A detective sergeant [Employee] contracted COVID-19 at work. As the result of a positive test for COVID-19 the County Department of Health ordered Employee to "quarantine/isolate for 10 days" and Employee was subsequently hospitalized from August 21, 2021 through August 28, 2021. Employee applied for benefits pursuant to General Municipal Law §207-c [207-c], but County Director of Risk Management [Director] Employee's application as untimely pursuant to local law. Employee's request for reconsideration was denied and ultimately a hearing held pursuant to local law and the parties' collective bargaining agreement.
The Hearing Officer recommended the Director sustain the denial of Employee's application for207-c benefits on the basis that he failed to timely file his application and failed to show good cause to excuse the untimely filing. Director issued a determination adopting the Hearing Officer's recommendation in its entirety and Employee's collective bargaining representative commenced a CPLR Article 78 proceeding challenging the Director's determination.
The Appellate Division noting §207-c requires certain municipal employers to continue to pay salary or wages to police officers who sustain a disability in the course of their employment, indicated that "The statute is remedial in nature and intended to provide a benefit to law enforcement personnel and, as such, is to be construed liberally in favor of such personnel". Further, the court opined while 207-c does not provide a procedure for applying for benefits thereunder, a benefits application process may be the subject of collective bargaining and/or local law, "Judicial review of an administrative determination made after a hearing at which evidence is taken pursuant to direction of law is limited to a consideration of whether that determination was supported by substantial evidence upon the whole record".
In the words of the court, "As relevant here [the County Code] requires, among other things, applications for benefits under General Municipal Law §207-c to be made 'within 10 days from the date of the incident alleged to have given rise to the claim of disability or illness, or from the time such condition is discovered, whichever date is later.' The [Director] may excuse the failure to file the application within this [10]-day period upon a showing of good cause."
The Director had determined that the employee's September 17 application was untimely because it was not made within 10 days of his alleged work-related incident of August 9. Under the circumstances, the Appellate Division held that it was improper for the Director to use August 9, 2021 as the incident date that commenced the 10-day period within which Employee was required to file his application for benefits as Employee's application "clearly stated that he was informed on September 9, 2021 about his lung damage stemming from his contraction of COVID-19, and it was on this date that [Employee] first discovered the disability ... that gave rise to his claim and application for benefits."
The Appellate Division found that Employee made his application was made within 10 days of September 9, 2021, and, accordingly, "the Director's determination denying his application for benefits pursuant to General Municipal Law §207-c is not supported by substantial evidence and must be annulled."
The matter was remanded to the County's Director of Risk Management "for further proceedings not inconsistent with this Court's decision."
Click HERE to access the Appellate Division's decision posted on the Internet.