Home -> Law Blog Directory -> Labor & Employment Law Blogs -> New York Public Personnel Law

Labor & Employment Law

: New York Public Personnel Law

Protected activity under the Taylor Law

By Harvey Randall, Esq.

Protected activity under the Taylor Law
Miller and NYC Board of Education, 35 PERB 3002

Reeva Miller received unsatisfactory performance ratings over a number of school years, including the 1998-1999 school year. Following her receiving the 1998-1999 unsatisfac­tory rating, the New York City Board of Education initiated disciplinary action against Miller pursuant to Section 3020-a of the Education Law based on her unsatisfactory performance.

Miller filed an unfair labor practice charge with PERB alleging that she had been subject­ed to a pattern of harassment that culminated in disciplinary action being taken against her in violation of Sections 209-a.1(a) and (c) of the Public Employees' Fair Employment Act [the Taylor Law]. Miller complained that the disciplinary action was initiated after she engaged in a pro­tected activity -- discussing her interest in a change in her class schedule in accordance with the terms of the relevant collective bargaining agreement with her union -- the United Federation of Teachers [UFT].

While PERB acknowledged that the "timing of two events could raise suspicion," PERB noted that it had never accepted "suspicion" as a substitute for evidence of anti-union animus. PERB dismissed Miller's charge, sustaining the Administrative Law Judge's finding that the District had not initiated disciplinary action against her because of her engaging in any protected activity.

PERB pointed out that Miller had been evaluated as "weak" prior to her request for a change in her class schedule and her communication with the UFT. It also noted that Miller had been provided with an opportunity to improve her performance as a teacher by using the services of the "PEER intervention program" and that she was observed in the classroom and rated unsatisfactory by individuals employed at another school and who were unaware of her communications with the UFT.

Full post as published by New York Public Personnel Law on January 29, 2008 (boomark / email).