Home -> Law Blog Directory -> Labor & Employment Law Blogs -> New York Public Personnel Law
(866) 635-2689 for Personal Injury or (866) 635-9402 for Criminal Defense
Find a Local Lawyer
Divorce (866) 635-6190
Personal Injury (866) 635-2689
Criminal Defense (866) 635-9402
Labor & Employment Law
: New York Public Personnel LawAlleged violations of a "Memorandum of Understanding" to a Taylor Law agreement may not be subject to contract grievance procedures
Pine Plains CSD v Federation of Teachers, 248 A.D.2d 612
It is not unusual for parties to a collective bargaining agreement to agree to provisions set out in a ?supplemental agreement? or to sign a ?memorandum of understanding? in the course of collective bargaining pursuant to the Taylor Law.
Typically this device is used to set out provisions that although they have been agreed upon, for some reason, one or both of the parties do not wish to have the item set out in the collective bargaining agreement. In other instances, the supplemental agreement or memorandum of understanding is used to explain or modify a term or contract provision contained in the agreement or provide something after negotiations have been completed.
The Pine Plains Central School District case considers a significant issue: how does a party resolve a dispute concerning a provision contained in a supplemental agreement or in a memorandum of understanding?
The case arose when the Pine Plains Federation of Teachers demanded that its grievance concerning an alleged violation of a provision contained in a ?supplemental memorandum of agreement? between the parties be submitted to arbitration in accordance with the arbitration procedure set out in the collective bargaining agreement in chief between the District and the Federation.
The District won a stay of arbitration of the alleged violation on the grounds that the supplement did not contain an arbitration clause nor was the contract grievance/arbitration procedure incorporated by reference into the supplement agreement.
According to the ruling by the Appellate Division, unless there is an arbitration process specifically set out in a supplement to a collective bargaining agreement or a memorandum of understanding, or the supplement or memorandum specifically states that the collective bargaining agreement in chief's arbitration procedure will be used to resolve disputes arising under it, a party cannot demand that the issue be submitted to arbitration as a matter of right.
Full post as published by New York Public Personnel Law on August 17, 2010 (boomark / email).
Prenuptial Agreements
Make an Airtight Prenuptial Agreement
Uniform Commercial Code and Contracts
Interstate commercial transactions and sale of goods in the United States
Uniform Pre-marital Agreement Act
Standard Prenuptial Law
Employment Contracts
General Contract Law Principles
Taylor Bean Faces Federal WARN Class Action
Taylor Bean Federal Employment Class Action Filed
Pennsylvania Employment Law
alleged violations of Pennsylvania labor laws including discrimination, harassment and overtime pay.
New Jersey Employment Law
alleged violations of New Jersey state labor laws including overtime pay, discrimination and harassment.
Texas Employment Law
alleged violations of Texas labor laws including overtime pay, discrimination and harassment.
Michigan Employment Law
alleged violations of Michigan labor laws including overtime pay, discrimination and harassment.
Oil and Gas
industry workers allegedly subject to serious accident injury from hazardous conditions.

Late filing divested arbitrator of jurisdiction
PERB Holds No Right To Disclosure In Disciplinary Arbitrations
SEC and Federal Reserve Enter into Memorandum of Understanding
The Importance of Integration/Merger Clauses in Michigan Contracts









