Civil Service Ass'n v. City & County of San Francisco

Good Law
144 Cal. Rptr. 895·1978 Cal. App. LEXIS 1530·79 Cal. App. 3d 540
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaApril 6, 1978Civ. No. 40062California1,156 words

Opinion

Lead Opinion

Elkington, J.

The San Francisco Unified School District had a class of employees, other than teachers, whose work assignments did not cover the summer, Christmas, and Easter school vacation periods. During those periods such employees were in a “nonpay status,” but they were not separated from the school service, nor were they rehired as new employees when school resumed. They were “never terminated in their employment,” and were in “continuous service” throughout the year.

Such employees are described by the parties, and will sometimes be described by us, as “school term” employees.

*543 The city’s charter, section 8.440, subdivision (a), as relevant, provides:

The city acting under certain administrative code provisions (discussed below) did not allow its school term employees the full paid vacations as provided by charter section 8.440, subdivision (a). Rather, it gave them “a pro-rata vacation allowance of eight (8) working days [instead of 10] after one year’s continuous service; twelve (12) working days [instead of 15] after five (5) years continuous service; and seventeen (17) working days [instead of 20] after fifteen (15) years continuous service ....”

At issue in the…

Sign in to read the full opinion

Create a free account to read the complete opinion text, citation history, and good-law status for this case.