CSC to hear terminated firefighters’ case in February

After a prehearing conference back in October, the Civil Service Commission has officially set a date to hear the appeal filed by the nine firefighters who were terminated for refusing to be vaccinated against COVID-19.

Joseph Horey, counsel to the nine terminated firefighters, told Saipan Tribune that the commission will hear his clients’ appeal on Feb. 21.

The nine firefighters are still holding out hope and awaiting the commission’s decision on their appeal following the Superior Court’s denial of their requested preliminary injunction for reinstatement.

The firefighters previously sued the Department of Fire and Emergency Medical Services and DFEMS Commissioner Dennis Mendiola for wrongful termination. In doing so, they also filed for a preliminary injunction asking the court to order their reinstatement.

However, Superior Court Associate Judge Joseph Camacho denied their request because the court currently has no jurisdiction over the case because a Civil Service Commission appeal is pending.

“Given that the appeal at the Civil Service Commission is still pending, and the requested remedy restoring plaintiff’s employment is a remedy available through the administrative appeals process, the plaintiffs have yet to exhaust administrative remedies. Until the Civil Service Commission issues its decision, the Superior Court cannot issue a judicial remedy,” he said.

Camacho explained that before the firefighters can pursue judicial review of their case, they must first exhaust all administrative remedies, meaning they must first complete the Civil Service Commission appeal process before bringing their case to court.

“Here, the plaintiffs are awaiting a scheduled Civil Services Commission hearing, which they requested, and their appeal process is therefore not yet at Step 6. They have not yet received a Civil Services Commission decision, which would mark the completion of Step 7, and at which point they will be deemed to have exhausted administrative remedies, allowing them to bring an action for judicial review before this court. Instead, plaintiffs have skipped to Step 8 while they have not yet completed Step 6, failing to complete the intra-agency appeal process. Thus, plaintiffs’ untimely and precipitate claim before this court is in violation of the exhaustion of administrative remedies requirement,” he said.