p e r s o n n e l b o a r d .... Changes i n t h e salary s c h e d u l e on one c l a s s o r a number o f c l a s s e s l e s s t h a n a l l may a l s o be made by o r d e r o r r e s o l u t i o n o f a g o v e r n i n g body as f o l l o w s : A c e r t i f i e d c o p y o f s u c h o r d e r o r r e s o l u t i o n s h a l l be f i l e d w i t h the p e r s o n n e l b o a r d , and u n l e s s t h e s a i d r e s o l u t i o n o r o r d e r be d i s a p p r o v e d by s a i d p e r s o n n e l b o a r d w i t h i n thirty days a f t e r the date of filing of such c e r t i f i e d c o p y t h e same s h a l l be v a l i d and operative a c c o r d i n g t o i t s t e r m s . . . . P r o v i d e , by p r o p e r r u l e s , r e g u l a t i o n s , and o r d e r s and s p e c i a l p r o v i s i o n s i n t h e pay p l a n f o r t h e advancement o f s a l a r y w i t h i n e a c h c l a s s o r g r a d e on t h e b a s i s o f e f f i c i e n c y and l e n g t h o f s e r v i c e , and f o r o t h e r s p e c i a l c o n d i t i o n s and premium r a t e s o f pay. I t s h a l l be u n l a w f u l f o r an a p p o i n t i n g a u t h o r i t y o r d i s b u r s i n g o f f i c e r t o pay o r c a u s e t o be p a i d a s a l a r y t o any e m p l o y e e g r e a t e r than or l e s s than the s a l a r y t o w h i c h such employee i s e n t i t l e d t o so r e c e i v e . Such pay p l a n and s a l a r y s c h e d u l e s , c l a s s e s and g r a d e s may f r o m t i m e t o t i m e be amended, added t o , c o n s o l i d a t e d o r a b o l i s h e d by the board." (Emphasis added.) Under § 12 with the of the enabling establish employees, and a pay and plan personnel director, and regulations a Section salary within " f o r the the a grade f o r a l l c l a s s i f i e d e m p l o y e e s , must must p r o v i d e e a c h c l a s s o r g r a d e on service." the a p p r o v a l o f t h e p e r s o n n e l b o a r d , must c r e a t e a c l a s s i f i c a t i o n structure rules act, pay plan a l l such by proper salary within o f e f f i c i e n c y and length of empowers t h e g o v e r n i n g b o d i e s w i t h i n e a c h c o u n t y and m u n i c i p a l i t y 32 the for advancement o f basis 12 e x p r e s s l y schedule regulated by t h e enabling 1100430 act to raise or lower the e n t i r e salary are p e r m i t t e d t o change t h e s a l a r y schedule; they s c h e d u l e o f one also o r more, but fewer than a l l , c l a s s e s w i t h i n the s c h e d u l e , p r o v i d e d the p e r s o n n e l b o a r d does n o t d i s a p p r o v e o f s u c h a change. the add Finally, p e r s o n n e l b o a r d i s e x p r e s s l y g r a n t e d t h e power t o amend, to, consolidate, schedules, classes, Given the or abolish the pay plan, salary and g r a d e s . purpose of the enabling act, the broad p a r a m e t e r s o f t h e s t a t u t o r y scheme, and t h e p e r t i n e n t p o r t i o n s of § 12 -- a l l o u t l i n e d above -- t h e e r r o n e o u s n a t u r e o f t h e employees' employees argument becomes apparent. In essence, c o n t e n d t h a t w i t h i n an a c t i n w h i c h t h e the legislature i n t e n d e d t o p r o v i d e the P e r s o n n e l B o a r d w i t h b r o a d powers t o regulate the compensation director, for civil-service scheme with some k i n d the o f mechanism and Personnel Board length from of of salary service allowing for a period. including that approval, must p r o v i d e advancement b a s e d appointing raises on prohibits the authorities to for civil-service In o t h e r words, the employees 33 its the p e r s o n n e l implicitly a c r o s s - t h e - b o a r d m e r i t pay employees -- requirement the P e r s o n n e l Board's efficiency suspend -- system u r g e an 1100430 e m p h a s i s on t h e l i m i t a t i o n o f power i n a s t a t u t e d e s i g n e d grant broad The to discretion. general purpose of the enabling act and d i s c r e t i o n the employees admit the P e r s o n n e l Board the possesses t o make r u l e s c o n c e r n i n g s a l a r y a d v a n c e s c e r t a i n l y c a s t d o u b t upon t h e e m p l o y e e s ' p o s i t i o n . mechanism for salary Indeed, advancement is the requirement so generic for a that the e m p l o y e e s a d m i t t h a t t h e P e r s o n n e l B o a r d has t h e d i s c r e t i o n t o determine how i t i s implemented, " g r a d i n g " and "classifications" amount t o be p a i d t o employees these classifications and appointing authorities constitutes "efficient" i . e . , to upon the to determine t o be u s e d , the in different gradings, the decide and within to delegate discretion s e r v i c e by an "steps" to to decide the what employee. More h a r m f u l t o t h e e m p l o y e e s ' a r g u m e n t , h o w e v e r , i s t h e f a c t t h a t § 12 o f t h e e n a b l i n g a c t g r a n t s t h e P e r s o n n e l t h e power t o amend, add t o , c o n s o l i d a t e , or a b o l i s h Board the pay p l a n , s a l a r y s c h e d u l e s , c l a s s e s , and g r a d e s a t i t s d i s c r e t i o n . Thus, t h e e m p l o y e e s a r e has contending t h e power t o a b o l i s h power t o a u t h o r i z e t h e the t h a t the entire suspension 34 pay Personnel p l a n but o f m e r i t pay Board lacks raises the that 1100430 e x i s t w i t h i n the pay p l a n . T h i s C o u r t has o b s e r v e d t h a t " t h e power t o r e p e a l i s t h e power t o amend. the less[er]." 524, 154 So. Bessemer, H a r d v. S t a t e 77, 164 83 ex r e l . B a k e r , (1934). Ala. 599, The g r e a t e r See 615, 51 includes 228 A l a . 517, also Eidge So. v. 246, City 251 of (1909) ( M c C l e l l a n , J . , d i s s e n t i n g ) ("The u n d e r l y i n g p r i n c i p l e i s t h a t the L e g i s l a t u r e , having traffic right i n liquors, t o render the r i g h t and power t o p r o h i b i t t h e has a l s o , and n e c e s s a r i l y , t h e power and the major purpose e f f e c t i v e by r e m o v i n g and i n h i b i t i n g t h e o p p o r t u n i t y f o r e v a s i o n by t r i c k , a r t i f i c e , o r design. The greater principle holds in includes this the instance: lesser."). the The power to same abolish n e c e s s a r i l y i n c l u d e s t h e power t o s u s p e n d . F u r t h e r m o r e , as t h e P e r s o n n e l B o a r d n o t e s , t h e e m p l o y e e s ' interpretation would produce absurd under the employees' i n t e r p r e t a t i o n , must grant through a Similarly, pay plan merit merit raises, wholesale results. an a p p o i n t i n g a u t h o r i t y but i t could reduction in negate the i t w o u l d seem t h a t t h e P e r s o n n e l violates the employees' p a y r a i s e s must be g i v e n 35 For example, those salary Board's raises schedule. 10-step i n t e r p r e t a t i o n because, i f s o l e l y b a s e d on satisfactory 1100430 s e r v i c e and denied pay such l e n g t h of s e r v i c e , then such r a i s e s c o u l d not t o an e m p l o y e e a t s t e p 10 -- grade. as The employees Thompson, who t h e h i g h e s t s t e p -- concede, i s at step however, 10 of g r a d e , a r e n o t e n t i t l e d t o a m e r i t pay For a l l the requirement provide foregoing reasons, his that be of a employees applicable pay raise. we conclude that the i n § 12 o f t h e e n a b l i n g a c t t h a t t h e pay p l a n must f o r "the advancement o f s a l a r y w i t h i n e a c h c l a s s o r g r a d e on t h e b a s i s o f e f f i c i e n c y and l e n g t h o f s e r v i c e " does not p r o h i b i t the P e r s o n n e l Board from a u t h o r i z i n g a c r o s s - t h e board suspensions o f m e r i t r a i s e s by a p p o i n t i n g IV. We conclude authorities the that authorities. Conclusion Rule provides t o s u s p e n d m e r i t pay appointing raises. We a l s o f i n d t h a t § 12 o f t h e e n a b l i n g a c t does n o t p r o h i b i t the Personnel the Board discretion 8.2(c) from e n a c t i n g circuit court's Board, Jefferson such summary j u d g m e n t County, and a rule. i n favor the sheriff Therefore, of the is Personnel due to be affirmed. AFFIRMED. Malone, C.J., and W o o d a l l , 36 P a r k e r , and M a i n , J J . , c o n c u r .
Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.
