10-2481 Schulz v. Green County

Listen to this article

Employment
Public employment; due process

Where a public employee’s job was eliminated as part of cost-saving reorganization, she was not entitled to due process.

“Although Schulz would have us focus on the similarities between the court-attached and social worker I/II positions, this focus is misplaced. The relevant question s whether the governmental reorganization was a pretext for harming Schulz; in this respect the similarities between the old and new positions may be relevant, but it is not controlling. See e.g., Misek, 783 F.2d at 100-01; West v. Grand County, 976 F.2d 362, 368 (10th Cir. 1992) (relying on Misek); Felde v. Town of Brookfield, 570 F. Supp. 2d 1070, 1074-75 (E.D. Wis. 2008); Campana v. City of Greenfield, 164 F. Supp. 2d 1078, 1092-94 (E.D. Wis. 2001). Here, the evidence before us indicates that the County reorganized to save costs, not to rid itself of Schulz; had the County reorganized merely to terminate
Schulz’s employment, its decision to rehire Schulz for the social worker I/II position would be inexplicable.

Because nothing in the record suggests that saving money was a pretext for something else, we affirm the district court’s holding that the County eliminatedSchulz’s court-attached juvenile-intake position in conjunction with a legitimate governmental reorganization and that Schulz was thus not entitled to due process.”

Affirmed.

10-2481 Schulz v. Green County

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western District of Wisconsin, Conley, J., Bauer, J.

Full Text