66.0509 Civil service system; veterans preference.

(1) Any city or village may proceed under s. 61.34 (1), 62.11 (5) or 66.0101 to establish a civil service system of selection, tenure and status, and the system may be made applicable to all municipal personnel except the chief executive and members of the governing body, members of boards and commissions including election officials, employees subject to s. 62.13, members of the judiciary and supervisors. Any town may establish a civil service system under this subsection. For veterans there shall be no restrictions as to age, and veterans and their spouses shall be given preference points in accordance with s. 63.08 (1) (fm). The system may also include uniform provisions in respect to attendance, leave regulations, compensation and payrolls for all personnel included in the system. The governing body of any city, village or town establishing a civil service system under this section may exempt from the system the librarians and assistants subject to s. 43.09 (1).

(1m)

(a) A local governmental unit, as defined in s. 66.0131 (1) (a), that does not have a civil service system on June 29, 2011, shall establish a grievance system not later than October 1, 2011.

(b) To comply with the grievance system that is required under par. (a), a local governmental unit may establish either a civil service system under any provision authorized by law, to the greatest extent practicable, if no specific provision for the creation of a civil service system applies to that local governmental unit, or establish a grievance procedure as described under par. (d).

(c) Any civil service system that is established under any provision of law, and any grievance procedure that is created under this subsection, shall contain at least all of the following provisions:

1. A grievance procedure that addresses employee terminations.

2. Employee discipline.

3. Workplace safety.

(d) If a local governmental unit creates a grievance procedure under this subsection, the procedure shall contain at least all of the following elements:

1. A written document specifying the process that a grievant and an employer must follow.

2. A hearing before an impartial hearing officer.

3. An appeal process in which the highest level of appeal is the governing body of the local governmental unit.

(e) If an employee of a local governmental unit is covered by a civil service system on June 29, 2011, and if that system contains provisions that address the provisions specified in par. (c), the provisions that apply to the employee under his or her existing civil service system continue to apply to that employee.

(2)

(a) Any town may establish a civil service system under sub. (1) and in the departments that the town board may determine. Any person who has been employed in a department for more than 5 years before the establishment of a civil service system applicable to that department is eligible to appointment without examination.

(b) Any town not having a civil service system and having exercised the option of placing assessors under civil service under s. 60.307 (3) may establish a civil service system for assessors under sub. (1), unless the town has come within the jurisdiction of a county assessor under s. 70.99.

(3) When any town has established a system of civil service, the ordinance establishing the system may not be repealed for a period of 6 years after its enactment, and after the 6-year period it may be repealed only by proceedings under s. 9.20 by referendum vote. This subsection does not apply if a town comes, before the expiration of the 6 years, within the jurisdiction of a county assessor under s. 70.99.

(4) Any civil service system established under the provisions of this section shall provide for the appointment of a civil service board or commission and for the removal of the members of the board or commission for cause by the mayor with approval of the council, by the city manager and the council in a city organized under ss. 64.01 to 64.15, and by the board in a village or town.

(5) All examinations given in a civil service system established under this section, including minimum training and experience requirements, for positions in the classified service shall be job-related in compliance with appropriate validation standards and shall be subject to the approval of the board or commission appointed under sub. (4). All relevant experience, whether paid or unpaid, shall satisfy experience requirements.

History: 1971 c. 152 s. 38; 1971 c. 154, 211; 1977 c. 196; 1983 a. 532; 1985 a. 225; 1991 a. 101; 1993 a. 246; 1999 a. 150 s. 310; Stats. 1999 s. 66.0509; 2005 a. 22; 2011 a. 10; 2015 a. 150.

A county's grievance procedure that excluded the plaintiff's dismissal from being grieved violated sub. (1m)'s mandate that the grievance procedure address terminations. Not all employee separations are “terminations" within the meaning of sub. (1m). Whatever the precise parameters of “terminations," the term is not commonly used to describe situations where an employee voluntarily quits or retires. However, the action taken against the plaintiff in this case was a termination within the plain meaning of the statute and the denial of the opportunity to grieve the termination was impermissible. Dodge County Professional Employees v. Dodge County, 2014 WI App 8, 352 Wis. 2d 400, 842 N.W.2d 500, 13-0535.

Neither this section nor the defendant county's grievance policy provided the substantive restrictions necessary to transform the plaintiff's employment into one which could be terminated only for cause. Under Wisconsin law, a dichotomy exists between employment at-will and employment that can be terminated only for cause. Only those employees whose employment falls within the “for cause" category receive due process protections. Even if this section requiring a grievance process and the defendant county's implementation of such a policy moved the plaintiff's employment out of the “at-will" category, there was no evidence of terms limiting the employer's discretion to terminate the plaintiff's employment only for cause. Nesvold v. Roland, 37 F. Supp. 3d 1027 (2014).