Union’s demand for all documents, including without limitation, any memoranda between any of the employer’s agents overbroad
District Council 37, AFSCME, Local 1070 and State Of New York - Unified Court System, U-27031 [Source: PERB’s Recent Decisions posting on the Internet]
PERB affirmed the ALJ's decision that the Unified Court System [UCS] violated §§209a.1(a) and (d) of the Act when it refused DC 37's request for documents and information for its representation of a bargaining unit member subject to a notice of charges issued pursuant to the disciplinary procedures contained in the UCSDC 37 collectively negotiated agreement.
The Board found that the charge was timely because each denial of a request for information gives rise to a separate violation of the Act. Reiterating the obligation under the Act of an employer to provide an employee organization with reasonable, relevant information necessary for the negotiation and administration of collectively negotiated agreements and the processing of grievances, the Board found that this general right to receive requested information extends to an employee organization's representation of an employee who is the subject of discipline under the negotiated terms of an agreement.
The Board held that "there is no meaningful distinction under the Act between a negotiated disciplinary grievance procedure and one calling for the filing of an answer in response to a notice of charges. Whether disciplinary action can be grieved, answered and/or appealed under a negotiated procedure, an employee organization has a duty to administer that provision under the Act. It follows that in order to fulfill that duty, an employee organization is entitled to receive, upon request, relevant and necessary information in order to effectively represent a member charged."
The Board modified the ALJ's order, however, by finding that DC 37's request for "all documents, including without limitation, any memoranda between any UCS agents" regarding the aggrieved employee was overly broad, unduly burdensome and unnecessary.
Summaries of, and commentaries on, selected court and administrative decisions and related matters affecting public employers and employees in New York State in particular and in other jurisdictions in general.
ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE IS NOT USED, IN WHOLE OR IN PART, IN THE SUMMARIES OF JUDICIAL AND QUASI-JUDICIAL DECISIONS PREPARED BY NYPPL
CAUTION
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. AGAIN, 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, OR CORRESPONDENCE CONCERNING SUCH MATERIAL, DOES NOT CREATE AN ATTORNEY-CLIENT RELATIONSHIP.
New York Public Personnel Law Blog Editor Harvey Randall served as Principal Attorney, New York State Department of Civil Service; Director of Personnel, SUNY Central Administration; Director of Research, Governor’s Office of Employee Relations; and Staff Judge Advocate General, New York Guard.
Consistent with the Declaration of Principles jointly adopted by a Committee of the American Bar Association and a Committee of Publishers and Associations, the material posted to this blog is presented with the understanding that neither the publisher nor NYPPL and, or, its staff and contributors are providing legal advice to the reader and in the event legal or other expert assistance is needed, the reader is urged to seek such advice from a knowledgeable professional.
Copyright 2009-2024 - Public Employment Law Press.
Email: nyppl@nycap.rr.com.