Decision Number 1194-BH-80 - Covered Employment - Section 8-101(j), 8-201 et seq. and Wages - Section 8-101(v) - Maryland Unemployment Decisions Digest - Appeals

BOARD OF APPEALS

DECISION

Issue: Whether the Claimant is entitled to unemployment benefits within the meaning of Article 95A, Section 20(g )(7 )(v)E of the Maryland Unemployment Insurance Law.

- NOTICE OF RIGHT OF APPEAL TO COURT -

YOU MAY FILE AN APPEAL FROM THIS DECISION IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE LAWS OF MARYLAND. THE APPEAL MAY BE TAKEN IN PERSON OR THROUGH AN ATTORNEY IN THE SUPERIOR COURT OF BALTIMORE CITY, OR THE CIRCUIT COURT OF THE COUNTY IN MARYLAND IN WHICH YOU RESIDE.

THE PERIOD FOR FILING AN APPEAL EXPIRES AT MIDNIGHT November 20, 1980.

APPEARANCES

FINDINGS OF FACT

The Board of Appeals assumed original jurisdiction in this case at the request of the Executive Director because the case involved the interpretation of a complicated section of the Law, namely, 20(g) (7)(V)E of the Maryland Unemployment Insurance Law.

The Claimant's attorney appeared without his client on the scheduled hearing date and requested a further postponement. Since the Board would not grant a further postponement in this case after two prior postponements, he made a written request that the case be withdrawn. He then left the Office of the Board of Appeals although the Board had requested that he wait until his case was called. When the case was called for a hearing, the Board of Appeals, after considering the Claimant attorney's request for a withdrawal, denied that request and continued with the hearing.

The Claimant was appointed Chief of Police for Montgomery County Maryland which is a home rule county. The position of Chief of Police is not a tenured position and is designated and described in Article 1, Chapter 35 of the Montgomery County Code.

The Claimant was appointed to his position by the County Executive and in March of 1979 he was terminated from his job by the County Executive. On July 10, 1979 he "filed a claim for unemployment benefits.

In the course of performing his duties he Claimant worked forty hours per week, supervised the Police Department for Montgomery County and hired and fired Personnel. In his position as Chief of Police he occupied a policy making and advisory position in the County government.

COMMENTS

All evidence having been heard, read and considered, the Board of Appeals finds that the Claimant, as Police Chief, was in 21 major non-tenured policy making and advisory position with the Montgomery County Government and is therefore disqualified from receiving unemployment benefits within the meaning of Section 20(g) (7)(V)E of the, Maryland Unemployment Insurance Law.

In reaching this decision, the Board of Appeals has examined the Legislative Documents surrounding the Law involved in this case and finds that it was the intent of the Legislature that employees in major non-tenured designated policy making or advisory positions are excluded from covered employment and are not subject to the unemployment insurance Law.

DECISION

The Claimant was in a position, under the Laws of Montgomery County which was designated as a major non-tenured policy making or advisory position. He is disqualified from receiving benefits from July 10, 1979, the date his benefit year began.

John J. Kent, Chairman
Hazel A. Warnick, Associate Member

K:W
kmb

DATE OF HEARING: September 8, 1980
COPIES MAILED TO:
CLAIMANT
EMPLOYER
Peter I. J. Davis, Esquire
Charles S. Rand, Esquire
Mr. Christopher Costello
UNEMPLOYMENT INSURANCE - WHEATON