| DAVID CHESKO, LISA HENDERSON, and CINDY SNYDER, Plaintiffs-Appellees, v. THE ILLINOIS CIVIL SERVICE COMMISSION, Defendant-Appellant. | ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) | Appeal from Circuit Court of Sangamon County No. 01MR679 Honorable |
PRESIDING JUSTICE COOK delivered the opinion of the court:
Plaintiffs, employees of the Department of Children andFamily Services (DCFS) whose classification is "Day Care Licensing Representative" (DCLR), filed a complaint for administrativereview of a decision of the Illinois Civil Service Commission(Commission). The Commission approved class revisions advancedby the Illinois Department of Central Management Services (CMS)that did not include DCLRs. The DCLRs claimed their exclusionfrom the revision resulted in their losing pay-scale parity andbumping and bidding rights with the classes that were revised. The DCLRs claimed the failure to include them in the revisionsviolated the Personnel Code (20 ILCS 415/1 through 25 (West2002)), and the circuit court agreed, finding the amendments werearbitrary. The circuit court then certified three questions oflaw for appeal:
"1. Whether a decision of the Commission to approve a reclassification plan is subject to administrative review and, if so, what is the appropriate standard of review.
2. Whether an employee whose position is not included in a reclassification plan, but whose terms and conditions of employment are adversely affected by a reclassification plan, has standing to bring a claim for administrative review of the reclassification plan.
3. Whether an employee whose position is not included in a reclassification plan, but whose terms and conditions of employment are adversely affected by a reclassification plan, has a statutory right to appeal that plan to the Commission pursuant to section10(5) of the Personnel Code (20 ILCS 415/10(5)(West 2002))."
We find as follows:
1. Approval of amendments to the classification plan is a quasi-legislative function of the Commission and is not subject to administrative review.
2. Whether plaintiffs have standing is irrelevant as administrative review is not appropriate.
3. Section 10(5) of the Personnel Code does not apply in this case; therefore, plaintiffs did not have a statutory right to appeal the plan to the commission. 20 ILCS 415/10(5) (West 2002).
We vacate the trial court's judgment.
I. BACKGROUND
The state classification plan (plan) categorizes allstate jobs subject to the jurisdiction of CMS according to"similarity of duties performed, responsibilities assigned, andconditions of employment so that the same schedule of pay may beequitably applied to all positions in the same class." 20 ILCS415/8a(1) (West 2002). Subject to the approval of the Commission, the Director of CMS is responsible for the "preparation,maintenance, and revision" of the plan. 20 ILCS 415/8a(1) (West2002). The Commission reviews the class specifications andapproves those that meet the requirements of the Personnel Codeand Personnel rules (80 Ill. Adm. Code