Appeal from the Order of the State Civil Service Commission in the case of Sherly J. Togans, Jr. v. State Civil Service Commission, Appeal No. 2842.
Sherly J. Togans, Jr., with him Marian E. Krankston and Marian B. Cocose, for petitioner.
Barbara G. Raup, Chief Counsel, for respondent.
Judges Rogers, Williams, Jr. and MacPhail, sitting as a panel of three. Opinion by Judge MacPhail.
[ 69 Pa. Commw. Page 432]
This is the appeal of Sherly J. Togans (Petitioner) from an order of the State Civil Service Commission (Commission) which upheld his suspension and dismissal from employment.
Petitioner was employed by the Commission as a Personnel Analyst II, regular status. On July 5, 1979, Petitioner was suspended for one day without pay due
[ 69 Pa. Commw. Page 433]
to unexplained absences. Petitioner appealed this suspension to the Commission in its adjudicative capacity alleging that he was discriminated against on the basis of his religious persuasion, philosophy, sex and race. However, on September 19, 1979, before the scheduled suspension hearing, Petitioner was removed from his employment.
Petitioner then instituted an appeal from the Commission's removal action which was later consolidated with the suspension appeal. Hearing on these two matters, however, was deferred until the conclusion of the Pennsylvania Human Relations Commission (PHRC) investigation into Petitioner's complaint, which alleged discriminatory removal from employment.*fn1 On January 28, 1980, the PHRC concluded that the facts adduced did not establish Petitioner's allegation of discrimination. Petitioner took no appeal from that adjudication. Thereafter, Petitioner reinstated his consolidated appeals to the Commission. A hearing before the Commission was held on April 16, 1980, and Petitioner elected to appear pro se.
The Chairman of the Commission instructed Petitioner concerning the proceedings and on the dangers of cross-examination, but expressly stated that Petitioner should use "his own judgment" in deciding whether to cross-examine witnesses.
The Commission by order dated October 15, 1980, sustained Petitioner's suspension and removal from work finding that no evidence was presented to support Petitioner's contention that the decision to remove him was based on racial, religious or ...