The Attorney General of Texas
November 10, 1980
MARKWHITE
Attorney General
Honorable William C. Wright Opinion No. MW-268
Orange County Attorney
County Courthouse Re: Whether a county court-at-
Orange, Texas 77630 law judge may adopt a sick leave
policy for his employees different
from the policy adopted by the
commissioners court
Dear Mr. Wright:
You have requested our opinion as to whether the judge of the county
court-at-law of Orange County may adopt a sick leave policy for his
employees different from the policy adopted by the commissioners court.
Your particular inquiry relates to the court coordinator of the county court-
at-law.
The county court-at-law of Orange County was created by article
1970-349, V.T.C.S. Section 4(a) thereof provides:
The County Attorney, County Clerk, and Sheriff of
Orange County, Texas, shall serve as County
Attorney, Clerk, and Sheriff, respectively, of the
County Court at Law of Orange County. The
Commissioners Court of Orange County may employ
as many additional assistant county attorneys, deputy
sheriffs and clerks as are necessary to serve the
Court created by this Act. Those serving shall
perform the duties, and are entitled to the compensa-
tion, fees, and allowances, prescribed by law for their
respective offices in Orange County.
The present policy of the Orange County Commissioners Court allows each
county employee up to 60 days sick leave. You contend that this policy is
superseded by article 3902, V.T.C.S., which provides, in pertinent part:
Whenever any district, county or precinct officer
shall require the services of deputies, assistants or
clerks in the performance of his duties he shall apply
p. 852
Honorable William C. Wright - Page Two (MN-268)
to the County Commissioners’ Court of his county for authority
to appoint such deputies, assistants or clerks, stating by sworn
application the number needed, the position to be filled and the
amount to be paid. Said application shall be accompanied by a
statement showing the probable receipts from fees,
commissions and compensation to be collected by said office
during the fiscal year and the probable disbursements which
shall include all salaries and expenses of said office; and said
court shall make its order authorizing the appointment of such
deputies, assistants and clerks and fix the compensation to be
paid them within the limitations herein prescribed and
determine the number to be appointed as in the discretion of
said court may be proper; provided that in TW)case shall the
Commissioners’ Court or any member thereof attempt to
influence the appointment of any person as deputy, assistant or
clerk in any office. Upon the entry of such order the officers
applying for such assistants, deputies or clerks shall be
authorized to appoint them; provided that said compensation
shall not exceed the maximum amount hereinafter set out. The
compensation which may be allowed to the deputies, assistants
or clerks above named for their services shall be a reasonable
one, not to exceed the following amounts:
Even if article 3902 permits the judge to fix the amount of sick leave which his
court coordinator may accrue, article 3912k, V.T.C.S., enacted in 1971, repealed every
prior law to the extent that it prescribed “the compensation, office expense, travel
expense, or any other allowance for any official or employee.” Article 3912k, section
8. Attorney General Opinion MW-136 (1980). That statute makes it the duty of the
commissioners court to:
fix the amount of compensation, office expense, travel expense,
and all other allowances for county and precinct officials and
employees who are paid wholly from county funds, but in no
event shall such salaries be set lower than they exist at the
effective date of this Act.
Section 1. It is clear that sick leave policy for all county employees covered by article
3912k is to be set by the commissioners court. Adoption of a sick leave policy for
county employees by the commissioners court would not improperly interfere with the
judge’s prerogative of selecting his court coordinator. See Renfro v. Shropshire, 566
S.W. 2d 688, 691-92 (Tex. Civ. App. - Eastlsnd 1978, wr=ePd n.r.e.). Thus, it is our
opinion that the judge of the county court-at-law of Orange County may not adopt a
sick leave policy for his employees which differs from the policy adopted by the
commissioners court.
p. 553
Honorable William C. Wright - Page Three (NW-2683
SUMMARY
The judge of the county court-at-law of Orange County may
not adopt a sick leave policy for his employees which differs
from the policy adopted by the commissioners court.
MARK WHITE
Attorney General of Texas
JOHN W. FAINTER, JR.
First Assistant Attorney General
RICHARD E. GRAY III
Executive Assistant Attorney General
Prepared by Rick Gilpin
Assistant Attorney General
APPROVED:
OPINION COMMlTTEE
Susan L. Garrison, Acting Chairman
Jon Bible
Walter Davis
Rick Gilpin
Bruce Youngblood
p. 854