Principles for Public Safety Employment

Officers Ass’n v. City of Alhambra Police Dept . where the police officer had agreed to lesser discipline and admitted to engaging in the alleged misconduct. The court ruled that settlements of disciplinary proceedings are binding in the absence of a showing of fraud, mistake, undue influence or duress. 246 Liebert Cassidy Whitmore recommends that managers and supervisors contact their Human Resources professionals and/or legal counsel before attempting to draft a settlement agreement to make sure it is written in a manner to withstand legal scrutiny. b. Resignation In Lieu of Discipline Sometimes an employee may offer to resign instead of facing disciplinary action. By doing so, the employee loses the right to appeal. Employers usually respond to inquiries from future employers regarding the employee’s reason for leaving by simply stating that the employee resigned. No employee can be compelled to resign; to be effective, a resignation must be entirely voluntary (i.e., initiated by the employee as opposed to a “take it or leave it” offer from the employer). Adequate time must be given to the employee to decide whether to resign. Otherwise, the peace officer may later claim the resignation was made under duress which may constitute a “constructive discharge.” Also, the resignation should be in writing and promptly accepted by the employer in writing. In Knappenberger v. City of Phoenix 247 the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals held that an officer who voluntarily retired after he was placed on administrative leave pending an investigation that he engaged in sexual harassment, could not subsequently claim he was constructively discharged or be entitled to due process procedures. The Ninth Circuit explained that an employee’s decision to retire or resign can constitute a constructive discharge, but only where an employee alleged he resigned due to intolerable working conditions. In Knappenberger , the employer did not request the peace officer’s resignation or retirement or tell him he would be terminated. Rather, the peace officer retired because he did not want to risk his lifetime health benefits. Walls v. Central Costa Transit Authority 248 Walls v. Central Costa Transit Authority , held that an employee was entitled to Skelly rights because his last chance agreement did not waive them. This case highlights the importance of identifying in a last chance agreement what specific rights the employee is waiving, and what effect the agreement will have on the employee’s discipline.

Kerry Walls was a bus driver for the Central Contra Costa Transit Authority (District). The District terminated his employment on January 27, 2006. Walls filed a grievance challenging his termination. On March 1, at a meeting between the District, Walls, and Walls’ union representative, Walls verbally requested to be absent from work until April 10. The next day, the District and Walls entered into a last chance agreement, which reinstated Walls and required him to attend a training course on the same day.

Principles for Public Safety Employment ©2022 (s) Liebert Cassidy Whitmore 85