ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE [AI] IS NOT USED IN COMPOSING NYPPL SUMMARIES OF JUDICIAL AND QUASI-JUDICIAL DECISIONS.

Jan 8, 2026

Anti-union animus found to have motivated the employer's taking disciplinary action against an employee resulting in the employee being suspended and demoted

Supreme Court, New York County, denied a petition filed by the City of New York [City] seeking to annul the determination of the Board of Collective Bargaining of the City of New York [Board] granting the improper practice petition filed by the Marine Engineers' Beneficial Association, AFL-CIO (MEBA). The City appealed the Supreme Court's ruling.

The Appellate Division unanimously affirmed the Supreme Court's ruling, explaining that  Supreme Court had properly [1] denied the City's petition and [2] granted the Board's cross-motions to dismiss the proceeding, as the Supreme Court's decision was rational and was supported by the evidence in the record.

Pointing out that the Board had a rational basis to conclude that anti-union animus motivated the employee's suspension and demotion, the Appellate Division's decision also  noted that the testimony in the record from multiple witnesses indicated that the discipline imposed was disproportionate to the offenses and similarly situated employees who engaged in the same conduct received no discipline. 

The Appellate Division's decision also reported that "the witness testimony and documentary evidence established a temporal relationship between the union activity the employee engaged in and the disciplinary action taken" by the City.

The Appellate Division opined that it was also proper "for the Board to reinstate the employee based on the Board's finding that anti-union animus was the substantially motivating cause of his dismissal, and not merely one of the reasons therefor".

Click HERE to access the decision of the Appellate Division posted on the Internet.

Editor in Chief Harvey Randall served as Director of Personnel, SUNY Central Administration, Director of Research , Governor's Office of Employee Relations and Principal Attorney, Counsel's Office, New York State Department of Civil Service. 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.

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