HomeMy WebLinkAbout84-560 GingMr. Robert P. Ging, Jr., Esquire
Professional Office Building
432 Boulevard of the Allies
Pittsburgh, PA 15219
RE: Clerk Typist II; DER; Section 3(e); Not Covered
Dear Mr. Ging:
STATE ETHICS COMMISSION
308 FINANCE BUILDING
HARRISBURG, PA 17120
TELEPHONE: (717) 783 -1610
April 26, 1984
ADVICE OF COUNSEL
84 -560
This responds to your letter of March 23, 1984, in which you, as Attorney
for Ms. Jean Wiser, requested advice from the State Ethics Commission.
Issue: You ask whether Ms. Wiser, a Clerk Typist II with the Department of
Environmental Resources, Bureau of Mining and Reclamation, is a public
employee for purposes of coverage under the State Ethics Act.
Facts: You indicate that Ms. Wiser is currently employed as a Clerk Typist II
with the Department of Environmental Resources, Bureau of Mining and
Reclamation, Greensburg District Office.
You indicate that Ms. Wiser holds the same position as that discussed in
Advice 84 -515, where a Clerk Typist II was deemed not to be a public employee
subject to the restrictions of the Ethics Act. Reference to that Advice is
reinforced by Ms. Wiser's job description as well as language contained within
the arbitration opinion enclosed with your request for advice. From these
items it may be generally stated that Ms. Wiser's position is basically one
dealing with typing, filing, maintaining files, and other duties normally
associated with clerical support responsibilities.
You also indicate that Ms. Wiser is interested in obtaining a secretarial
position with an engineering firm which does consulting work with DER. In
this regard, you ask what restrictions, if any, would be placed on Ms. Wiser
should she obtain such a position. You indicate that you do not believe Ms.
Wiser is a public employee within the meaning of the Ethics Act, and that she
is, thus, not subject to any restrictions pursuant to the Ethics Act. You
have, therefore, requested a ruling from the State Ethics Commission as to
whether or not Ms. Wiser is indeed a public employee within the meaning of the
Act and if so, what restrictions she would experience in her new job.
Mr. Robert P. Ging, Jr., Esquire
April 26, 1984
Page 2
Discussion: The initial question to be reviewed is whether or not Ms. Wiser
is considered a "public employee" as that term is defined in the State Ethics
Act as follows:
"Public employee." Any individual employed by the
Commonwealth or a political subdivision who is responsible
for taking or recommending official action of a
nonmiinisterial nature with regard to:
(1) contracting or procurement;
(2) administering or monitcring grants or
subsidies;
(3) planning or zoning;
(4) inspecting, 'licensing, regulating or auditing
any person; or
(5) any other activity where the official action
has an economic impact of greater than a de
minimus nature on the interests of any person.
"Public employee" shall not include individuals who are
employed by the State or any political subdivision thereof
in teaching as distinguished from administrative duties.
65 P.S. 402.
Based upon this definition and in light of Ms. Wiser's job description as
well as the language in the arbitration decision, we conclude that Ms. Wiser
is not to be considered a "public employee" as that term is defined in the
Ethics Act. Thus, because Ms. Wiser is not within the classification of the
term "public employee ", the restrictions applicable to an individual who is a
"former public employee" as contained in Section 3(e) of the Ethics Act are
inapplicable to Ms. Wiser should she terminate her service with the Department
of Environmental Resources.
It should be noted that even if Ms. Wiser were to be considered a "public
employee" as set forth in the Ethics Act, the mere fact that she would seek or
have obtained employment with an engineering firm that does consulting work
with DER would not be prohibited under the Ethics Act. Any restrictions upon
a former public employee are primarily centered upon personal appearances
before or representation of a new employer before the agency with which the
former public employee had been associated. However, given our conclusion as
set forth above, and in light of Ms. Wiser's job description, Advice No.
84 -515, as well as the language and the decision of the arbitration panel
enclosed with your request for advice, Ms. Wiser, as a Clerk Typist II, should
not be considered to be a "public employee." Upon termination of her
employment with DER, she would have no obligation as a "former public
employee" nor would she be subject to any restrictions under Section 3(e) of
the Ethics Act.
Mr. Robert P. Ging, Jr., Esquire
April 26, 1984
Page 3
Conclusion: In her position as a Clerk Typist II with DER, Ms. Wiser is not
to be considered a "public employee" as that term is defined in the State
Ethics Act. Accordingly, upon termination of her employment with the
Commonwealth, Ms. Wiser would not be a former public employee subject to any
restrictions which would be applicable to such persons as set forth in Section
3(e) of the Ethics Act. Her activities in the year following her termination
of employment with DER may be undertaken without restriction under Section
3(e) of the Ethics Act.
Pursuant to Section 7(9)(ii), this Advice is a complete defense in any
enforcement proceeding initiated by the Commission, and evidence of good faith
conduct in any other civil or criminal proceeding, providing the requestor has
disclosed truthfully all the material facts and committed the acts complained
of in reliance on the Advice given.
Finally, if you disagree with this Advice or if you have any reason to
challenge same, you may request that the full Commission review this Advice. A
personal appearance before the Commission will be scheduled and a formal
Opinion from the Commission will be issued. Any such appeal must be made, in
writing, to the Commission within 15 days of service of this Advice pursuant
to 51 Pa. Code 2.12.
CW /rdp
This letter is a public record and will be made available as such.
Sincerely,
andra S. Ch ► stianson
General Cou sel