Thursday, November 04, 2010
Discontinuing or postponing administrative disciplinary action while criminal action involving the same event is pending and related issues
New York courts have considered discontinuing disciplinary action while criminal action is pending, holding that an appointing authority has no obligation to postpone administrative disciplinary action even if the county district attorney requests that the administrative disciplinary action be postponed.
An individual who is terminated pursuant to Section 71 or Section 73 of the Civil Service Law because of his or her absence caused by a disability may decide to sue the employer, claiming the termination was unlawful.
Tuesday, November 02, 2010
Most public officers and employees serve in one position at a time. Sometimes, however, an individual may be employed by two different jurisdictions simultaneously. Such dual employments generally require the knowledge and approval of the appointing authorities involved.
Friday, October 29, 2010
The central issue in this case concerned a teacher’s eligibility for Jarema credit for the purposes of granting tenure. As the decision demonstrates, determining whether an individual qualifies for Jarema credit is not always an easy task.
Thursday, October 28, 2010
In 1988 the state amended the Retirement and Social Security Law to change the mandatory age of retirement for certain members of the Police and Firefighters’ Retirement System [PFRS] from age 60 to age 57 [Chapter 795 of the Laws of 1988]. A State Police Officer challenged the requirement that he retire from his position upon his attainment of age 57.
A school risks violating the Establishment Clause of the U.S. Constitution if any of its teachers’ activities give the impression that the school endorses a religion. But how far can a school board go in limiting a teacher’s classroom speech on religious issues before it tramples on another Constitutional guarantee: the right to free expression?
Wednesday, October 20, 2010
Where Civil Service rules so provide, a resignation may not be withdrawn without the consent of the appointing authority. This was the lesson that a food service worker learned when she attempted to rescind her letter of resignation.
Thursday, October 07, 2010
It is not unusual for an employee placed on disability leave pursuant to Section 72 of the Civil Service Law to allege that his or her employer’s action in placing the individual on such leave constituted unlawful discrimination because of a disability. In this case, national origin discrimination was claimed to have motivated placing the employee on “an involuntary medical leave” that eventually resulted in the employee's being placed on Section 72 leave.
Monday, October 04, 2010
The designation of managerial and confidential employees within the meaning of the Taylor Law is important to both employers and unions. In this case the Appellate Division set out the criteria courts follow in reviewing determinations by the Public Employment Relations Board [PERB] concerning the designation of such personnel.
Thursday, September 23, 2010
Seniority is probably the most critical factor in determining who may be lawfully retained in a layoff situation. In this case, the New York Court of Appeals addressed the competing seniority claims of two elementary grade teachers seeking to avoid being excessed by a School District.
Tuesday, September 14, 2010
Attorney in private practice employed by municipality to conduct an investigation claims qualified immunity when sued by employee
In this decision the court explains that the doctrine of qualified immunity that protects government officials “from liability for civil damages insofar as their conduct does not violate clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of which a reasonable person would have known.”
Monday, August 02, 2010
Uninterrupted Civil Service Law §72 absence for one year or more permits termination of employee pursuant to §73 of the Civil Service Law
Administrative Law Judge recommended that the employer terminate a correction officer absent on Civil Service Law Section 72 leave from employment pursuant to Section 73 of the Civil Service Law after the officer has been absent from duty continuously for more than one year due to a non work-related disability.
Friday, July 23, 2010
A "Google Alert" received by NYPPL via the Internet concerned applying the Rule of Three set out in §61.1 of the Civil Service Law based on the following facts:
“I scored a 100 on a New York State civil service promotional exam. There were 7 openings for supervisor. Five candidates scored a 100. One of the four declined the promotional opportunity. The promotions were given to two eligibles who scored 100, four eligibles who scored 95, and one eligible who scored a 90.
Tuesday, June 29, 2010
In this ruling the court sets out the basic rules concerning the rights of a provisional employee to continued employment as a provisional employee.
Monday, June 21, 2010
An employee’s “disciplinary probation status” may follow the individual to a new agency upon his or her transfer if the new employer wishes to condition the approval of the transfer on the continuation in such status.
Monday, June 14, 2010
In order to overcome the confidentiality requirements applicable to the personnel records of police officers, firefighters and certain other civil servants, satisfying each the following requirements.
Wednesday, June 09, 2010
Upon his retirement the County paid the retiree for accrued vacation in the amount of 630 hours. The retiree, however, contended that he was entitled to be paid for an additional 444 hours of accrued vacation time, or a total of 1074 hours of credit.
Out-of-title work Article 78 petition dismissed for failure to exhaust remedy provided in the collective bargaining agreement
CSEA complained that the library aide job assignments given to negotiating unit members violated the out-of-title prohibition contained in Civil Service Law Section 61.
If an appointing authority claims that it made a mistake in taking or confirming a personnel action, may it rescind the action or correct the error if the individual voices an objection?
A police officer's application for performance of duty disability retirement benefits was rejected by the New York Employees’ Retirement System because she failed to file a notice or report of the incident with her employer within 30 days of the event.
Tuesday, June 08, 2010
Distinguishing between “constructive criticism” and a “reprimand” in the nature of disciplinary action
Typically courts have viewed placing a memorandum in a personnel file that the writer characterizes as a “reprimand” or uses a phrase such as “you are hereby reprimanded” constitutes disciplinary action within the meaning of statutory disciplinary procedures, entitling a tenured individual to notice and hearing.
Employees of an entity providing services to a school district pursuant to a contract are not employees of the school district
The New York State Teachers Retirement System ruled that individuals employed were not entitled to member service credit because they were not employees of a participating employer or, alternatively, because they were not providing teaching services within the meaning of Education Law §501.
Monday, June 07, 2010
Although employee scored higher than a number of other applicants in a written test for promotion, he was passed over because he “did not do as well as other eligible job aspirants in the evaluative interview conducted by the Department’s promotion committee.”
Suing for damages for a "line of duty injury" suffered in the course of performing firefighter and police officer duties
The so-called Firefighters Rule, which has been extended to police officers,* bars firefighters and police officers from recovering for line of duty injuries that occur as a result of the specific risks inherent in performing the duties of firefighter or police officer.
Friday, June 04, 2010
An employee appealed, asking the court to annul the Village’s denial of his General Municipal Law §207-c benefits on the grounds that such denial was arbitrary and capricious, an abuse of discretion and affected by error of law and fact.
Workers’ Compensation held the exclusive remedy available to an employee injured on the way to a work-related meeting
The Workers' Compensation Law provides the exclusive remedy “where, ... the employer and the landowner are essentially the same party and the plaintiff is injured while performing his [or her] job.”
Thursday, June 03, 2010
In general, a name-clearing hearing is to provide an employee who claims that he or she has been “stigmatized” by his or her employer with an opportunity to clear his or her name* The individual seeking such a hearing has the burden of proof in the proceeding.
Quid pro quo in the nature of the withdrawal of disciplinary charges not required to validate disciplinary settlement agreement
The agreement that the employee signed extended his one-year probationary period as a firefighter to 18 months. The Appellate Division said that it was not required that the settlement agreement constitute a quid pro quo for the dismissal of pending disciplinary charges, so long as employee’s waiver of rights to a pre-termination hearing was knowingly and freely made.
Friday, May 28, 2010
Appellate Division lacked “discretionary authority” to vacate the disciplinary penalty imposed by the appointing authority
The Court of Appeals held that the Appellate Division “has no discretionary authority or interest of justice jurisdiction in this CPLR article 78 proceeding to review the penalty imposed .…”
Monday, May 24, 2010
The general rule is that once the public officer or employee delivers his or her resignation to the appointing authority or the appointing authority's designee, approval of a request to withdraw or rescind the resignation is subject to the discretionary approval of the appointing authority.
Tuesday, February 09, 2010
§36 of the Public Officers Law provides, in pertinent part, for the removal of town, village, improvement district or fire district officer [except a justice of the peace] by the Appellate Division having jurisdiction "for any misconduct, maladministration, malfeasance or malversation in office."
Friday, January 22, 2010
Critical to the resolution of this appeal was the Appellate Division’s holding that the time limits for the petitioner commencing her lawsuit challenging her dismissal “was not extended by her administrative appeal of [the Department of Education’s] determination.”
Wednesday, January 06, 2010
The School District had filed disciplinary charges against the principal of one of its schools. Subsequently the School Board authorized its superintendent to negotiate a settlement that would dispose of the matter. A settlement was reached and the Board adopted a motion withdrawing its charges against the principal without prejudice.
Monday, January 04, 2010
The court declared that it was a “misapprehension that in 3020-a hearings the panel member selected by the Board is the `Board’s representative,’ and the panel member selected by the teacher is the `teacher’s representative,’ and only the Chairman is expected to be neutral and impartial.” According to the Meehan decision, this is no longer the case.
Some of the topics addressed in the more than 4,500 cases summarized in New York Public Personnel Law.
Click on text highlighted in color to access the reference.
Subsequent court and administrative rulings, or changes to laws, rules and regulations may have modified or clarified or vacated or reversed the decisions summarized here. Accordingly, these summaries should be Shepardized® or otherwise checked to make certain that the most recent information is being considered by the reader.
THE MATERIAL ON THIS WEBSITE IS FOR INFORMATION ONLY. CHANGES IN LAWS, RULES, REGULATIONS AND NEW COURT AND ADMINISTRATIVE DECISIONS MAY AFFECT THE ACCURACY OF THE INFORMATION PROVIDED IN THIS LAWBLOG. THE MATERIAL PRESENTED IS NOT LEGAL ADVICE AND THE USE OF ANY MATERIAL POSTED ON THIS WEBSITE DOES NOT CREATE AN ATTORNEY-CLIENT RELATIONSHIP.