Bill Text: AZ SB1212 | 2012 | Fiftieth Legislature 2nd Regular | Chaptered
Bill Title: Law enforcement officers; just cause
Spectrum: Partisan Bill (Republican 22-1)
Status: (Passed) 2012-05-14 - Governor Signed [SB1212 Detail]
Download: Arizona-2012-SB1212-Chaptered.html
|
House Engrossed Senate Bill |
|
State of Arizona Senate Fiftieth Legislature Second Regular Session 2012
|
|
CHAPTER 356
|
|
SENATE BILL 1212 |
|
|
AN ACT
amending section 38‑1104, Arizona Revised Statutes; relating to law ENFORCEMENT officers.
(TEXT OF BILL BEGINS ON NEXT PAGE)
Be it enacted by the Legislature of the State of Arizona:
Section 1. Section 38-1104, Arizona Revised Statutes, is amended to read:
38-1104. Discipline of law enforcement officers; exceptions; definitions
A. A law enforcement officer shall not be subject to disciplinary action except for just cause.
B. Subsection A of this section does not apply to any law enforcement officer who has not completed an initial probationary period if a probationary period is required by the employer or to a dismissal that is for administrative purposes, including a reduction in force.
C. This section does not preempt agreements that supplant, revise or otherwise alter the provisions of this section, including preexisting agreements, between the employer and the law enforcement officer's lawful representative association.
D. If a law enforcement officer is demoted or terminated as the result of a chief of the law enforcement agency or the chief executive officer of a city or town an employer or a person acting on behalf of an employer reversing the decision or recommendation of a civil service board or merit commission hearing officer, administrative law judge or appeals board where the finding states that there was no just cause for the demotion or termination, the law enforcement officer who believes the termination was without just cause may bring an action in superior court for a new hearing de novo on the demotion or termination. The hearing officer, administrative law judge or appeals board shall state in every finding of disciplinary action whether or not just cause existed for the disciplinary action.
E. If a law enforcement officer is demoted or terminated by the chief of the law enforcement agency or chief executive officer of a city or town an employer or a person acting on behalf of an employer where there is not a civil service board or merit commission no hearing officer, administrative law judge or appeals board to review the demotion or termination, the law enforcement officer may bring an action in superior court to review the agency's file. If the court finds from a review of the file that there was no just cause for the demotion or termination did not exist, the officer is entitled to a hearing on the demotion or termination.
F. If the superior court finds that just cause for the a DEMOTION or termination did not exist, the court shall order the officer reinstated to the officer's previous position with the law enforcement agency and may award to the law enforcement officer monetary damages that shall not exceed the officer's combined total of wages and benefits during the period of imposed disciplinary action that was lost as a result of the demotion or termination.
G. In an action pursuant to subsection D or E of this section the court may award the successful party reasonable attorney fees as set forth in section 12‑341.01, subsection B and shall award the successful party all costs pursuant to section 12‑341.
H. This section does not apply to a law enforcement officer who is employed as an at will employee as a police chief or an assistant police chief in a law enforcement agency.
I. For the purposes of this section:
1. "At will employee" means a person who is employed as an employee who may be terminated at the will of either the employee or employer, at any time, with or without cause.
2. "Disciplinary action" has the same meaning prescribed in section 38‑1101.
3. "Just cause" means:
(a) The employer informed the officer of the possible disciplinary action resulting from the officer's conduct through agency manuals, employee handbooks, the employer's rules and regulations or other communications to the officer or the conduct was such that the officer should have reasonably known disciplinary action could occur.
(b) The disciplinary action is reasonably related to the standards of conduct for a professional law enforcement officer, the mission of the agency, the orderly, efficient or safe operation of the agency or the officer's fitness for duty.
(c) The discipline is supported by a preponderance of evidence that the conduct occurred.
(d) The discipline is not excessive and is reasonably related to the seriousness of the offense and the officer's service record.
4. "Law enforcement officer" means:
(a) An individual who is certified by the Arizona peace officer standards and training board, other than a person employed by a multi-county water conservation district, a reserve police officer, a volunteer or a person who is otherwise exempted by an existing merit system.
(b) A correction officer or detention officer, excluding a juvenile detention officer, who is employed by this state or a political subdivision of this state.
(c) A regularly appointed and paid deputy sheriff of a county.
(d) A regularly employed police officer in a city or town.
APPROVED BY THE GOVERNOR MAY 14, 2012.
FILED IN THE OFFICE OF THE SECRETARY OF STATE MAY 15, 2012.
