Labor & Employment Law

: New York Public Personnel Law

Employee terminated after obtaining Red Cross assistance under ?false pretenses?

By Harvey Randall, Esq. (index)

Employee terminated after obtaining Red Cross assistance under ?false pretenses?
Matter of Christopher Mapp v Burnham, 8 N.Y.3d 999, Court of Appeals

Christopher Mapp was employed as a Senior Product Consultant in the Technology Services Department of the Port Authority of New York and New Jersey. Mapp?s superior, Gregory Burnham, wrote Joseph Seymour, Executive Director of the Port Authority, recommending that Mapp be terminated from his employment because he applied for, and accepted, financial aid from the American Red Cross based upon misleading information that Mapp had allegedly provided to the Red Cross concerning his employment status in the aftermath of September 11, 2001 terrorist attack on the New York City World Trade Center.
A disciplinary hearing was held and the hearing officer recommended that Mapp be terminated from his position based of evidence that:

1. Mapp told a Red Cross representative that he was ?laid off? when he had not been terminated, and was in fact receiving his paycheck;

2. Mapp?s written statement to the Office of the Inspector General ?profusely? apologized for his actions, which the hearing officer found to be indicative of Mapp?s guilt;

3. Mapp testified that he needed financial assistance from the Red Cross to pay for future childcare, while the Red Cross document states that Mapp requested the funds to pay for outstanding debts; and

4. Mapp used the money to pay the arrears for his children?s after-school program.

The hearing officer found such evidence sufficient to support the termination because these actions constituted ?a significant violation of the General Rules and Regulations for All Port Authority Employees? and, in particular, brought ?discredit to the Port Authority.? The appointing authority, after reviewing the findings and recommendation of the hearing officer, terminated Mapp.

Mapp appealed his dismissal. The Appellate Division vacated the Port Authority?s action, ruling that ?the evidence [against Mapp] is insufficient, and therefore find that the determination lacks a rational basis and must be annulled? [Mapp v Burnham, 23 A.D.3d 37].

The Authority challenged the Appellate Division?s decision and the Court of Appeals reversed, holding that ?The determination of respondent Port Authority of New York and New Jersey (the PA) terminating petitioner?s employment is supported by substantial evidence,? citing Pell v Board of Education, 34 NY2d 222.

The court said that the evidence in the record supports the finding that Mapp misled the American Red Cross concerning his employment status and obtained financial assistance under false pretenses.

Further, said the Court of Appeals, in view of the nature of Mapp?s misconduct, ?we cannot conclude that the penalty of dismissal imposed . . . shocks the judicial conscience,? citing Rukunas v Stout, 8 NY3d 897.

The full text of the decision is at:

http://nypublicpersonnellawarchives.blogspot.com/2007/06/employee-terminated-after-obtaining-red.html

Full post as published by New York Public Personnel Law on March 21, 2008 (boomark / email).