Opinion No. (2008)

California Attorney General Reports·Decided December 19, 2008·Published

Opinion

EDMUND G. BROWN JR. Attorney General DANIEL G. STONE Deputy Attorney General

THE HONORABLE LOU CORREA, MEMBER OF THE STATE SENATE, has requested an opinion on the following question:

Does a firefighter on full-time active duty in the California State Military Reserve, working at a military base and being paid by the California Military Department, qualify as "a permanent career firefighter employed by the state" who may become eligible for placement on a hiring list prepared by the California Firefighter Joint Apprenticeship Program? *Page 2

CONCLUSION
A firefighter on full-time active duty in the California State Military Reserve, working at a military base and being paid by the California Military Department, does qualify as "a permanent career firefighter employed by the state" who may become eligible for placement on a firefighter hiring list prepared by the California Firefighter Joint Apprenticeship Program for use by local governments.

ANALYSIS
This question concerns the eligibility requirements of Government Code section 53270, 1 which permits certain displaced career firefighters to be placed on a hiring list *Page 3 maintained by the California Firefighter Joint Apprenticeship Program (CFJAP)2 for local government firefighter positions. Appointments from the CFJAP list may be made irrespective of certain local rules which might otherwise pose an obstacle to the appointment. Local governments are not required to use the list in making their hiring decisions, however. The list serves mainly to bring fully trained, qualified, and available firefighters to the attention of hiring entities and to enable those entities to more readily employ displaced *Page 4 career firefighters.

As it was first enacted in 1997, section 53270 afforded this hiring opportunity to any "civilian federal firefighter" who was terminated as the result of a federal military base "closure."3 In 1999, the statute was amended to clarify that list placement is also available to any "permanent career civilian federal firefighter" who loses that job due to the "closure, downsizing or realignment" of a federal military installation.4 The 1999 amendments were identified as being declaratory of existing law.5

Section 53270 was most recently amended in 2004, when eligibility for placement on the preferential hiring list was expanded to include any "permanent career firefighter employed by the state or a local government" who is terminated "as a consequence of job elimination."6 In an uncodified section of the 2004 statute, the Legislature stated that the purpose of these most recent amendments was to allow the CFJAP to establish a list of "all displaced state and local government firefighters due to layoffs in any jurisdiction in California," and to give fire agencies the authority to grant special hiring consideration to those displaced firefighters.7 *Page 5

Here, we examine whether section 53270 applies to a firefighter who is on full-time active duty with the California State Military Reserve, employed at a military training base, and paid by the California Military Department. Is such a firefighter a "permanent career firefighter employed by the state" who becomes eligible for placement on the hiring list after being "terminated as a permanent career state or local government firefighter"? We conclude that a firefighter in that situation would indeed be eligible for inclusion on the hiring list.

One area of uncertainty about whether section 53270 applies to such firefighters stems from the fact that they are not "civilian" employees of the California Military Department, but are instead members of the military. They are on full-time active duty as part of the California State Military Reserve and are part of the "active militia" of the state.8 They are engaged in military service9 and are subject to the federal Uniform Code of Military Justice.10 It is our opinion, however, that section 53270 conditions list eligibility upon "civilian" status only for displaced federal firefighters.

As it now stands under section 53270, the CFJAP hiring list comprises two general categories of workers: (1) any person who was "serving as a permanent career civilian federal firefighter in good standing at any United States military installation" and was terminated due to "the closure, downsizing, or realignment of a federal military installation;" and (2) any person who "was a permanent career firefighter employed by the state or a local government within the state" and was terminated "as a consequence of job-elimination."11 *Page 6 Taken alone, this language plainly limits the use of the restrictive adjective "civilian" to federal firefighters. There is no parallel "civilian" restriction when these provisions refer to state and local firefighters, 12 and we must assume that the Legislature's omission of that term in the state and local contexts was deliberate.13

Despite this clear language, some confusion has arisen because there are several points in the statute where the Legislature refers to all eligible firefighters together, using the phrase "permanent career civilian federal, state, or local government firefighter."14 It might be argued that in this phrase the adjective "civilian" should be read to modify all three categories of firefighters — federal, state, and local. However, we believe that to do so would be to thwart the Legislature's intent.

At every place in the statute where the phrase occurs, the term "civilian" was already part of the text before the 2004 amendments, and its function at that point was to modify only the term "federal firefighter." That is, the phrase in each case used to be "civilian federal firefighter."15 When it amended these provisions in 2004, the Legislature inserted the newly eligible state and local categories into the existing framework, resulting in the arguably ambiguous phrase, "civilian federal, state, or local government firefighter." We believe that any ambiguity caused by this phrase is logically and appropriately resolved by referring to subdivisions (b)(1) and (b)(3), in which the phrase "permanent career civilian federal firefighter" appears, separately and disjunctively, ("or"), from the entirely new category of permanent career state and local firefighters. In our view, the language newly drafted for subdivisions (b)(1) and (b)(3) leaves no doubt that the term "civilian" applies only to federal firefighters.

Furthermore, our construction is consistent with the Legislature's stated purpose in amending the statute in 2004, namely, "to establish and administer a list of all displaced state and local government firefighters due to layoffs in any jurisdiction in California. . . ."16 Nothing in the legislative history of the 2004 amendments indicates a contrary intent. *Page 7

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Opinion No. (2008), (Cal. 2008).

Opinion No. (2008) (Opinion No. (2008)) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

People v. Woodhead
741 P.2d 154 (California Supreme Court, 1987)
People v. Cruz
919 P.2d 731 (California Supreme Court, 1996)
Wilcox v. Birtwhistle
987 P.2d 727 (California Supreme Court, 1999)
Horwich v. Superior Court
980 P.2d 927 (California Supreme Court, 1999)
Holmes v. California National Guard
109 Cal. Rptr. 2d 154 (California Court of Appeal, 2001)
Curle v. Superior Court of Shasta County
16 P.3d 166 (California Supreme Court, 2001)