(a) Definitions. For purposes of this Section, the following terms have the meanings indicated:
Employment dispute means any grievance or appeal filed by the employee against the County where a dismissal action under COMCOR 33.07.01.33 or 33.07.01.35, is challenged.
No-rehire clause: a provision prohibiting, preventing, or otherwise restricting an employee from obtaining future employment.
(b) An agreement to settle an employment dispute must not contain a no-rehire clause from County employment.
(c) Except as provided in subsection (b), a settlement agreement may include a no-rehire clause if:
(1) the provision is mutually agreed upon to end the current employment relationship;
(2) the employee voluntarily resigns after a formal disciplinary action has been initiated by an agency head; or
(3) the Chief Administrative Officer or agency head has made a finding that there are sufficient grounds to dismiss the employee for cause.
(d) Appeal of No-Rehire Clause. An aggrieved employee may file an appeal with the County’s Merit System Protection Board to challenge the decision of the Chief Administrative Officer or agency head to include a no-rehire clause in a proposed settlement agreement under subsection (c)(3). The appeal must:
(1) be in writing; and
(2) filed within 10 working days from the employee’s receipt of the proposed settlement agreement which included a no-rehire clause.
(e) Burden of Proof. The County, upon appeal, has the burden of proof by a preponderance of evidence to provide a legitimate, nondiscriminatory reason for its decision. (2022 L.M.C., ch. 1, §1.)
Editor’s note—2022 L.M.C., ch. 1, §2, states: Sec. 2. Transition. This Act does not apply to any County employee settlement agreement that was executed by all parties before this Act took effect.
Former § 33-22, Benefits for domestic partner of employee, derived from 1999 L.M.C., ch. 30, § 2, as amended by 2001 L.M.C., ch. 21, § 1, and 2010 L.M.C., ch. 30, § 1, was repealed by 2016 L.M.C., ch. 21, § 1.
2016 L.M.C., ch. 21, § 2, states: Transition. The amendments to Section 33-22 made in Section 1 do not apply to an employee or retiree who is receiving domestic partner benefits or has applied for domestic partner benefits before June 28, 2016.
Former Section 33-22 was interpreted, quoted, and the validity of the section was upheld in Tyma v. Montgomery County, 369 Md. 497, 801 A.2d 148 (2002).