§ 33-12. Appeals of disciplinary actions; grievance procedures.

(a) Appeals of certain disciplinary actions. Any merit system employee, excluding those in probationary status, who has been notified of impending removal, demotion or suspension shall be entitled to file an appeal to the board, which shall cause a hearing to be scheduled without undue delay unless the appeal has been settled during administrative review of the appeal by the chief administrative officer or a designee. Any merit system employee who is the subject of other disciplinary action not specified above may file an appeal with the board, but such appeal may or may not require a hearing as the board may determine.

(b) Grievances. A grievance is a formal complaint arising out of a misunderstanding or disagreement between a merit system employee and supervisor with reference to a term or condition of employment. The determination of the board as to what constitutes a term or condition of employment shall be final. Grievances do not include the following: Classification allocations, except due process violations; failure to reemploy a probationary employee; or other employment matters for which another forum is available to provide relief or the board determines are not suitable matters for the grievance resolution process. A grievance shall include termination by resignation which is found by the board to have been submitted under circumstances which cause the resignation to be involuntary; in the event of such a finding, the board shall require the appointing authority to substantiate the termination as in the case of a removal. The county executive shall prescribe, in the personnel regulations adopted under method (1) of section 2A-15 of this Code, procedures which seek to secure at the lowest possible level a fair, prompt and mutually satisfactory resolution to a grievance. In providing these procedures, the county executive shall ensure that any grievance based upon an alleged improper application of a merit system law or regulation concerning a disputed issue of fact is entitled to resolution after a fact-finding inquiry authorized by the board. Grievances based upon an alleged improper interpretation of merit system laws or regulations do not require a hearing during the grievance resolution process.

(c) Hearing examiners. The board may utilize hearing examiners to conduct grievance investigations and other hearings, authorized under this section, who shall make findings and recommendations subject to objection by the parties and final board approval under such procedures as established by the board. A party to any proceeding which has been assigned to a hearing examiner shall be afforded the opportunity to present an oral argument on the record before the board prior to a final decision. (1979 L.M.C., ch. 24, § 2; 1982 L.M.C., ch. 40, § 5; 1984 L.M.C., ch. 24, § 39; 1984 L.M.C., ch. 27, § 23.)

Editor's note— Section 33-12 was quoted in Mayer v. Montgomery County, 143 Md. App. 261, 794 A.2d 704 (2002). Section 33-12 was interpreted in Haub v. Montgomery County, 353 Md. 448, 727 A.2d 369 (1999). In Waller v. Montgomery County, 36 Md. App. 326, 373 A.2d 971 (1977), it was held that a person cannot sue alleging he had been discharged without due process unless he had exhausted his administrative remedies.

See County Attorney Opinion dated indicating that the Charter permits the use of merit system employees for pilot programs and enterprise programs, but prohibits the use of contract employees for these programs.