ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE IS NOT USED, IN WHOLE OR IN PART, IN THE SUMMARIES OF JUDICIAL AND QUASI-JUDICIAL DECISIONS PREPARED BY NYPPL PERSONNEL

June 27, 2024

Recent decisions involving disciplinary charges served on employees of the City of New York posted on the Internet by the New York City Office of Administrative Trials and Hearings

Employee alleged with having falsifying certain of his time and attendance records:

New York City Office of Administrative Trials and Hearings [OATH] Administrative Law Judge [ALJ] Charlotte Davidson recommended termination of employment of  an investigator [Respondent] who, from December 30, 2019 to January 15, 2024, was found to have violated the Employer’s policies by charging sick leave credits  while on annual leave to extend his vacations.  

Respondent was entitled to unlimited sick leave but could be credited with a finite amount of accumulated annual leave credits and any unused annual leave credits would be paid to him upon his leaving his employment with the City. 

Although some of the dates of Respondents alleged misconduct were beyond the 18-month statute of limitations for bringing disciplinary charges, Judge Davidson determined that such otherwise untimely charges filed against the Respondent fell under the criminal exception for bringing such charges.

Such alleged misconduct, if proven true, would constitute the crime of official misconduct because Respondent received a benefit by failing to accurately report certain of Respondent's absences as "sick time" and obtain approval to use sick leave credits in place of annual leave credits for such absences from work by falsely reporting such absences to the Department .

Noting Respondent’s position as a uniformed investigator entrusted with highly confidential information and investigations of potentially criminal matters, the ALJ held that Respondent must be held to a "high standard of integrity". Accordingly,  Judge Davidson found that Respondent's lack of disciplinary record and satisfactory job performance were insufficient to mitigate such dishonesty and abuse of the use of sick leave credits by Respondent. 

Click HERE to access Judge Davidson's findings and recommended disposition of this disciplinary action posted on the Internet.


Employee served with disciplinary charges alleging he sexually harassed coworkers:

OATH's ALJ Michael D. Turilli recommended termination of the employment of an employee [Respondent] found guilty of disciplinary charges alleging acts of sexual harassment of coworkers. 

The ALJ denied the pro se Respondent’s motion to dismiss the charges for lack of jurisdiction and found that Respondent had sexually harassed the three coworkers in multiple incidents over the course of a year by making offensive remarks and obscene gestures, displaying a sexually explicit photograph, and making unwanted advances. 

The ALJ found that the coworkers had provided credible and compelling testimony, which was corroborated by contemporaneous reports and were consistent with previous statements alleging such misbehavior. Indeed, the Administrative Law Judge found that Respondent’s own witness provided further corroboration of the alleged misconduct, testifying that two complainants had reported Respondent’s behavior to her. 

Notwithstanding the Respondent’s 20-plus years of service and lack of any history of disciplinary action having been taken against Respondent in the past, Judge Turilli concluded that the penalty of termination from employment would be the appropriate penalty under the circumstances and recommended the imposition of the penalty of dismissal of the Respondent to the Appointing Authority. 

Click HERE to access Judge Turilli's findings and recommended disposition of this disciplinary action posted on the Internet.


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.
New York Public Personnel Law. Email: publications@nycap.rr.com