ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE [AI] IS NOT USED, IN WHOLE OR IN PART, IN PREPARING NYPPL SUMMARIES OF JUDICIAL AND QUASI-JUDICIAL DECISIONS

August 06, 2024

Indirect threats made to another individual may support filing disciplinary charges against an employee making them

New York City Office of Administrative Trials and Hearings Administrative Law Judge [ALJ] Tiffany Hamilton recommended a 60-day suspension for a correction officer [CO] who failed to cooperate with and threatened police officers during a traffic stop.

CO was off-duty when she was pulled over for speeding. The ALJ found CO failed to obey the officers’ directives to promptly hand over her driver license and to step out of the vehicle. During the traffic stop, CO was on the phone and made statements such as, “They lucky I don’t have a firearm” and “Just give me the ticket, before I slap one of them.”

Judge Hamilton rejected CO's argument that these statements were not threats because they were not directed at the officers, holding that indirect statements made in the presence of the intended recipient can constitute a threat for the purposes initiating disciplinary action. 

Noting that it is well-established that an agency may discipline an employee for off-duty misconduct, the ALJ explained that "to do so, the agency must first establish a nexus between the alleged off-duty misconduct and the employee’s job duties". Judge Hamilton found "a sufficient nexus between a correction officer’s duties and the CO's failure to cooperate with police instructions" to conclude that the employer proved that the CO violated the employer's "Rules and Regulations" by failing to cooperate with NYPD officers by refusing to promptly present her driver's license or to step out of her vehicle as directed.

Click HERE to access Judge Hamilton's decision and recommendation 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 information and, or, decisions summarized in NYPPL. For example, New York State Department of Civil Service's Advisory Memorandum 24-08 reflects changes required as the result of certain amendments to §72 of the New York State Civil Service Law to take effect January 1, 2025 [See Chapter 306 of the Laws of 2024]. Advisory Memorandum 24-08 in PDF format is posted on the Internet at https://www.cs.ny.gov/ssd/pdf/AM24-08Combined.pdf. Accordingly, the information and case 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.
NYPPL Blogger 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