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

Labor & Employment Law

: New York Public Personnel Law

The jurisdiction and authority of the Commissioner to grant relief in adjudicating an appeal filed pursuant to §310 of the Education Law

The jurisdiction and authority of the Commissioner to grant relief in adjudicating an appeal filed pursuant to §310 of the Education Law
Appeal of P. Stephen Lamont from action of the Board of Education of the City School District of the City of Rye, Clarita Zeppie, principal, and Cari Caulway, teacher, regarding employee discipline.

P, Stephen Lamont filed a §310 appeal with the Commissioner of Education objecting to the decision of the Board of Education of the City of Rye School District not to discipline school principal Clarita Zeppie (?Zeppie?) and first grade school teacher Cari Caulway (?Caulway?) based an alleged incident that occurred between Lamont and Caulway in her classroom after dismissal concerning homework.

Among the allegations underlying Lamont?s appeal were the following:

1. The school superintendent, claiming ?privacy concerns,? declined to ?share any specific actions that the district may or may not have taken against a particular employee? with him.

2. He was treated disrespectfully by Caulway and that he was threatened by Zeppie in violation of Federal Civil Rights Laws.

3. He suffered fear, intimidation, public humiliation, and public embarrassment that impeded his free speech rights and his right to petition government.

4. He was denied equal protection, and suffered emotional upset and anxiety.

As redress for these alleged acts or omissions, Lamont asked the Commissioner (1) to suspend Caulway for 30 days without pay; (2) to terminate Zeppie from her position; and (3) award him $250,000 in damages.

Addressing the merits of Lamont?s appeal, the Commissioner said that to the extent Lamont claimed that his constitutional rights were violated, the appeal must be dismissed as an appeal to the Commissioner is not the proper forum ?to adjudicate novel issues of constitutional law or to challenge the constitutionality of a regulation.?

The Commissioner also dismissed Lamont?s appeal seeking Calway?s suspension without pay and Zeppie?s termination from employment.

The Commissioner explained that ?To dismiss or discipline a tenured employee, charges must be instituted by the board of education pursuant to Education Law §3020-a," and the Commissioner of Education does not have any authority "to order the suspension or termination of tenured employees for the alleged reasons in the absence of a §3020-a hearing.?

The Commissioner then noted that a board of education has broad discretion to determine whether to bring disciplinary proceedings against tenured employees.*

As to Lamont?s seeking an award monetary damages, costs or reimbursements, the Commissioner said that he did not have any authority to make such awards in connection with an appeal pursuant to Education Law §310.

* Decisions of the Commissioner of Education demonstrating the fact that discretion whether or not to file disciplinary charges is vested in a school board include Matter of Middleton, Decision #14431, in which the Commissioner sustained a decision by the school board not to file charges against an employee and Matter of Gaul, Decision #14432, where the Commissioner sustained the school board's decision to file disciplinary charges against an employee].

The Commissioner?s decision is posted on the Internet at: http://www.counsel.nysed.gov/Decisions/volume49/d16054.htm

Full post as published by New York Public Personnel Law on May 11, 2010 (boomark / email).