Section 101.21. Generally

(a) Good cause for suspension is one of the following:

(1) Insubordination.

(2) Habitual lateness in reporting for work.

(3) Misconduct amounting to violation of law, rule or lawful and reasonable Departmental orders.

(4) Intoxication while on duty.

(5) Conduct either on or off duty which may bring the service of the Commonwealth into disrepute.

(6) Similar substantial reasons.

(b) Suspension pending investigation may be instituted for the purpose of ascertaining an employee’s fitness for continued employment.

(1) When the investigation has not revealed cause for disciplinary action, the suspension shall be retracted and expunged from all records, with the employee receiving back pay for the full period of suspension.

(2) When the investigation has revealed cause for disciplinary action, the suspension shall be converted, either in whole or in part, to a disciplinary action.

(c) Suspensions, to include suspensions pending internal investigation, may not exceed an aggregate of more than 60 work days in a calendar year.

(d) An employee suspended, pending investigation by an external agency, may be suspended for the duration of the external investigation and up to 30 consecutive work days after the conclusion of the external investigation.

(e) The Commission may impose a suspension of not more than 120 work days under section 905.2 of the act (71 P. S. § 741.905b).

The provisions of this § 101.21 adopted October 18, 1961; amended October 15, 1964 and April 16, 1970; amended March 29, 1985, effective March 30, 1985, 15 Pa.B. 1151; amended November 15, 1991, effective November 16, 1991, 21 Pa.B. 5334; amended March 12, 2004, effective March 13, 2004, 34 Pa.B. 1442. Immediately preceding text appears at serial pages (261921) to (261922) and (257133) to (257134).

Notation

Notes of Decisions

Arrest of civil service employee of residential facility for adjudicated delinquents on perjury and false swearing charges unrelated to his employment, constituted ‘‘good cause’’ for his suspension pending resolution of the charges; employee’s arrest resulted in the credibility and reputation of the facility being compromised. Woods v. State Civil Service Commission, 912 A.2d 803, 810 (Pa. 2006).

An employee, who received and ignored 40 parking tickets for which an arrest warrant was issued, was discharged for just cause because this disregard for the law adversely affected the image of the agency for which he worked. Office of Attorney General v. Colbert, 598 A.2d 344 (Pa. Cmwlth. 1991); appeal dismissed 619 A.2d 1062 (Pa. 1993).

Where some of the crimes with which the petitioner was charged and arrested related directly to the performance of his duties as a forester, the court held that the appointing authority had good cause for its suspension of the petitioner. Lylo v. Department of Environmental Resources, 477 A.2d 897 (Pa. Cmwlth. 1984).

An arrest for possessing and selling controlled substances may be considered in determining good cause for suspension of the type specified in 4 Pa. Code § 101.21(a)(5), ‘‘scandalous or disgraceful conduct while on or off duty which may bring the service of the Commonwealth into disrepute’’. Salvati v. Berks County Board of Assistance, 474 A.2d 399 (Pa. Cmwlth. 1984).

An Income Maintenance Worker II with the Department of Public Welfare who was suspended for 30 days after her arrest and arraignment on criminal charges relating to her possession and sale of controlled substances was suspended for good cause as described in subsection (a)(5). Salvati v. Department of Public Welfare, 463 A.2d 1224 (Pa. Cmwlth. 1983); order reaffirmed 474 A.2d 399 (Pa. Cmwlth. 1984).

Failure of a physician to comply with the hospital director’s repeated instructions to prepare a plan to implement unit rounds by staff under the physician’s supervision constitutes insubordination and just cause for suspension, despite physician’s belief that such a program could not be carried out. Gorby v. Department of Public Welfare, 426 A.2d 223 (Pa. Cmwlth. 1981).

Dismissal of a prison guard for possession of marijuana at a State correctional institution is proper, since such conduct violates the parameters of the sensitive position he holds and casts doubt on his competency and ability to execute his duties. Stone v. State Correctional Institution at Graterford, 422 A.2d 1227 (Pa. Cmwlth. 1980).

It was improper to suspend a workmen’s compensation referee on the grounds that he had threatened to ‘‘even the score’’ against an attorney with whom he had had dealings in his status as a private attorney, since there was no evidence that the referee had made such a threat and since he had instead requested that cases involving the attorney be reassigned to another referee. Kanjorski v. Department of Labor and Industry, 403 A.2d 631 (Pa. Cmwlth. 1979).

Evidence in a criminal court proceeding that an employee had committed a crime is sufficient just cause for suspension and termination and the employing agency is not required to conduct its own investigation of the facts. Brown v. Department of Transportation, 383 A.2d 978 (Pa. Cmwlth. 1978).