State of Michigan

Civil Service Commission





Michigan State Employees Association,

CSC 97-07




CSC 97-04

ERB 97-015

ERB 96-103

ERB 96-043


SPD 10-20-95

HERM 0206-95

Department of Management and Budget,


Docket No.








A Decision of the Michigan Civil Service Commission


Susan Grimes Munsell, Commissioner and Chair


David Adamany, Commissioner


Rae Lee Chabot, Commissioner


Robert P. Hunter, Commissioner




Decided May 8, 1997


Issued May 9, 1997




Decision and Order

In this decision, we address only Michigan State Employees Association v Department of Management and Budget, civil service docket 95-0177-CPS-J, SPD 10-20-95, HERM 0206-95.The employment relations board previously consolidated this case with another case[1] in its recommendation in ERB 96-103.The commissionís decisions in the two cases now differ and a consolidated decision is no longer appropriate.


On April 10, 1997, the civil service commission[2] decided to reject the recommendation of the employment relations board in ERB 96-103 and to approve the results reached by the state personnel director Martha Bibbs in SPD 10-20-95.On April 11, 1997, we released our order, CSC 97-04,[3] in advance of this full decision setting forth our reasons.


The commission finds that the time period for the performance of any personal services under the landscaping contract in question has long since passed.Also, the commission has today substantially amended rule 4-6.1(a) to eliminate all references to the sale of goods.As a result, we find that the questions presented are no longer of major significance to the state and, therefore, there is no good reason for the commission to decide those questions.[4]Therefore, we dismiss, as improvidently granted, the application for leave to appeal filed by the Michigan State Employees Association.


The commission vacates (1) the recommendation of the board in ERB 96-103 and (2) the decision of the board in ERB 96-043, granting leave to appeal.



[1]Michigan State Employees Association v Bureau of State Lottery, civil service docket 95-0230-CPS-J, SPD 2-23-96, HERM 265-95.

[2]CommissionerDavid Adamany dissented.

[3]CSC 97-04 was incorrectly numbered CSC 97-03 when first released.

[4]In the past, we have ruled on contract appeals even though the contract in question had already expired.In United Technical Employees Association v Corrections, CSC 96-14, p 1, we noted as follows:

Although the state personnel director lacks any effective remedial powers to disapprove payments for personal services after the contract expires, the issues . . . remain important.The parties and others in the state classified system need to know, for future cases, how these issues have been resolved.

†† Since we have now amended rule 4-6, there will be no new similar cases arising in the future.

This is a publication of the Michigan Civil Service Commission. The written document, as published at the time it was issued, is the most authoritative source of the actual content and format of the decision.