public employees; disclosure
of information
HB 2583 broadens the definition of public body and specifies the requirements for authorized personnel regarding policies in the disclosure of information by public employees (whistle- blowers).
As many as 30 states, including Arizona, have enacted whistleblower statutes. While these statutes vary from state to state they do have common elements. Arizona statute defines which employees are protected. Secondly, whistleblower statute describes an employer prohibited practice that may result in liability. An employer prohibited practice is retaliatory actions towards the whistleblower in the form of a personnel action. Finally, the statute establishes the procedures a whistleblower must follow when reporting suspected employer misconduct.
Currently, state employees, except employees and officers of a state university and the Arizona Board of Regents (ABOR), who report a violation of any law, mismanagement, a gross waste of monies or an abuse of authority, are protected under whistleblower statute from reprisal. The State Personnel Board (Board) is required to hear and review appeals regarding whistleblower complaints from employees of the state. Additionally, the Board hears complaints from employees of community college districts, counties and school districts if an independent board to consider whistleblower complaints has not been established.
The Board is responsible for hearing appeals filed by employees or former employees who have been dismissed, demoted, or suspended for over 40 hours. The Board also hears and reviews complaints filed under whistleblower statutes. Once an appeal and/or complaint is received, it is set for a hearing. Hearings are conducted by contract attorneys and are tape-recorded. After the hearings are completed, the hearing officer submits the Findings of Fact, Conclusions of Law, and Recommendation. This document is mailed to the parties for their review and opportunity to file any objections to the report. The Personnel Board members are subsequently provided with copies of case files and a final determination is made by the Board at its next monthly meeting. After the Board rules on a case, the parties may appeal the decision of the Board in the Superior Court. The administrative record is transmitted to the Superior Court for review. The court process involves a trial de novo, which means the parties present their case in court again instead of the court reviewing the administrative record on appeal.