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

Labor & Employment Law

: New York Public Personnel Law

The absence of language in the collective bargaining agreement providing for the claimed benefit bars the arbitration of the alleged grievance

The absence of language in the collective bargaining agreement providing for the claimed benefit bars the arbitration of the alleged grievance
Matter of Union-Endicott Cent. School Dist. v Endicott Teachers' Assn., 2009 NY Slip Op 01060, Decided on February 11, 2009, Appellate Division, Third Department

Joanne Peters, a teacher employed by the Union-Endicott Central School District was a member of the collective bargaining unit represented by the Endicott Teachers Association.

In late 2006, the school district initiated an investigation of allegations that Peters was stealing school property. In March 2007, Peters wrote to the Board of ?indicating an intent to retire, contingent on receiving certain health and dental benefits? pursuant to the Collective Bargaining Agreement [CBA].

A few weeks later Peters was arrested and charged with grand larceny based on the same allegations then being investigated by school district.

Peters was suspended and subsequently the district filed administrative disciplinary charges against her pursuant to Education Law § 3020-a. In view of these developments, the district decided to delay the processing of Peters' retirement and request for retiree benefits pending a resolution of the charges against her.

The Association filed a grievance on behalf of Peters and demanded arbitration of district?s refusal to process her retirement and provide the bargained-for benefits. In response to this demand for arbitration, the district filed a petition in Supreme Court for an order that would ?permanently staying arbitration.?

Supreme Court granted the district?s application and the Association appealed.

The Appellate Division sustained the lower court?s ruling, holding that ?the arbitration at issue was not authorized by the terms of the CBA.?

Noting that the CBA provided for the arbitration of an "alleged violation of the expressed written words in th[e] agreement," the Appellate Division found that ?[t]here is no provision in the CBA setting forth the procedure pertaining to the initiation of retiree benefits ? [n]or does the CBA provide instruction as to when an employee must be considered to be retired for purposes of receiving benefits thereunder.?

According, the court ruled that in the absence of any provision in the collective bargaining agreement requiring the school district to take action while Peters was under suspension, the district?s decision to delay action regarding her retirement did not violate any expressed right or procedure set out in the CBA and therefore was not arbitrable.

The full text of the decision is posted on the Internet at:
http://www.courts.state.ny.us/reporter/3dseries/2009/2009_01060.htm

Full post as published by New York Public Personnel Law on February 12, 2009 (boomark / email).