Connecticut General Statutes

Conn. Gen. Stat. § 5-240 (2026)

Reprimand, suspension, demotion, dismissal. Layoffs. Notice period pay. Use of tax return information in certain proceedings

✓ current as of May 2026

Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section CT-CGAcga.ct.gov (official) JustiaTitle on Justia CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar

(a) An appointing authority, subject to any regulations issued by the Secretary of the Office of Policy and Management, may reprimand or warn an employee in the classified service under the appointing authority's jurisdiction or suspend such an employee without pay or with reduced pay for an aggregate period not exceeding sixty calendar days in any calendar year. For any employee not included in any collective bargaining unit of state employees, any written reprimand or warning shall be included in the employee's personnel file and, if not merged in the next service rating, shall be expunged after twelve months from the date of reprimand or warning. Any such written reprimand or warning may be reviewed in accordance with the procedures established in subsections (h) and (i) of section 5-202.

(b) An appointing authority, subject to any regulations issued by the Secretary of the Office of Policy and Management, may demote an employee in the classified service under the appointing authority's jurisdiction from a position in any given class or grade to a position in a lower class or grade. The appointing authority shall give the Secretary of the Office of Policy and Management or the secretary's designated representative written notice of the authority's intention to effect any such demotion not less than two weeks before the date it is intended to become effective. The Secretary of the Office of Policy and Management may transfer such an employee whose record is otherwise satisfactory to a position under the jurisdiction of another appointing authority, with the approval of such other appointing authority.

(c) An appointing authority may dismiss any employee in the classified service when the authority considers the good of the service will be served thereby. A permanent employee shall be given written notice of such dismissal at least two weeks in advance of the employee's dismissal, except as hereinafter provided, and a copy of the same shall be filed with the Secretary of the Office of Policy and Management or the secretary's designated representative. Such notice shall set forth the reasons for dismissal in sufficient detail to indicate whether the employee was discharged for misconduct, incompetence or other reasons relating to the effective performance of the employee's duties and shall be prepared in such form and given in such manner as the Secretary of the Office of Policy and Management prescribes. The Secretary of the Office of Policy and Management may provide by regulation for the waiving of advance notice in cases of serious misconduct by an employee affecting the public, the welfare, health or safety of patients, inmates or state employees or the protection of state property. Such regulation shall provide for written notice to a permanent employee who has attained permanent status and shall not preclude whatever rights any employee may have to appeal. The name of any such employee dismissed for incompetence or other reasons relating to the effective performance of the employee's duties shall be immediately removed from the eligible list in the office of the Commissioner of Administrative Services. No appointing authority shall pay any dismissed employee notice period pay or any other separation pay at a rate that exceeds the dismissed employee's rate of compensation, at the time of dismissal, for two weeks, or the amount of notice period provided for in an applicable collective bargaining agreement.

(d) An appointing authority, subject to any regulations issued by the Secretary of the Office of Policy and Management, may lay off any employee in the classified service as provided in section 5-241.

(e) (1) As provided in subsection (b) of section 12-15, the Commissioner of Revenue Services may, subject to such terms and conditions as said commissioner may prescribe, disclose return or return information, as defined in said section 12-15, in connection with a personnel proceeding, including any administrative or judicial proceedings related thereto, involving an employee or former employee of the Department of Revenue Services, if said commissioner determines that such information is relevant and material to such proceeding. If such return or return information is relevant and material to such proceeding, the commissioner shall, upon request made by the employee or former employee who is the subject of such proceeding, disclose such return or return information to such employee or former employee, or the collective bargaining agent for such employee or former employee, regardless of whether the commissioner introduces or otherwise relies upon such return or return information during the course of the proceeding. Return and return information disclosed under this subsection shall be used only for purposes of and to the extent necessary in such proceeding and shall not be further disclosed by any person involved in such proceeding.

(2) Any person who violates any provision of this subsection shall be fined not more than one thousand dollars or imprisoned not more than one year, or both.

(1967, P.A. 657, S. 49; P.A. 77-614, S. 66, 67, 610; P.A. 87-456, S. 3, 6; P.A. 00-77, S. 6, 7; P.A. 01-26, S. 5; P.A. 04-118, S. 2; P.A. 05-30, S. 1; P.A. 13-150, S. 3.)

History: P.A. 77-614 replaced personnel commissioner and personnel policy board with commissioner of administrative services; P.A. 87-456 amended Subsec. (a) to require that, for non-bargaining-unit employees, written reprimands or warnings shall be included in their personnel files and shall be expunged after 12 months if not merged in the next service rating; P.A. 00-77 substituted the Secretary of the Office of Policy and Management for the Commissioner of Administrative Services, made technical changes and added new Subsec. (d) re layoffs, effective May 16, 2000; P.A. 01-26 changed “commissioner” to “Secretary of the Office of Policy and Management” and made technical changes in Subsec. (c); P.A. 04-118 amended Subsec. (a) to make a technical change; P.A. 05-30 amended Subsec. (c) to prohibit payment of notice period pay at rate in excess of employee's rate of compensation at time of dismissal or as provided in collective bargaining agreement; P.A. 13-150 added Subsec. (e) re use of return information in certain personnel proceedings, effective June 25, 2013.

State employee may be dismissed for misconduct, incompetence or other reason relating to effective performance of duties. 170 C. 668. State must use this procedure to dismiss classified employee after working test period under Sec. 5-230 has expired. 174 C. 271. Cited. 176 C. 1; 177 C. 344; 194 C. 601; 228 C. 106.

(Return to Chapter
Table of Contents)

(Return to
List of Chapters)

(Return to
List of Titles)

Notes of Decisions

Cited in 12 cases (1 in the last 5 years), 1976–2025 · leading case: Goodson v. State, 635 A.2d 285 (Conn. 1993).

Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment

Goodson v. State, 635 A.2d 285 (Conn. 1993). · cites it 3× “The extent to which § 52-422 confers authority upon the Superior Court to intervene in a state employee bargaining agreement grievance procedure is a question that affects an ongoing program of the civil system. The issues raised by the proper construction of § 52-422 involve…”

Wagner v. Connecticut Pers. Appeal Bd., 368 A.2d 20 (Conn. 1976). · cites it 4× “” The latter phrase has been limited in scope to situations involving misconduct, incompetence, or other reasons relating to the effective performance of duties.”

Tomlin v. Pers. Appeal Bd., 416 A.2d 1205 (Conn. 1979). · cites it 3× “As his first claim of error, the plaintiff argues that under § 4-8 (a) and § 5-240 (c) 1 of the General Statutes, a deputy commissioner is without authority to dismiss an employee and that his dismissal by *347 deputy commissioner Henry Boyle was therefore invalid.”

McCann v. Dep't of Env't Prot., 952 A.2d 43 (Conn. 2008). · cites it 2× “” See also General Statutes § 5-240 (c); Regs., Conn.”

Chotkowski v. Connecticut Pers. Appeal Bd., 404 A.2d 868 (Conn. 1978). · cites it 2× “3 As such he was entitled under General Statutes § 5-240 (c) to two weeks written notice and a statement of reasons for his dismissal.”

Lombardi v. City of Bridgeport, 483 A.2d 1092 (Conn. 1984). · cites it 2× “In respect to such a layoff, competitive and noncompetitive employees are treated alike, neither having any right of appeal to the commission.”

Fusco v. Motto, 649 F. Supp. 1486 (D. Conn. 1986). · cites it 6× “Thus, although the § 29-18 powers are not explicitly subject to the requirement that the revocation of such powers be based on good cause, and may not be so subject in other circumstances, such is the case here where the possession of such powers is a prerequisite to plaintiff’s…”

Bapat v. Connecticut Dep't of Health Servs., 815 F. Supp. 525 (D. Conn. 1992). · cites it 2× “§ 5-240(b) provides in pertinent part that [a]n appointing authority, subject to any regulations issued by the commissioner of administrative services, may demote an employee in the classified service under his jurisdiction from a position in any given class or grade to a…”

King v. Lensink, 720 F. Supp. 236 (D. Conn. 1989). · cites it 2× “Conn.Gen.Stat. § 5-240(c). It is thus recognized that classified civil service employees in Connecticut have a property right in continued employment which is protected by the due process clause of the fourteenth amendment.”

Coppola v. Pers. Appeal Bd., 386 A.2d 228 (Conn. 1978). “After May 16, 1974, the state would have to follow the procedure set forth in § 5-240 (c) of the General Statutes and § 5-9-20 of the Regulations of the Connecticut State Agencies with respect to any dismissal action.”

Clark v. Employees' Review Bd. (Conn. App. Ct. 2025). · cites it 8× “Held: The trial court properly upheld the department’s decision to terminate the plaintiff’s employment utilizing a just cause standard pursuant to the applica- ble statute (§ 5-240) and regulation (§ 5-240-1a (c)), as the plaintiff’s asser- tions that she was entitled to…”

Ruffin v. Dep't of Pub. Works, 914 A.2d 617 (Conn. Super. Ct. 2006). · cites it 10× “General Statutes § 5-240 (c) and § 5-240-5a of the Regulations of Connecticut State Agencies address dismissal.”

— Conn. Gen. Stat. § 5-240(b) — 1 case

Bapat v. Connecticut Dep't of Health Servs., 815 F. Supp. 525 (D. Conn. 1992). “§ 5-240(b) provides in pertinent part that [a]n appointing authority, subject to any regulations issued by the commissioner of administrative services, may demote an employee in the classified service under his jurisdiction from a position in any given class or grade to a…”

— Conn. Gen. Stat. § 5-240(c) — 2 cases

King v. Lensink, 720 F. Supp. 236 (D. Conn. 1989). “Conn.Gen.Stat. § 5-240(c). It is thus recognized that classified civil service employees in Connecticut have a property right in continued employment which is protected by the due process clause of the fourteenth amendment.”

Fusco v. Motto, 649 F. Supp. 1486 (D. Conn. 1986). “Thus, although the § 29-18 powers are not explicitly subject to the requirement that the revocation of such powers be based on good cause, and may not be so subject in other circumstances, such is the case here where the possession of such powers is a prerequisite to plaintiff’s…”

Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.