Opinion
October 7, 1991
Appeal from the Supreme Court, Nassau County (Collins, J.).
Ordered that the judgment is affirmed, with costs.
Administrative determinations concerning classification of positions are subject to limited judicial review and will not be disturbed in the absence of a showing that they are wholly arbitrary or without any rational basis (see, Cove v. Sise, 71 N.Y.2d 910, 912; Matter of Dillon v. Nassau County Civ. Serv. Commn., 43 N.Y.2d 574, 580). Here, the County explained that due to the changing nature of data processing, a restructuring of the Division of Data Processing in which the petitioner worked was necessary. The County proffered evidence that the reclassification was based upon an extensive study of that Division which included questionnaires completed by the employees, organizational charts and work audits. Moreover, the County established that the petitioner was treated equally with his peers. Each Programmer Analyst IV in the Applications Development section was reclassified to the position of Programmer Analyst I. It should be noted that the petitioner's salary and grade level remained intact after the reclassification.
In light of the County's explanation of the process by which it reclassified the entire Data Processing Division, we find that a rational basis exists for the reclassification of the petitioner's position from Programmer Analyst IV to Programmer Analyst I (see, Cove v. Sise, supra; Matter of Dillon v. Nassau County Civ. Serv. Commn., supra). While the petitioner contends that he has more experience than other employees in his reclassified position, he fails to demonstrate that the reclassification was arbitrary and capricious or erroneous as a matter of law (see, Matter of Hansen v. Schneider, 141 A.D.2d 823, 824; Matter of Grossman v. Rankin, 43 N.Y.2d 493). Harwood, J.P., Lawrence, Eiber and Balletta, JJ., concur.