State-worker pay cuts proper, court rules

LANSING – The Michigan Court of Appeals has ruled that pay cuts for thousands of Michigan Department of Corrections workers were properly handled five years ago. 

In a unanimous opinion, a three-judge panel sided with the department and against the corrections officers union in overturning an Ingham County judge's 2016 ruling that the employees should be restored to the higher pay. The local court had said the employees perform more specialized work than typical corrections officers. 

The union, the Michigan Corrections Organization, will meet next week and discuss next steps, the group said in a statement. 

"Corrections is evolving, and more is expected from officers than ever before," the statement said. "They are stakeholders in these changes and deserve recognition for their dedication to the work."

From the archives:"State worker pay cuts 'arbitrary and capricious,' judge says"

Related:"For state workers, budget could be worse"

More:"For state workers, budget could be worse"

The case began in April 2012, when the department essentially downgraded nearly 2,500 positions, cutting the pay for affected workers between 59 cents and $1.48 per hour. After a classification study that reviewed the duties of those workers, the Michigan Civil Service Commission — which regulates state workers — agreed with the department's argument that the positions were always improperly classified.  

MCO video on the Court of Appeals hearing. Story continues below video.

The union sued the department in Ingham County Circuit Court, which ruled in the union's favor in March 2016. Ingham County Judge William Collette called the state's decision "arbitrary and capricious" and noted that the Civil Service Commission had affirmed the classifications three times before, in 1983, 1996 and 2006. 

In an opinion dated June 29, however, the appellate court judges called those earlier decisions irrelevant and said "nothing indicates (the commission's) decision violated a statute or resulted from procedures that were unlawful." The judges also said Collette "erred by … exceeding the authorized-by-law scope of review by reweighing evidence, making credibility decisions, and substituting (his) judgement for that of the" commission. 

The employees' pay was not restored after Collette's ruling because the appeal was pending.  

In an email to the State Journal, Corrections spokesman Chris Gautz said the position changes saved about $12 million a year, but the cost of restoring the pay would be difficult to calculate because of issues such as overtime and promotions that have changed what employees made over the last five years. 

Contact Justin A. Hinkley at (517) 377-1195 or jhinkley@lsj.com. Follow him on Twitter @JustinHinkley. Sign up for his email newsletter, SoM Weekly, at on.lsj.com/somsignup.