Perez v. N.M. Dep't of Workforce Solutions

Summary

The New Mexico Supreme Court consolidated appeals concerning whether three former state employees held major nontenured policy-making or advisory positions excluded from unemployment compensation benefits under NMSA 1978, Section 51-1-44(A)(5)(a). The Court held that the Legislature must expressly designate a position as a major nontenured policy-making or advisory position, and that the relevant positions had not been so designated. The Court therefore held that all three claimants were eligible for unemployment compensation benefits.

Holdings

1. A state-government employee is ineligible for unemployment compensation under Section 51-1-44(A)(5)(a) only if the Legislature has expressly designated the position as both nontenured and either a major policy-making position or a major advisory position.
2. A position's exemption from the State Personnel Act establishes only that the position is nontenured; it does not establish that the position is a major policy-making or advisory position for purposes of Section 51-1-44(A)(5)(a).
3. The Legislature may designate a position as a major policy-making or advisory position by defining the position's statutory duties in a manner that demonstrates legislative intent to make the designation.
4. None of the three positions was designated by the Legislature as a major nontenured policy-making or advisory position; therefore, Perez, Griego, and Hatch were eligible for unemployment compensation benefits.

Questions Presented

1. Whether Section 51-1-44(A)(5)(a) requires an express legislative designation of a state-government position as a major nontenured policy-making or advisory position before the position is excluded from unemployment compensation eligibility.
2. Whether exemption from the protections of the State Personnel Act establishes that a position is also a major nontenured policy-making or advisory position under the Unemployment Compensation Law.
3. Whether the statutory duties of the state personnel director demonstrated legislative intent to designate that position as a major nontenured policy-making or advisory position.
4. Whether Griego's and Hatch's positions, which had no statutory job descriptions identified by the court, were designated by the Legislature as major nontenured policy-making or advisory positions.

Disposition

reversed