Tenured teacher’s objection to submitting a challenge to termination to arbitration rejected

Tenured teacher’s objection to submitting a challenge to termination to arbitration rejected

Atwater v. Commissioner of Education, Massachusetts Supreme Court, November 21, 2011, Docket: SJC-10817

A tenured teacher was terminated for conduct unbecoming a teacher.

The teacher appealed contending that Massachusetts law compelling arbitration of a wrongful dismissal claim made by a tenured public school teacher violated Article 30 of the Massachusetts Declaration of Rights because it impermissibly delegated to a private individual (an arbitrator) a judicial function and denied meaningful judicial review.

Massachusetts Supreme Court ruled that submitted a challenge to a principal's or superintendent's dismissal decision to arbitration did not interfere with “core judicial functions” and the statute provided sufficient judicial review.

The decision is posted on the Internet at:

http://law.justia.com/cases/massachusetts/supreme-court/2011/sjc-10817.html

Dismissed employee entitled to back pay

Dismissed employee entitled to back pay

Matter of Rider, 78 A.D.2d 856

The employee was found guilty to the charges brought against him and dismissed under Section 75 of the Civil Service Law. He had been suspended without pay upon the service of the charges and continued in that status until after the hearing and his dismissal. This involved a period of more than the 30 days suspension without pay permitted by Section 75.

The Appellate Division ruled that the employee, notwithstanding the fact that he was terminated from his position, was entitled to back pay for the period beginning 30 days after his suspension until the date of dismissal.

The court noted that this was the correct result “even though there was substantial evidence to support the finding of guilt and the fact that the penalty imposed was not excessive.”

Unblemished record mitigates discipline penalty

Unblemished record mitigates discipline penalty

Matter of Gailband, 78 A.D.2d 853

The New York City Housing Authority, dismissed an employee and stated “in no uncertain terms, its view of the seriousness of the (employee’s) conduct.”

The Appellate Division, however, ruled that “under the totality of the circumstances at bar, including an unblemished record of more than 15 years duration, the penalty of dismissal was grossly disproportionate to the nature of (the employee’s) misconduct so as to be shocking to one’s sense of fairness.

The court then went on to indicate that it would ordinarily remand the case to the agency for appropriate reconsideration, but as the Authority had strongly and unequivocally condemned the conduct, and as any lesser penalty would increase the Authority’s potential liability for back pay, it would fix the penalty to be imposed.

The Appellate Division ordered the reinstatement of the employee with back pay for absence in excess of three months (including the 30 day suspension period imposed by the Authority in accordance with Section 75 of the Civil Service Law) less unemployment benefits, if any, and any amount [the employee] earned while “dismissed”.

Short v. Nassau County Civil Service Commission, 59 AD2d 157 sets forth some guidelines to be followed in cases such as this.

Court voids arbitrator’s award

Court voids arbitrator’s award

Uniformed Firefighters Association v. City of New York, 76 A.D.2d 392, Motion for leave to appeal denied, 52 N.Y.2d 702

The City of New York filed an petition pursuant to Article 75 of the Civil Practice Law and Rules seeking to vacate an arbitrator’s award that held that the City could not implement its plan to use civilian workers in fire prevention inspector titles.

The court held that the City had the authority and responsibility to allocate its financial resources in a manner it felt most appropriate to prevent fires.

The Appellate Division also observed that “the decision to utilize civilians rather the uniformed firefighters to perform inspection functions is consonant...with the City’s agreement with the Uniformed Firefighters Association and proper”.

Punitive damages awarded for failure to act to prevent sexual abuse of students

Punitive damages awarded for failure to act to prevent sexual abuse of students G.G. v Grindle, U.S. 7th Circuit Court of Appeals, Docket 10-3506 

The Seventh Circuit Court of Appeals affirmed an award of compensatory and punitive damages based on a jury finding a school administrator failed to prevent the sexual abuse of several female students by their teacher.

The teacher had pled guilty to multiple counts of aggravated kidnapping and aggravated criminal sexual abuse.

The award for damages, said the court, was justified in view of the administrator’s failure to act, noting that the administrator advanced “no basis for invalidating the jury’s determination that her conduct justified the imposition of punitive damages.”

The decision is posted on the Internet at:

http://law.justia.com/cases/federal/appellate-courts/ca7/10-3506/10-3506-2011-11-23-opinion-2011-11-23.html