Repository: UIHistories Project: Board of Trustees Minutes - 1918 [PAGE 662]

EXTRACTED TEXT FROM PAGE:

656

BOARD OF TRUSTEES

[February 16,

Petitioner then alleges that he was not allowed to continue his work as such janitor and that the keys were demanded of him by Harry Woods, then Secretary of State. He was finally discharged from the classified service by the Civil Service Commission on account of his having made illegal loans. This petition was filed praying that a writ issue to compel the payment of his salary at the rate of $800 per year for the time the Secretary of State would not allow him to perform his duties up until the time he was discharged from the Civil Service department. It was contended by respondents that the relator did not come within the provisions of the Civil Service act for the reason that he was a laborer. The Supreme Court held that while the term "laborer" might be broad enough to cover his position, that inasmuch as certain janitors were provided for, to-wit, ten in number at a salary of $800 per annum, that the relator filled the position of such janitor and as such was under Civil Service different from that of a laborer as that term is used in such act. It will be observed that in all of these cases the position in question had been either fixed by statute or was recognized by the legislature in the appropriation act where a definite amount to cover the salary that the occupant of such position should receive was fixed. In the case of the University of Illinois the amounts appropriated are largely in gross and the expenditure of the appropriation is in most part left to the discretion of the Board of Trustees. The legislature does not undertake to appropriate definite amounts for different positions, and there is no where in the appropriation passed for the University of Illinois an appropriation for the position of carpenter. In fact, that position is not mentioned in the appropriation. No definite amount is appropriated for the services or salary of a carpenter and so far as the act is concerned there is nothing to indicate that carpenters, as such, are entitled to any part of the appropriation made. It rather seems that the employment of carpenters at the University would be of a temporary and incidental employment rather than a permanent one. An examination of the petition filed in this case discloses that the salary claimed by the relator is not fixed by the State or the State authorities, nor is it fixed by the Civil Service Commission, except the petition alleges that they appointed the relator to that position at a salary of not less than $60 per month. The petition avers that the relator began his employment at an agreed salary made between him and the University of Illinois at 40 cents per hour or for a 9 hour day,or $3.60 per day. So under the averments of the petition the position filled by him does not carry with it a definite salary but that the matter of the amount that he shall receive for his services rests on the agreement made between him and the University of Illinois. In the case of City of Chicago, vs. Chicago Telephone Co. 230 111. 157 the Supreme Court held that mandamus is not the proper remedy to enforce