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

November 30, 2020

New York State vs. COVID-19 -- November 30, 2020 Update

On November 30, 2020Governor Andrew M. Cuomo again updated New Yorkers on the state's progress in the ongoing COVID-19 pandemic.

On November 30, 2020, Governor Andrew M. Cuomo today updated New Yorkers on the state's progress during the ongoing COVID-19 pandemic. 

"All the experts spoke about what was going to happen when we reach the fall—there's colder weather, more people are indoors and more people are now traveling. While there has been a change in behavior amongst the majority of people who understand and follow protocols, it's as critical as ever we continue our work and focus on preparing this state, and its residents, for winter," Governor Cuomo said. "We are already in the holiday season, and that is going to have a profound effect. It already has. It had an effect when people started to travel for the holiday season, when they started to travel for Thanksgiving, when students to go home, when people started to shop, and when they started to move around. Increased mobility and social activity equals increased viral infection rate. It is directly proportionate. And we talked about this before Thanksgiving, you are not just going into the Thanksgiving weekend, you're starting a 37-day holiday period. It's not a one- or two-day affair—it's going to be the entire holiday season. New Yorkers need to stay vigilant, wash their hands, wear masks, socially distance and follow the rules as we move through the next 37 days and beyond."     

The Governor noted that the positive testing rate in all focus areas under the state's Micro-Cluster strategy is 6.22 percent, and outside the focus zone areas is 4.02 percent. Within the focus areas, 37,632 test results were reported yesterday, yielding 2,341 positives. In the remainder of the state, not counting these focus areas, 111,342 test results were reported, yielding 4,478 positives. Full results for tests reported November 29, 2020, the day prior, the current 7-day rolling average, and last two weeks is below:  

STATEWIDE

11/8- 11/14 % Positive

11/15- 11/21 % Positive

Current 7-day rolling average

Day Prior (11/28) % Positive

Yesterday (11/29) % Positive

 

 

 

 

 

 

All focus area statewide % positive

4.81%

4.51%

5.38%

5.83%

6.22%

 

 

Statewide % positive with all focus areas included

2.86%

2.89%

3.71%

4.27%

4.57%

 

 

Statewide % positive without all focus areas included

2.47%

2.44%

3.19%

3.75%

4.02%

 

 

 

Micro-cluster zone 7-day average positivity rates for November 30, 2020, yesterday, the day before, last week, and the week prior is below:  

FOCUS ZONE

11/8- 11/14 % Positive

11/15- 11/21 % Positive

Day Prior 7-day Rolling Average

Yesterday 7-day Rolling Average

Current 7-day Rolling average

 

 

 

 

 

 

Erie orange-zone focus area % positive

7.22%

7.30%

7.14%

7.20%

7.43%

 

 

Erie Yellow-zone focus area % positive

5.34%

7.36%

6.81%

6.83%

6.61%

 

 

Niagara Yellow -zone focus area % positive

5.10%

4.44%

7.16%

7.35%

7.89%

 

 

Monroe Orange-zone focus area % positive

4.41%

4.17%

5.79%

6.59%

7.04%

 

 

Monroe Yellow-zone focus area % positive

5.95%

3.58%

4.90%

5.62%

6.44%

 

 

Onondaga Orange-zone focus area % positive

6.26%

5.34%

5.10%

6.13%

5.98%

 

 

Onondaga Yellow-zone focus area % positive

6.03%

4.50%

4.60%

5.09%

5.13%

 

 

Queens Kew Garden Hills/Forest Hills/Astoria yellow-zone focus area % positive

3.40%

3.40%

3.52%

3.61%

3.78%

 

 

Bronx East Yellow-zone focus area % positive

3.81%

3.52%

4.51%

4.47%

4.74%

 

 

Bronx West Yellow -zone focus area % positive

3.80%

4.70%

4.30%

4.64%

4.81%

 

 

Brooklyn Yellow-zone focus area % positive

3.92%

3.70%

5.32%

5.64%

5.73%

 

 

Rockland Yellow-zone focus area % positive

3.55%

3.39%

3.90%

3.94%

4.23%

 

 

Chemung Orange-zone focus area % positive

4.59%

4.71%

6.86%

6.46%

7.03%

 

 

Staten Island Orange-zone focus area % positive

5.24%

4.96%

4.73%

4.75%

5.09%

 

 

Staten Island Yellow-zone focus area % positive

3.75%

3.61%

3.94%

4.08%

4.18%

 

 

Tioga Yellow-zone focus area % positive

10.81%

5.60%

2.38%

3.10%

3.74%

 

 

Orange Middletown - Yellow-zone focus area % positive

3.81%

5.41%

3.56%

3.81%

4.78%

 

 

Orange Newburgh - Yellow-zone focus area % positive

8.07%

7.89%

8.85%

8.57%

7.76%

 

 

Manhattan-Washington Heights-Yellow-zone focus area % positive

3.23%

3.39%

3.12%

3.40%

3.73%

 

 

Nassau-Great Neck-Yellow-zone focus area % positive

3.69%

3.69%

3.01%

3.93%

4.34%

 

 

Nassau Massapequa Park -Yellow-zone focus area % positive

4.64%

4.15%

4.76%

5.12%

5.54%

 

 

Suffolk-Hampton Bays-Yellow-zone focus area % positive

9.26%

5.69%

6.28%

7.00%

6.68%

 

 

Suffolk-Riverhead-Yellow-zone focus area % positive

4.80%

4.85%

3.37%

3.49%

2.87%

 

 

Westchester Peekskill - Yellow-zone focus area % positive

10.36%

7.15%

6.14%

7.23%

8.43%

 

 

Westchester Ossining - Yellow-zone focus area % positive

9.88%

10.22%

9.97%

9.96%

10.65%

 

 

Westchester Tarrytown/Sleepy Hollow - Yellow-zone focus area % positive

8.47%

8.27%

7.37%

7.05%

6.38%

 

 

Westchester Yonkers - Yellow-zone focus area % positive

4.48%

4.11%

4.95%

4.84%

5.03%

 

 

Westchester New Rochelle - Yellow-zone focus area % positive

6.46%

5.68%

5.04%

5.44%

6.19%

 

 

Westchester Port Chester Orange-zone focus area % positive

9.34%

7.59%

7.34%

7.21%

7.91%

 

 

 

November 30, 2020's data is summarized below:  

Patient Hospitalization - 3,532 (+160)

Patients Newly Admitted - 457

Hospital Counties - 54

Number ICU - 681 (+14)

Number ICU with Intubation - 325 (-1)

Total Discharges - 85,556 (+269)

Deaths - 54

Total Deaths - 26,747

   

Each region's percentage of positive test results reported over the previous three days is as follows:

REGION

FRIDAY

SATURDAY

SUNDAY

CURRENT 7-DAY AVERAGE

Capital Region

3.4%

3.4%

3.7%

3.24%

Central New York

8.4%

6.9%

4.2%

4.79%

Finger Lakes

6.6%

6.6%

6.6%

5.76%

Long Island

3.4%

4.1%

4.5%

3.76%

Mid-Hudson

4.8%

4.9%

5.1%

4.55%

Mohawk Valley

4.7%

5.1%

4.6%

4.42%

New York City

2.9%

3.4%

3.9%

2.92%

North Country

3.1%

2.4%

3.0%

2.80%

Southern Tier

4.4%

4.1%

3.8%

2.11%

Western New York

7.4%

7.2%

7.4%

6.94%

 

Each New York City borough's percentage of positive test results reported over the previous three days is as follows:

 BOROUGH

FRIDAY

SATURDAY

SUNDAY

CURRENT 7-DAY AVERAGE

Bronx

4.1%

4.1%

4.7%

3.97%

Brooklyn

2.9%

2.9%

3.5%

2.72%

Manhattan

2.2%

2.7%

3.1%

1.94%

Queens

3.1%

3.5%

4.2%

3.24%

Staten Island

3.8%

5.1%

5.8%

4.39%

 

Of the 647,980 total individuals who tested positive for the virus, the geographic breakdown is as follows:

   County

Total Positive

New Positive

Albany

5,816

104

Allegany

1,042

23

Broome

5,367

59

Cattaraugus

1,135

21

Cayuga

890

21

Chautauqua

1,580

18

Chemung

3,087

39

Chenango

643

4

Clinton

461

2

Columbia

1,027

7

Cortland

1,061

17

Delaware

363

4

Dutchess

7,284

87

Erie

25,427

485

Essex

286

1

Franklin

266

0

Fulton

508

13

Genesee

1,028

31

Greene

695

7

Hamilton

46

1

Herkimer

709

18

Jefferson

566

15

Lewis

368

8

Livingston

714

14

Madison

951

7

Monroe

15,660

522

Montgomery

494

10

Nassau

60,701

520

Niagara

3,874

106

NYC

311,979

2,504

Oneida

4,970

109

Onondaga

10,804

103

Ontario

1,326

22

Orange

16,891

90

Orleans

630

7

Oswego

1,625

54

Otsego

632

14

Putnam

2,844

55

Rensselaer

1,746

26

Rockland

21,632

130

Saratoga

2,293

48

Schenectady

2,481

38

Schoharie

197

1

Schuyler

316

2

Seneca

309

14

St. Lawrence

850

28

Steuben

1,797

26

Suffolk

61,072

658

Sullivan

2,202

11

Tioga

1,149

17

Tompkins

1,118

13

Ulster

3,381

56

Warren

583

6

Washington

452

3

Wayne

1,148

21

Westchester

50,693

583

Wyoming

546

13

Yates

265

3

 

On November 29, 2020, 54 New Yorkers died due to COVID-19 in New York State, bringing the total to 26,747. A geographic breakdown is as follows, by county of residence:

   Deaths by County of Residence

County

New Deaths

Albany

1

Bronx

6

Broome

2

Chemung

7

Columbia

1

Dutchess

1

Erie

10

Kings

4

Manhattan

2

Monroe

1

Nassau

1

Oneida

1

Onondaga

1

Orange

1

Rockland

1

Saratoga

1

St. Lawrence

1

Suffolk

4

Tioga

2

Ulster

1

Wayne

1

Westchester

1

Wyoming

2

Yates

1

 

###

An arbitration award may not be confirmed by a court if it is in explicit conflict with law, rule or regulation and the relevant policy concerns

In this proceeding brought pursuant to CPLR Article 75 to modify an arbitration award the Nassau Healthcare Corporation[Employer] appealed that portion of an arbitration award that ordered Employer to reinstate three Petitioners* [Employees] to their former positions while the Employee's cross-appealed that part of the arbitration award providing for reinstatement without back pay.

The genesis of this action was the Employees' being terminated by the Employer based upon an incident that occurred during which the Employees allegedly ignored approximately nine minutes of visual and audible alarms signaling that a ventilator-dependent resident was in respiratory distress.

Pursuant to the collective bargaining agreement, the Employees' collective bargaining representative filed a grievance challenging the terminations and the matter ultimately proceeded to arbitration. The Employees elected not to testify at the hearing.**

Following the hearing, the arbitrator issued an award finding that Employer did not sustain its burden of proving that the blaring alarm of the central alarm system throughout the unit, which signaled a respiratory emergency, was triggered. However, based on the employees' failure to testify at the hearing, the arbitrator drew an adverse inference against them on the factual issue of whether the beeping alarm coming from the ventilator machine itself in the patient's room, which did not necessarily signal an emergency, was audible to them at the nursing station.

The arbitrator reinstated the employees to their former positions, but directed that they be reinstated without back pay. Supreme Court confirmed the arbitration award and the Employer appealed.

The Appellate Division granted the Employer's motion to vacate the arbitration and dismissed the Employee's cross-appeal is dismissed as academic. The court also awarded "one bill of costs" to the Employer, payable by the Employees.

The Appellate Division, citing Matter of New York State Correctional Officers & Police Benevolent Assn. v State of New York, 94 NY2d 321, and Matter of Banegas v GEICO Ins. Co., 167 AD3d 873, pointed out that an arbitration award may be vacated if it violates strong public policy, is irrational, or clearly exceeds a specifically enumerated limitation on an arbitrator's power.

Considering the public policy exception, the Appellate Division commented that "a court may vacate an arbitral award where strong and well-defined policy considerations embodied in constitutional, statutory or common law prohibits a particular matter from being decided or certain relief from being granted by an arbitrator" and the focus of the analysis is on the award itself." Accordingly, a court may vacate an award on public policy grounds "where the final result creates an explicit conflict with other laws and their attendant policy concerns," quoting from New York State Correctional Officers & Police Benevolent Assn. v State of New York, 94 NY2d at 327.

Here, opined the Appellate Division, the record reflects that after the employees were indicted on felony charges, OMIG notified the employees that they were excluded "from participation in the New York State Medicaid program based on New York State regulations authorizing the immediate exclusion of a person who has been charged with committing an act which would be a felony under the laws of New York and which relates to or results from," among other things, "the furnishing of or billing for medical care, services or supplies."

Citing 18 NYCRR 515.5(c), the court said that "[a] person who is excluded from the program cannot be involved in any activity relating to furnishing medical care, services or supplies to recipients of medical assistance for which claims are submitted to the program, or relating to claiming or receiving payment for medical care, services or supplies during the period." Further, the regulations also preclude reimbursement for medical care, services, or supplies provided by an excluded person.

Clearly the final result of the arbitrator's award in this case, reinstating the Employees to their former positions, "creates an explicit conflict with the subject regulations and their attendant policy concerns." Accordingly, under the particular circumstances of this case, the Appellate Division concluded that Supreme Court should have granted the Employer's motion to vacate that portion of the award providing for the reinstatement of the Employees, thereby mooting the claim to back salary.

* The three Employees involved were two registered nurses and a nurse aide

**Subsequently the Employees were indicted on several misdemeanor and felony charges, including criminally negligent homicide..

The decision is posted on the Internet at http://www.nycourts.gov/reporter/3dseries/2020/2020_06777.htm

 

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