Appeal of Vicky Morton

Summary

The Supreme Court of New Hampshire affirmed decisions of the New Hampshire Personnel Appeals Board concerning Vicky Morton's layoff and her qualifications for an Associate Vice President of Academic Affairs position. The court held that the applicable personnel rules required evaluation of other positions for reassignment rather than reinstatement to an abolished position, and that a supplemental job description could lawfully specify substantially and reasonably similar qualifications tailored to the position.

Holdings

1. Morton's challenge to NHCTCS's authority to abolish her position was not preserved because she raised it for the first time in her motion for reconsideration.
2. When an employee's position has been abolished, reinstatement to the former position does not require restoration of that nonexistent position; the proper remedy may require evaluating other positions in the same class and offering reassignment if the employee is qualified and more senior than the current holder.
3. RSA 21-I:42, II does not require the qualifications in a supplemental job description to be exactly identical to those in the general class specification; the qualifications must instead be substantially and reasonably similar.

Questions Presented

1. Whether the Personnel Appeals Board selected the proper remedy for Morton's layoff by ordering evaluation of another Program Specialist II position for possible reassignment rather than reinstatement to her abolished position.
2. Whether RSA 21-I:42, II prohibited NHCTCS from establishing position-specific minimum qualifications in a supplemental job description that were tailored to the position but substantially and reasonably similar to the general class qualifications.
3. Whether Morton preserved a challenge to NHCTCS's authority to abolish her former position.

Disposition

affirmed