Employee’s lack of remorse concerning activities leading to disciplinary action does not always mandate imposing termination as the penalty

Employee’s lack of remorse concerning activities leading to disciplinary action does not always mandate imposing termination as the penalty

City of New York v Organization of Staff Analysts, 2013 NY Slip Op 00806, Appellate Division, First Department

The Appellate Division affirmed Supreme Court’s denial of the City of New York’s petition to vacate an arbitrator’s award imposing a penalty of a one-year suspension without pay rather than termination of the employee.

The employee had been charged with accessing the personnel files of two co-workers.

The Appellate Division said that although and arbitrator’s award “can be overturned where it is directly contrary to a settled public policy,” citing UFT Local 2 v Board of Education, 1 NY3d 72. The court said that imposing a one-year suspension without pay rather than termination did not violate “the policy of protecting confidential information.”

Further, explained the court, the imposition of a penalty short of termination did not render the award irrational, rejecting the City’s argument that there was a possibility that the employee “will re-offend, especially where there has been no criminal conviction and there is a clear, substantial penalty imposed to deter such future conduct.”

The City had cited Binghamton City School District, 46 AD3d 1042, in support of its contention that termination was the appropriate penalty in this instance. In Binghamton the Appellate Division held that a “school teacher's lack of remorse or understanding of moral aspect of inappropriate relationship with teen student required termination until counseling or other remedial steps taken.”

Although the Appellate Division noted “the employee's lack of remorse,” it held that although “relevant to the risk of recidivism,” in this instance such lack of remorse  “did not rise to the level in the cases relied upon by the City.”

The decision is posted on the Internet at:

http://www.courts.state.ny.us/reporter/3dseries/2013/2013_00806.htm

Selected reports and information published by New York State's Comptroller Thomas P. DiNapoli

Selected reports and information published by New York State's Comptroller Thomas P. DiNapoli

Issued during the week ending February 10, 2013 [Click on text highlighted in bold to access the full report] 

DiNapoli Reaches Agreement with Cabot Oil and Gas to Disclose Policies on Hydraulic Fracturing Fluid

New York State Comptroller Thomas P. DiNapoli announced that Cabot Oil and Gas Corporation has agreed to publicly disclose its policy and procedures for eliminating or minimizing the use of toxic substances in its hydraulic fracturing fluids. As a result of the agreement, DiNapoli has withdrawn his shareholder proposal submitted for the company’s 2013 proxy statement calling for a report on the use of these substances in Cabot’s shale energy operations.

DiNapoli: Special Education Providers Charged Taxpayers for Excessive Salaries and Personal Items

The owners of two Manhattan–based special education providers claimed more than $500,000 in expenses to which they were not entitled, including extra money for their salaries, vehicle costs and personal expenses, as well as bonuses for staff that could not be justified, according to two audits released Thursday by New York State Comptroller Thomas P. DiNapoli. The audit findings are being considered for referral to law enforcement.

DiNapoli: Court Allows Securities Litigation Class Action Against BP To Move Forward

New York State Comptroller Thomas P. DiNapoli commended a Houston federal judge’s decision to allow a securities class action case against BP plc to go forward. “We are pleased that the New York State Common Retirement Fund’s claims on behalf of BP’s investors will proceed,” DiNapoli said. “Shareholders saw their investments plummet in value following the Deepwater Horizon catastrophe. Now information has come to light that BP was wholly unprepared to respond to the risks of its deep sea operations and incapable of adequately reacting when something went wrong.”

DiNapoli Receives Hubert H. Humphrey Humanitarian Award

State Comptroller Thomas P. DiNapoli received the Hubert H. Humphrey Humanitarian Award in recognition of his lifetime of public service to the state of New York and its citizens. The award was presented at the United Federation of Teachers’ annual Greater Metropolitan New York Social Studies Conference at which DiNapoli delivered the luncheon keynote address.

DiNapoli: Gloversville Faces Fiscal Challenges

Long–term population loss continues to limit economic growth in the city of Gloversville, according to a report issued by State Comptroller Thomas P. DiNapoli. City officials, however, have established critical rainy day funds by controlling the growth in spending, which helped lead to a recent upgrade to the city’s credit rating. The report is the latest in a series of fiscal profiles on cities across the state released by the Comptroller’s office.

Comptroller DiNapoli Releases Municipal Audits

New York State Comptroller Thomas P. DiNapoli announced his office completed audits of:

the Town of Bangor;

the Town of Black Brook;

the Town of Florida;

the Jericho Fire District;

the City of Mechanicville;

the Town of Olive; and,

the Watertown Housing Authority.

Evidence that the employee was clearly aware of the employer’s policy defeats argument that the policy was not set out “in writing”

Evidence that the employee was clearly aware of the employer’s policy defeats argument that the policy was not set out “in writing”

Matter of Osborne (Commissioner of Labor), 2013 NY Slip Op 00370, Appellate Division, Third Department

 The Unemployment Insurance Appeal Board ruled that claimant was disqualified from receiving unemployment insurance benefits because his employment was terminated due to misconduct.

The individual had been counseled by his supervisor about having inappropriate relationships in the workplace. Notwithstanding this, he became involved in a relationship and was issued a written disciplinary warning notice at that time, which stated that the relationship was a clear violation of the standards that he was counseled on earlier and that any further infractions in this regard would result in his termination.

Although the individual apparently briefly ended the relationship, it was subsequently resumed and his employment was terminated.

The Appellate Division affirmed the Unemployment Insurance Appeal Board decision disqualifying the individual for unemployment insurance benefits, explaining that "A knowing violation of an employer's established policy or reasonable request may constitute disqualifying misconduct, particularly where, as here, the claimant has received prior warnings about similar behavior."

While the court noted that the employer’s policy in question was not in writing, the individual was clearly aware of the policy as he signed a warning letter affirming his understanding of it.

The decision is posted on the Internet at:

http://www.courts.state.ny.us/reporter/3dseries/2013/2013_00370.htm

Employee found guilty of uploading confidential medical information viewed while at work on Facebook terminated

Employee found guilty of uploading confidential medical information viewed while at work on Facebook terminated

The Appellate Division affirmed the dismissal of an Emergency Medical Services Supervisor by the Commissioner of the New York City Fire Department for misconduct, ruling that the Commissioner’s determination that the Supervisor was guilty of violating departmental regulations was supported by substantial evidence.

The EMS Supervisor had admitted photographing a computer terminal’s screen showing confidential and privileged information received during a 911 call concerning a medical emergency, as well as the 911 caller's name, address and telephone number, and then uploading the image to his Facebook account, with the caption "[c]an't make this up."

The decision states that approximately 460 of the Supervior’s Facebook "friends" had access to the posting.

Further, said the Appellate Division, at the time of the posting the EMS Supervisor understood that divulging such patient information was in violation of departmental rules, as well as a serious breach of trust.

Considering the “serious nature” of the Supervisor’s misconduct, the court said that the penalty imposed, dismissal,  did not shock its sense of fairness, citing Kelly v Safir, 96 NY2d 32 and  Berenhaus v Ward, 70 NY2d 436.

The decision is posted on the Internet at:

http://www.courts.state.ny.us/reporter/3dseries/2013/2013_00437.htm

Equal pay for equal work

Equal pay for equal work
Subway Surface Supervisors Assn. v New York City Tr. Auth., 2013 NY Slip Op 00276, Appellate Division, First Department

In deciding this appeal, the Appellate Division, in a three to two decision, said that Civil Service Law §115 codifies a critical public policy, which is that, "to attract unusual merit and ability to the service of the state of New York, to stimulate higher efficiency among the personnel, to provide skilled leadership in administrative departments, to reward merit and to insure to the people and the taxpayers of the state of New York the highest return in services for the necessary costs of government," there should be "equal pay for equal work, and regular increases in pay in proper proportion to increase of ability, increase of output and increase of equality of work demonstrated in service."

In Bertoldi v State of New York, 275 AD2d 227, the Appellate Division, First Department, stated that "[t]he principle of equal pay for equal work need not be applied in all cases under any and all circumstances." The clear implication of that statement, said the court, is that there are circumstances in which the principle of equal pay for equal work must be applied and that “this Court has the power to apply it.”

Further, the Appellate Division explained, “The mere fact that there are no reported cases in which a court has exercised such power does not mean that courts do not have that power.”

While case law establishes that a court need not presume that a disparity in pay is violative of §115, the Appellate Division said a court nevertheless may correct the disparity where "there is palpable discrimination or arbitrary action detrimental to the individual or class," citing Beer v Board of Educ. of City of N.Y., 83 NYS2d 485.

The decision is posted on the Internet at:

http://www.courts.state.ny.us/reporter/3dseries/2013/2013_00276.htm

Decisions by OATH Administrative Law Judges

Decisions by OATH Administrative Law Judges

New York City Office of Administrative Trials and Hearings

Technical guilty of failing to follow hospital procedure

Recommended penalty: 30-suspension without pay recommended

An ultrasound technician was charged with failing to follow hospital procedures requiring that a patient’s name and medical record number be placed on each image of the patient’s echocardiogram. Without the required identifiers, the reviewing cardiologist could not prepare his report, and the patient had to return to re-take the test.

Though the hospital sought the penalty of termination of employment, Administrative Law Judge Tynia D. Richard recommended a 30-day suspension, noting that the misconduct, while serious, was a single error and caused no harm except inconvenience.

The decision is posted on the Internet at:

Health & Hospitals Corp (Jacobi Medical Ctr.) v. Goldfayn (in PDF), OATH Index No. 2100/12

Employee found guilty of sexually harassing female co-workers

Penalty recommended: termination

Administrative Law Judge Spooner found that a pharmacy technician sexually harassed two female co-workers by forcibly grabbing one from behind and pressing himself against her, and by forcibly kissing the other employee three times. Termination of employment was recommended.

The decision is posted on the Internet at: 

Health & Hospitals Corp (Elmhurst Hospital Ctr.) v. Polepalle (in PDF), OATH Index No. 142/13

Interest arbitration held to contravene public policy insofar as a public entity's being bound to nonmandatory subjects of collective bargaining in negotiating a new agreement

Interest arbitration held to contravene public policy insofar as a public entity's being bound to nonmandatory subjects of collective bargaining in negotiating a new agreement

Niagara Frontier Tr. Metro Sys., Inc. v Amalgamated Tr. Union Local Union 1342,2013 NY Slip Op 00622, Appellate Division, Fourth Department

Supreme Court denied Niagara Frontier Transit Metro System’s petition to stay arbitration in case that involved a labor dispute arising from a collective bargaining agreement [CBA] between the System, a public benefit corporation that provides bus and light rail transit service, and the Amalgamated Transit Union Local Union 1342 (Local 1342), which represents a unit of System’s employees.

Local 1342 had demanded that the terms and conditions of a new CBA be determined by compulsory "interest arbitration." 

The Appellate Division reversed the lower court’s decision and granted the System’s petition.

The Appellate Division explained that “even assuming, arguendo, that the [Collective Bargaining] Agreement entitles Local 1342 to interest arbitration over [the System’s] objection, we would conclude, as we did in ATU,* that such a result ‘contravenes public policy, both by compelling a public entity, which has broad responsibilities to the entire population of the State, to be bound forever to nonmandatory subjects of bargaining, i.e., interest arbitration, and by encumbering its ability to negotiate an entirely new collective bargaining agreement which reflects the changing requirements and mandates of the public interest’"

* Matter of Local Union 1342 of Amalgamated Tr. Union v Niagara Frontier Tr. Metro Sys, 183 AD2d 355, leave to appeal denied, 81 NY2d 710.

The decision is posted on the Internet at: 

http://www.courts.state.ny.us/reporter/3dseries/2013/2013_00622.htm

A court’s power to vacate an arbitration award is limited

A court’s power to vacate an arbitration award is limited
Professional, Clerical, Tech., Employees Assn. (Board of Educ. for Buffalo City Sch. Dist.), 2013 NY Slip Op 00612, Appellate Division, Fourth Department

The issue before the arbitrator was whether the Board of Education’s selection process used in its filling two vacancies of a newly created title, Assistant Management Analyst, violated the collective bargaining agreement between the parties. The arbitrator concluded that it had not.

Essentially the arbitrator rejected the Association’s argument that the collective bargaining agreement provided that seniority "trumps" a supervisor's discretion in selecting the individual to fill the vacancies in question.

Supreme Court granted the Professional, Clerical, Tech., Employees Assn.’s application to vacate an arbitration award.

The Appellate Division unanimously reversed the lower court’s ruling and granted the Board of Education’s the cross petition seeking to confirm the arbitration award, explaining that Supreme Court erred in vacating the award as the award was not irrational and the arbitrator did not exceed a specific limitation on her authority.*  

Noting that “It is well established that "an arbitrator's rulings, unlike a trial court's, are largely unreviewable," citing Matter of Falzone, 15 NY3d 530, the Appellate Division said that "a court may vacate an arbitration award only if it violates a strong public policy, is irrational, or clearly exceeds a specifically enumerated limitation on the arbitrator's power."

As the Court of Appeals held in New York State Correctional Officers & Police Benevolent Assn. v State of New York, 94 NY2d 321, 326), "Courts are bound by an arbitrator's factual findings, interpretation of the contract and judgment concerning remedies. A court cannot examine the merits of an arbitration award and substitute its judgment for that of the arbitrator simply because it believes its interpretation would be the better one. Indeed, even in circumstances where an arbitrator makes errors of law or fact, courts will not assume the role of overseers to conform the award to their sense of justice."

* The Appellate Division also held that Supreme Court erred in determining that the arbitrator impermissibly modified the collective bargaining agreement.

The decision is posted on the Internet at:

http://www.courts.state.ny.us/reporter/3dseries/2013/2013_00612.htm

Google Statistics reports that NYPPL’s audience in the "top ten" nations during the month of January 2013 was as follows:

Only registered readers of New York Public Personnel Law are able to access this LawBlog. Click on http://nypplcaes.blogspot.com/ for information about becoming a registered reader.

Selected reports and information published by New York State's Comptroller Thomas P. DiNapoli

Selected reports and information published by New York State's Comptroller Thomas P. DiNapoli

Issued during the week ending February 3, 2013 [Click on text highlighted in bold to access the full report]


DiNapoli Finalizes Fiscal Monitoring System

State Comptroller Thomas P. DiNapoli announced Monday his office has finalized plans to implement a statewide fiscal monitoring system that would publicly identify local governments experiencing financial strain.

DiNapoli: Inappropriate Payments Cited In Kingston Audit

The city of Kingston made $23,000 in improper payments to employees for unearned leave time, according to an auditreleased Thursday by State Comptroller Thomas P. DiNapoli. As a result of the audit, former fire chief Richard Salzmann was arrested and charged by Ulster County District Attorney D. Holley Carnright with offering a false instrument for filing in the second degree, a class A misdemeanor.

DiNapoli: Empire BlueCross BlueShield Paying Hospitals Windfalls For Special Medical Items

New York State health insurance provider Empire BlueCross BlueShield has routinely allowed hospitals to charge excessive amounts for special medical items such as implants, drugs and blood, because they did not sign agreements to limit reimbursement for those items, according to an auditof the New York State Health Insurance Program released Friday by State Comptroller Thomas P. DiNapoli.

DiNapoli: Utica Facing Continued Fiscal Challenges

The city of Utica continues to struggle with recurring budget gaps and has nearly depleted its fund balances, according to a fiscal report issued Tuesday by State Comptroller Thomas P. DiNapoli. The report is the latest in a series of fiscal profiles on cities across the state.

Comptroller DiNapoli Releases Municipal Audits

New York State Comptroller Thomas P. DiNapoli Thursday announced his office completed audits of:

the Big Flats Fire District No. 2;

the Golden Glow Volunteer Fire Company, Inc.;

the Lincoln Fire District; and,

the Village of Richmondville.

Comptroller DiNapoli Releases School Audits

New York State Comptroller Thomas P. DiNapoli Thursday announced his office completed audits of:

the Hadley–Luzerne Central School District; and,

the Hyde Park Central School District

State Comptroller's auditors alledge that NYSHIP provider Empire Bluecross Blueshield paid excessive amounts for special medical items

State Comptroller's auditors alledge that NYSHIP provider Empire Bluecross Blueshield paid excessive amounts for special medical items

Source: Office of the State Comptroller

New York State Health Insurance Program (NYSHIP) provider Empire BlueCross BlueShield [Empire] has routinely allowed hospitals to charge excessive amounts for special medical items such as implants, drugs and blood because they did not sign agreements to limit reimbursement for those items according to an audit of the NYSHIP released on February 1, 2013 by New York State Comptroller Thomas P. DiNapoli.  

The Comptroller's Office said:
 
"DiNapoli’s auditors reviewed claims for a series of special items, finding Empire paid hospitals on average 344 percent more than the costs of the items in question. While the details of the special items cannot be disclosed due to proprietary concerns, examples of Empire’s excessive payments include:

Claim Example	Amount Empire Paid Hospital for Special Items	Hospitals’ Purchase / Acquisition Cost	Excess to Hospital
A	$82,407	$18,000	$64,407	358%
B	$94,656	$25,000	$69,656	279%
C	$102,877	$24,780	$78,097	315%
D	$80,307	$13,399	$66,908	499%
Totals	$360,247	$81,179	$279,068	344%

"DiNapoli’s auditors were unable to obtain supporting documentation from 13 hospitals for 44 selected claims for special items because Empire cannot compel the hospitals to submit that information. If Empire paid these hospitals 344 percent more than the costs of the items, the hospitals could have generated profits of nearly $1.6 million on these claims, auditors estimated.

"NYSHIP provides health insurance coverage to active and retired state, participating local government and school district employees and their dependents.

"The Department of Civil Service contracts with Empire Blue Cross and Blue Shield (Empire) to provide hospitalization coverage under the Empire Plan, the largest insurance option provided by NYSHIP. Empire processes Plan claims for hospital services and medical items in accordance with agreements it negotiates with participating hospitals.

"Empire’s hospital agreements provide for additional payments for certain special items. Agreements with many member hospitals often limit payments for special items, but others do not. For the period January 1, 2011 through March 31, 2011, Empire paid 246,870 claims totaling over $529 million for services provided to plan members. This included payments totaling $24 million for 12,990 claims for special items submitted by hospitals whose agreements did not limit Empire’s reimbursements for such items.

"DiNapoli’s auditors recommended Empire:

·        Ensure that future agreements with hospitals contain language that specifies the basis of reimbursement for the purchase and acquisition of special items; and require hospitals to provide appropriate support documentation (including invoices for special items) upon request; and

·        Develop and implement internal controls to ensure that payments for special items are made in accordance with hospital agreements.

"For a copy of the roll-up report documenting the findings on 15 hospitals visit: http://osc.state.ny.us/audits/allaudits/093013/11s17.pdf

"The audits of 11 other individual hospitals with special item payment agreements can be found under the NYSHIP section at: http://www.osc.state.ny.us/audits/index.htm "

Employee privacy and Internet Social Media

Employee privacy and Internet Social Media

http://leginfo.legislature.ca.gov/faces/billNavClient.xhtml?bill_id=201120120AB1844

California’s Governor Edmund G. Brown has signed into law a bill that prohibits an employer from requiring or requesting an employee or applicant for employment to disclose a username or password for the purpose of accessing personal social media, to access personal social media in the presence of the employer, or to divulge any personal social media.

The law also prohibits an employer from discharging, disciplining, threatening to discharge or discipline, or otherwise retaliating against an employee or applicant for not complying with a request or demand by the employer that violates these provisions.

The new law provides as follows:

California Labor Code

CHAPTER  2.5. Employer Use of Social Media

§980.

 (a) As used in this chapter, “social media” means an electronic service or account, or electronic content, including, but not limited to, videos, still photographs, blogs, video blogs, podcasts, instant and text messages, email, online services or accounts, or Internet Web site profiles or locations.

(b) An employer shall not require or request an employee or applicant for employment to do any of the following:

(1) Disclose a username or password for the purpose of accessing personal social media.

(2) Access personal social media in the presence of the employer.

(3) Divulge any personal social media, except as provided in subdivision (c).

(c) Nothing in this section shall affect an employer’s existing rights and obligations to request an employee to divulge personal social media reasonably believed to be relevant to an investigation of allegations of employee misconduct or employee violation of applicable laws and regulations, provided that the social media is used solely for purposes of that investigation or a related proceeding.

(d) Nothing in this section precludes an employer from requiring or requesting an employee to disclose a username, password, or other method for the purpose of accessing an employer-issued electronic device.

(e) An employer shall not discharge, discipline, threaten to discharge or discipline, or otherwise retaliate against an employee or applicant for not complying with a request or demand by the employer that violates this section. However, this section does not prohibit an employer from terminating or otherwise taking an adverse action against an employee or applicant if otherwise permitted by law.

Employee terminated following his falsely reporting he was unable to work and engaging in unauthorized outside employment

Employee terminated following his falsely reporting he was unable to work and engaging in unauthorized outside employment  

The Appellate Division sustained the termination of a deputy sheriff’s employment as a deputy sheriff, holding that substantial evidence supports the findings that the deputy sheriff:

[1] Falsely reported that he was unable to work from October through the following June;

[2] Engaged in unauthorized outside employment: and

[3] Lied under oath when he denied engaging in such outside employment at his workers' compensation hearing.

The court ruled that there was no basis to disturb the credibility determinations of the Administrative Law Judge and that the penalty of termination “does not shock our sense of fairness,” citing Cherry v Horn, 66 AD2d 556

The decision is posted on the Internet at:

http://www.courts.state.ny.us/reporter/3dseries/2013/2013_00427.htm

Challenging the denial of an appeal of an unsatisfactory performance rating

Challenging the denial of an appeal of an unsatisfactory performance rating 
102 AD3d 586

Supreme Court denied a petition seeking to annul the determination by the New York City Board of Education denying an educator’s appeal of an unsatisfactory rating (U-rating) for school year.

The Appellate Division unanimously affirmed the lower court’s ruling, explaining that the educator “failed to show that the U-rating was arbitrary and capricious, or made in bad faith.”

The court noted that detailed observations in reports prepared by the principal and two assistant principals describing the educator's poor performance in class management, engagement of students, and lesson planning provided a rational basis for the U-rating.

Further, said the Appellate Division, the record showed that after the educator received a U-rating at the end of the prior school year and was then provided with a professional development plan at the start of the succeeding school year and, throughout that year, received professional support and had a series of classroom observations by the principal and two assistant principals. Each observation, said the court, was documented by a detailed letter to the educator noting areas of improvement and making specific recommendations for addressing continuing deficiencies.

The decision is posted on the Internet at:

http://www.courts.state.ny.us/reporter/3dseries/2013/2013_00418.htm

Certain issues that the Commissioner of Education will decline to consider "for lack of jurisdiction"

Certain issues that the Commissioner of Education will decline to consider "for lack of jurisdiction"

Appeal of C.Z. from actions of the Board of Education of the Jordan-Elbridge Central School District, et. al.

Decisions of the Commissioner of Education, Decision No. 16,450

In this appeal to the Commissioner of Education C.Z. contended that certain alleged actions by school board members were “inappropriate and/or in violation of the Education Law and the Educational Rights and Privacy Act [FERPA].”  C.Z asked the Commissioner to issue an order admonishing the board members.

The Commissioner, stating that he lacked jurisdiction to consider FERPA claims, dismissed this branch of C.Z.’s appeal. The Commissioner explained that “The United States Secretary of Education, not the Commissioner, has jurisdiction over alleged FERPA violations (20 U.S.C. §1232[g]).

The Commissioner also dismissed that portion of C.Z. appeal that, in the words of the Commissioner, “attempts to allege violations of the Open Meetings Law through her claims that [the school board] declined to allow her to attend and to discuss certain issues at an executive session." The Commissioner noted that the §107 of the Public Officer Law “vests exclusive jurisdiction over complaints alleging violations of the Open Meetings Law in the Supreme Court of the State of New York, and alleged violations thereof may not be adjudicated in an appeal to the Commissioner.”

As to the redress sought, admonition of certain members of the school board, The Commissioner noted that it is “well established” that the Commissioner of Education does not have  members any authority to censure or reprimand a board member.

The decision is posted on the Internet at:

http://www.counsel.nysed.gov/Decisions/volume52/d16450.html

Decisions by OATH Administrative Law Judges

Decisions by OATH Administrative Law Judges

New York City Office of Administrative Trials and Hearings

Correction officer found guilty of improper use of force

Recommended penalty: 15-day suspension without pay

A correction officer was charged with improper use of force against two inmates. That officer and his partner were also charged with making false reports and failing to obtain medical attention for an injured inmate.

Administrative Law Judge John B. Spooner found petitioner proved that the first officer used improper force against one of the inmates but he recommended dismissal of the rest of the charges. The recommended penalty was a 15-day suspension, given the inconclusive proof as to the precise extent of the force used.

This was the first OATH case involving videoconference testimony by an inmate from a City jail.

The decision is posted on the Internet at:

Dep't of Correction v. Wingate (in PDF), OATH Index Nos. 1490/12 & 1491/12

Employee found guilty of being intoxicated while on duty

Recommended penalty: termination

An office worker was charged with being intoxicated at work on four occasions during a one-month period.

Administrative Law Judge Kevin F. Casey sustained two of the charges. He rejected as implausible respondent’s claim that his medications and illnesses cause a variety of symptoms, including dizziness and vomiting, which give people the mistaken impression that he was intoxicated, in view of proof that respondent was diagnosed with acute alcohol intoxication at a hospital on one of the charged dates.

Given respondent’s prior disciplinary record -- which included a 40-day suspension for similar, recent misconduct -- and in the absence of evidence of rehabilitation, ALJ Casey recommended termination of respondent’s employment.

The decision is posted on the Internet at:

Human Resources Admin. v. Anonymous (in PDF), OATH Index No. 212/13

Employee's acceptance of an appointment from an open-competitive eligible list to another position may be deemed a resignation from the employee's former position

Employee's acceptance of an appointment from an open-competitive eligible list to another position may be deemed a resignation from the employee's former position

Supreme Court denied the petition of an individual seeking to annul the appointing authority’s:

[a] terminating him from his from his position during the required probationary period: and

[b] declining to reinstate the individual to his former “permanent position.”

According to the decision, the individual, then serving as a “Computer Aide,” was appointed to the position of “Computer Science Technician (CST), Level II” from an open-competitive eligible list.

The Appellate Division vacated the Supreme Court’s ruling and remanded the matter for a determination if the individual “effectively resigned* from his permanent position.”

The court explained that while an individual appointed from an open-competitive eligible list to the position from which he or she had been terminated during the probationary period would not be entitled to reinstatement to his or her prior, permanent position “if he voluntarily accepted his appointment to the new position, which would constitute an effective resignation from his prior, permanent position,” in this instance there was a triable issue of fact as to whether the individual “voluntarily accepted the appointment to the subsequent, probationary position.” Accordingly, the Appellate Division remanded the matter to Supreme Court for its further consideration.

A corollary issue that the Supreme Court may be required to explore: was the individual “promoted” to his or her new position within the meaning of the Civil Service Law? §63.1 of the Civil Service Law provides, in pertinent part, as follows:

When probationary service is required upon promotion, the position formerly held by the person promoted shall be held open for him [or her] and shall not be filled, except on a temporary basis, pending completion of his [or her] probationary term.

Typically “promotion” is the word of art used to describe the advancement of an individual from a lower grade position to a higher-grade position in the “line of promotion.” In the absence or exhaustion of a “promotion list,” an appropriate “open-competitive eligible list” may be used to fill the vacancy.

Indeed, in situations where a promotion examination is not expected to produce sufficient eligibles to fill all the vacancies, actual and anticipated, during the life of the eligible list, an open-competitive examination may be authorized to be held simultaneously with the promotion examination, with the resulting open-competitive eligible list to be certified upon the exhaustion of the promotion eligible list.

In Bethel v McGrath-McKechnie, 95 N.Y2d 7, the Court of Appeals ruled that an individual who accepts an original appointment to a position from an open-competitive examination effectively resigned from his or her former position. The Court of Appeals decided that Bethel had not been promoted and thus Section 63(1) did not apply to her situation.

Citing Engoren v County of Nassau, 163 AD2d 520, leave to appeal denied 77 NY2d 805, the court said that Section 63 provides job security to a permanent employee who is transferred or promoted to a position in which he or she is required to serve, but does not satisfactorily complete, a probationary period.

* Typically a resignation from a position is required to be in writing to be effective.

The decision is posted on the Internet at:

http://www.courts.state.ny.us/reporter/3dseries/2013/2013_00397.htm

If the question before a court is one of pure legal interpretation of statutory terms, deference to the agency's interpretation of the statutory term in question is not required

If the question before a court is one of pure legal interpretation of statutory terms, deference to the agency's interpretation of the statutory term in question is not required

Kaslow v City of New York, 2013 NY Slip Op 00210, Appellate Division, Second Department

In this CPLR Article 78 proceeding David Kaslow asked Supreme Court to review a determination of the New York City Employees' Retirement System [NYCERS]. 

Kaslow had retired from employment with the New York City Department of Correction [DOC]. NYCERS however, had denied his request for service credit for his prior employment with the New York City Department of Environmental Protection [DEP] for purposes of determining his retirement allowance.

While Kaslow had contended that he was entitled to service credit for his prior employment with DEP, NYCERS said that in accordance with Retirement and Social Security Law §504-a, Kaslow, as a member of the Tier 3 CO-20 retirement plan, was not entitled to service credit for his civilian service with DEP prior to his employment with DOC.

Supreme Court granted Kaslow’s petition, holding that his service with the City's Department of Environmental Protection should have been credited. NYCERS and the City of New York appealed the court’s ruling.

The Appellate Division, noting that "An agency's interpretation of the statutes and regulations that it administers must be given great weight and judicial deference, so long as the interpretation is neither irrational, unreasonable nor inconsistent with the governing statute,'" said that in the event the question is one of pure legal interpretation of statutory terms, “deference to the agency is not required."

In this instance, said the court, NYCERS's interpretation of the term "credited service," was irrational, unreasonable, and inconsistent with the other applicable statutes governing the retirement benefits of officers employed with the DOC.

Accordingly, and under the circumstances presented in this instance, the Appellate Division concluded that for purposes of determining Kaslow retirement allowance upon his retirement from DOC, his creditable civilian service with DEP should have been included in NYCERS's calculation of his benefits, and, thus, Supreme Court had properly granted Kaslow’s petition.

The decision is posted on the Internet at:

http://www.courts.state.ny.us/reporter/3dseries/2013/2013_00210.htm

Decisions by OATH Administrative Law Judges

Decisions by OATH Administrative Law Judges

New York City Office of Administrative Trials and Hearings 

Firefighter admitted using cocaine

Penalty recommended: termination and forfeiture of the vesting his pension recommended

A firefighter who tested positive for cocaine admitted to using the drug but argued that he should be permitted to vest his pension and retire when eligible to do so.

Administrative Law Judge Alessandra F. Zorgniotti noted that pursuant to the Department’s “zero tolerance policy,” termination of employment is the usual penalty for a first time positive test, in the absence of exacerbating or extenuating circumstances.

Judge Zorgniotti found that respondent failed to present sufficient evidence in mitigation to justify a lesser penalty and recommended termination of the individual’s employment, without an allowance that his pension be permitted to vest fully.

The decision is posted on the Internet at:

Fire Dep’t v. Arcello (in PDF), OATH Index No. 109/13 

New York State Comptroller Thomas P. DiNapoli to classify financial condition of local governments to identify local governments experiencing financial strain

New York State Comptroller Thomas P. DiNapoli to classify financial condition of local governments to identify local governments experiencing financial strain

On January 28, 2013, State Comptroller Thomas P. DiNapoli announced that his office has finalized plans to implement a statewide fiscal monitoring system that would publicly identify local governments experiencing financial strain. The monitoring system will include nine financial indicators, such as cash-on-hand and patterns of operating deficits, together with broader demographic information like population trends and tax assessment growth. The system will start by analyzing those localities whose fiscal year ended December 31, 2012 and later apply it to villages and school districts whose fiscal years end at various periods throughout the year.

DiNapoli’s office drafted the ‘early warning’ monitoring system in September 2012 and shared details of the proposal with all of the state’s local governments and school districts for their review during a 60-day comment period. More than 85 local government and school district officials, as well as a number of affiliated organizations, submitted comments.

Using data already submitted by more than 3,000 local governments, DiNapoli’s office will calculate and publicize an overall score of fiscal stress for approximately 2,300 municipalities and school district across the state. They will be listed as in “significant fiscal stress,” in “moderate fiscal stress,” “susceptible to fiscal stress,” or “not in fiscal stress.”

Once the monitoring system has identified local governments and school districts experiencing fiscal stress, an array of services will be offered by DiNapoli’s office including budget reviews, technical financial assistance, guidance on multi-year financial planning, financial management publications and training.

Additional information concerning the Comptroller’s fiscal stress monitoring system is posted on the Internet at: www.osc.state.ny.us/localgov/fiscalmonitoring/index.htm

Retirement to avoid disciplinary action

Retirement to avoid disciplinary action

A Los Angeles Unified School District teacher arrested and accused of sexually abusing students retired from his position before administrative disciplinary action had been initiated by the school district. School District Superintendent John Deasy, when asked what action the school district planned to take responded “Can you go back and fire someone who’s already retired?”*

An appointing authority of a New York State or political subdivision of the State is able do just that insofar as certain employees are concerned.

For example, 4 NYCRR 5.3(b), which applies to employees in the classified service of the State and public authorities, public benefit corporations and other agencies for which the Civil Service Law is administered by the State Department of Civil Service, provides, in pertinent part, provides that, Resignation, provides: that  “… when charges of incompetency or misconduct have been or are about to be filed against an employee, the appointing authority may elect to disregard a resignation filed by such employee and to prosecute such charges and, in the event that such employee is found guilty of such charges and dismissed from the service, his termination shall be recorded as a dismissal rather than as a resignation."** Many local civil service commissions have adopted a similar rule.

Presumably the appointing authority could elect to disregard a “retirement” under similar circumstances.***

In the case of an individual serving in a position in the classified service not otherwise entitled to a pre-termination disciplinary hearing pursuant to law or a collective bargaining agreement, the appointing authority presumably could elect to disregard the resignation, schedule a disciplinary hearing in the exercise of its discretion and in the event the individual is found guilty of the charge[s], record the separation as a “termination for cause” rather than as a resignation.

Undertaking such a disciplinary action could be significant with respect to employment in the public service in the future as application forms for employment or examination with the State or a political subdivision of the State typically  include the following questions.

1. Were you ever discharged from any employment except for lack of work, disability or medical condition?  [ ] yes  [ ] no  

2. Did you ever resign from any employment rather than face discharge? [ ] yes  [ ] no 

Failing to answer these questions correctly could result in the applicant being disqualified for such employment pursuant to §50.4(e), and, or (f) and, or (g) of the Civil Service Law by the responsible Civil Service Commission or Personnel Officer.

Many local civil service commissions and personnel officers have promulgated rules similar to 4 NYCRR 5.3(b).

*  See Los Angeles Times article on the Internet at:

http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/lanow/2013/01/teacher-molestation-principal-ignored-allegation.html

** State Education Law §1133.1 provides that “[a] school administrator or superintendent shall not make any agreement to withhold from law enforcement authorities, the superintendent or the commissioner, where appropriate, the fact that an allegation of child abuse in an educational setting on the part of any employee or volunteer as required by [Article 23-B of the Education Law] in return for the resignation or voluntary suspension from his or her position of such person, against whom the allegation is made.

*** See Mari v. Safir, 291 AD2d 298, leave to appeal denied, 98 NY2d 61

Selected reports and information published by New York State's Comptroller Thomas P. DiNapoli

Selected reports and information published by New York State's Comptroller Thomas P. DiNapoli

Issued during the week of January 21 - 25, 2013 [Click on the caption to access the full report]

DiNapoli Approves Terms of $3.14 Billion Tappan Zee Bridge Contract

State Comptroller Thomas P. DiNapoli last Friday announced he has approved a $3.14 billion contract between the state Thruway Authority and Tappan Zee Constructors to design and build the new Tappan Zee bridge.


Officers of Albany Nanotech Complex Safeguarding Public Funds

Fuller Road Management Corp., the not for profit corporation that runs the State University at Albany’s College of Nanoscale Science and Engineering, is fulfilling its duties to support and provide appropriate internal controls over operations and activities, and promoted an ethical business climate at the multi–billion dollar facility, according to a report released Friday by State Comptroller Thomas P. DiNapoli.


DiNapoli: State Tax Revenues Up, But Still Lag Projections

Tax collections through December totaling $46.4 billion were $48.3 million below the state’s latest estimates and $685.3 million below initial estimates in April. Higher than anticipated personal income tax collections in December likely reflect income paid before federal tax increases take effect in 2013 for high income taxpayers, New York State Comptroller Thomas P. DiNapoli said last week in releasing the December cash report.

Comptroller DiNapoli Releases Municipal Audits

New York State Comptroller Thomas P. DiNapoli announced his office completed audits of:

the City of Beacon;

the Midway Fire District;

the Niagara Falls Housing Authority;

the Orleans County;

the Town of Otto; and,

the Village of Spring Valley.

Department of Health Medicaid Overpayments for Out-of-State Ambulatory Surgery Services (Follow-Up) (2012-F-26)

An initial audit report examining whether DOH was appropriately paying out-of-state providers for ambulatory surgery services provided to New York State Medicaid recipients found $12.2 million in actual and potential Medicaid overpayments for such services during the audit period. Following up, auditors found DOH and the Medicaid Inspector General made progress in addressing the issues identified in the initial audit. This included the recovery of $1,309,960.

Department of Health Monitoring of Medicaid Payments for Nursing Home Bed Reserve Days (Follow-Up) (2012-F-28)

An initial audit examined whether nursing home claims submitted to Medicaid for hospital bed reserve days were appropriate. During the five year audit period ended March 31, 2010, Medicaid paid $28 million for bed reserve claims that exceeded the bed reserve day limit. However, because reimbursement rates were the same for both standard and reserve care during our audit period, auditors determined no significant overpayments occurred. Auditors recommended DOH remind nursing homes of the correct way of coding for standard nursing home days and bed reserve days and implement controls within eMedNY to prevent payment of claims for bed reserve days in excess of prescribed limits. In a follow-up, auditors found DOH and the Office of the Medicaid Inspector General have taken significant actions in correcting the problems identified in the initial report.

Office of General Services Selected Employee Travel Expenses (2012-S-92)

As part of a statewide initiative to determine whether the use of travel money by selected government employees was appropriate, auditors examined travel expenses for the highest-cost travelers in the state as well as other outliers. These employees incurred more than $100,000 in travel expenses during the three year period ending March 31, 2011. Four of these employees worked at the Office of General Services (OGS) and had travel costs totaling $206,494. Auditors found the travel expenses for the four OGS employees selected for audit were documented and adhered to state travel rules and regulations.

New York State Department of Taxation and Finance Selected Employee Travel Expenses (2012-S-95)

As part of a statewide initiative to determine whether the use of travel money by selected government employees was appropriate, auditors examined travel expenses for the highest-cost travelers in the state as well as other outliers. These employees incurred more than $100,000 in travel expenses during the three year period ending March 31, 2011. Three of these employees worked at the Department Taxation and Finance with outliers in the areas of train fare, fuel and other miscellaneous travel expenses. The employees travel costs totaled $91,686. Auditors found that the travel expenses for the three employees selected for audit were documented and adhered to state travel rules and regulations.

Department of Agriculture and Markets Quality of Internal Control Certification (2012-S-47)

In 1987, the Legislature passed the New York State Governmental Accountability, Audit and Internal Control Act requiring State agencies and public authorities to each institute a comprehensive system of internal controls over their operations. By April 30 each year, DOB requires each covered agency to certify compliance with the act. Agriculture and Markets’ Internal Control Certification was submitted more than four months after the April 30 deadline, the department's certification did not provide an adequate level of detail describing specific actions it will take to address its partial compliance assessment of its internal audit function. Auditors recommended the department: re-examine priorities to accommodate the timely submission of the Internal Control Certification; provide appropriately detailed responses to questions as requested in the annual Internal Control Certification; and expand and enhance the internal control training and education program to cover all aspects of internal controls for all staff levels.

Tuition Assistance Program, Pace University (2012-T-1)

Auditors determined that Pace’s certification procedures are appropriately designed and were substantially complied with during the audit period for the transactions we tested. Auditors concluded there is not a high risk that a significant number of students certified for TAP are not eligible for awards.  Nonetheless, tests did disclose ten awards totaling $21,236 that school officials incorrectly certified in error.

State Comptroller Thomas P. Dinapoli recommends that municipalities conduct background checks of employees providing youth program services

State Comptroller Thomas P. Dinapoli recommends that municipalities conduct background checks of employees providing youth program services

Source: Office of the State Comptroller

Local governments could do more to conduct background checks on individuals working in municipal youth program services, according to an audit released today by New York State Comptroller Thomas P. DiNapoli.

“Failing to perform background checks potentially jeopardizes the safety of children,” said DiNapoli. “It is essential that local officials take action to ensure they are consistently screening all persons who provide youth program services in their communities. Parents need to trust that all of the necessary steps have been taken to keep their children out of harm’s way.”

From January 2010 through May 2012, auditors examined youth program activities in the cities of Binghamton, Middletown, New Rochelle and Utica; as well as the towns of Amherst, Clifton Park, Manlius and Seneca Falls. These municipalities offer activities to more than 409,000 residents.

The Comptroller’s audit found seven of the eight municipalities did not conduct background checks on all of the individuals who deliver their youth program services. Only one, the town of Clifton Park [in Saratoga County], annually screened all program personnel against the state’s sex offender registry and other resources.

Two municipalities, the town of Manlius and the city of New Rochelle, did not screen applicants at all, except for those personnel providing programs where state law mandates screening. The remaining five municipalities performed some screening, but did not do it consistently or did not document the date and results of the screening process.

Of the 1,994 individuals working in youth program services in these municipalities, the Comptroller’s audit did not identify any persons with sex offender or significant criminal histories.

The Comptroller’s audit findings also include:

·        Four of the five municipalities that used volunteers did not check volunteers’ criminal history;

·        Five municipalities that hired contracted workers to offer program services did not screen these workers for sexual offenses prior to delivering services; and

·        Six municipalities performed some variety of background checks for new employees.

Municipal youth programs can include pre-school or afterschool activities, arts and crafts, exercise and fitness, summer camps, seasonal or holiday special events, sports, employment and literacy programs, safety programs, swim programs and therapeutic programs. Background checks are currently required by state law or regulation only for individuals who have contact with children in camps, childcare programs and therapeutic programs.

DiNapoli recommended municipalities conduct background checks for all employees, volunteers and contractors involved in youth programs. Minimally, local officials should utilize the sex offender registry maintained by the New York State Division of Criminal Justice Services. They can also perform various types of criminal history background checks and develop their own procedures to limit liability and ensure the safety of participating children.

Local officials generally agreed with the audit findings and the Comptroller’s recommendations. Their responses are included in the final audit report.

For a copy of the report visit: http://www.osc.state.ny.us/localgov/audits/swr/2013/backgroundchecks/global.pdf

Unless meeting specified time requirements to advance a grievance to the next step is expressly set out in a collective bargaining agreement, timeliness is an issue for the arbitrator to resolve

Unless meeting specified time requirements to advance a grievance to the next step is expressly set out in a collective bargaining agreement, timeliness is an issue for the arbitrator to resolve

Matter of Board of Educ. of The Rondout Val. Cent. Sch. Dist. (Rondout Val. Fedn. of Teachers), 2012 NY Slip Op 08862, Appellate Division, Third Department

The relevant collective bargaining agreement (CBA) spelled out time frames for the processing of grievances and included a clause stating "[t]he failure on the part of [Rondout Valley Federation of Teachers] to advance a pending grievance to the next stage within the time periods set forth herein shall constitute an abandonment of the grievance."

Certain grievances proceeded through the initial procedural stages of the grievance procedure set out in the CBA and ultimately the Federation filed demands for arbitration of these grievances with American Arbitration Association. Contending that these grievances were not processed consistent with the time requirements spelled out in the CBA and were thus “abandoned,” the school district filed a petition pursuant to CPLR 7503 (b) seeking to stay the arbitrations.

Supreme Court granting the district's petition for a stay, holding that “the submission of a timely demand for arbitration constituted a condition precedent to the filing for arbitration” and the Federation appealed.

The Appellate Division vacated the lower court’s decision with respect to the Federation’s demands for arbitration. The court explained that “Where a collective bargaining agreement contains a broad arbitration clause, the question of whether a party has complied with the procedural requirements of the grievance process — such as time limitations — is to be resolved by an arbitrator absent ‘a provision expressly making compliance with the time limitations a condition precedent to arbitration.’"

Rejecting the school district’s argument that the provision in the CBA's specifying that non-adherence to time limits set out in the CBA constituted an "abandonment" of the grievances and thus precluded advancing them to arbitration, the Appellate Division held that the CBA did not expressly condition access to arbitration on adherence to the time limits set out in the grievance procedure.

Accordingly, the Appellate Division ruled that the question of whether the Federation’s grievances were timely filed is a question of "procedural arbitrability" to be resolved by an arbitrator.

The decision is posted on the Internet at:

http://www.courts.state.ny.us/reporter/3dseries/2012/2012_08862.htm

Overhauled Hatch Act takes effect on January 27, 2013

Overhauled Hatch Act takes effect on January 27, 2013

Source: NYMUNIBLOG published by Harris Beach PLLC*. Reproduced with permission. Copyright © 2013, All rights reserved.

Kevin P. Ryan, Esq. has posted the following item explaining certain changes resulting from the recently amended Hatch Act on the Harris Beach PLLC blog NYMUNIBLOG. Mr. Ryan writes:

"On December 28, 2012, President Obama signed into law an overhaul of the Hatch Act that eased the restrictions on state or local government employees seeking elected office.

"The Hatch Act, as it existed prior to the enactment of the recent legislation (S. 2170), prohibited state and local government employees whose employment was connected to activities receiving federal funding from running as candidates for partisan political office; from using their official authority to influence an election or nomination; or pressuring or advising another state or local employee to make a political contribution.

"Since the old legislation applied to state and local government employees whose employment was broadly defined as “being in connection with activities receiving federal funding,” it served as a blanket prohibition of nearly all state and local government employees from running for office. 

"By way of example, after Robert J. Duffy resigned as mayor of the City of Rochester to become the lieutenant governor, the then deputy mayor, Thomas S. Richards, was sworn in as acting mayor. After a Hatch Act complaint was filed, Richards was forced to resign that position in order to run in a special election to succeed Mayor Duffy, forcing the appointment of a separate acting mayor in the interim.

"The new legislation relaxes that restriction and takes effect January 27, 2013.

"The legislation approved by Congress and signed into law by the president removes the prohibition on certain state and local employees running for elected office unless their salary is paid entirely by federal funds.  Thus, in relaxing the restriction to employees whose employment is in connection with activities receiving federal funding to those only whose salaries are funded entirely with federal funds, the ability of state and local government employees to run for political office is expanded.

"While the new legislation does expand the ability of state and local government employees to run for office, it still prohibits employees whose employment is “in connection with an activity supported by federal funding” from using their official authority to affect an election or nomination or to coerce or advise another state or local employee to make a political contribution. The new legislation also keeps in place the exemption of the governor, lieutenant governor, the mayor of a city, or other elected official from being subject to the terms of the Hatch Act."

* NYMUNIBLOG.COM was created and is maintained by the law firm of Harris Beach PLLC as a public service. For more information about NYMUNIBLOG please go to: http://nymuniblog.com/

NYPPL comment:.See, also, Civil Service Law §107 "Prohibition against certain political activities; improper influence."

Postings on Internet social networks deemed inappropriate may result in disciplinary action

Postings on Internet social networks deemed inappropriate may result in disciplinary action

1 .Rubino v City of New York, 34 Misc 3d 1220(A)

2. In re Tenure Hearing of Jennifer O’Brien, A-2452-11T4, Appellate Division, New Jersey Superior Court

3. Fire Department v Palleschi, OATH Index #551/11

4. Decisions of the Commissioner of Education, Decision 16,121

The posting of material on social networks such as Facebook alleged to be inappropriate has resulted in disciplinary action being initiated against educators; students and employees.

Examples of such disciplinary actions are set out below:

The Rubino case: This decision by New York State Supreme Court Justice Barbara Jaffee illustrates the consequences that may result from a posting on an individual’s Facebook "wall" that the employer subsequently determined was inappropriate. In this instance the posting by a teacher of material deemed inappropriate resulted in disciplinary charges alleging “misconduct, neglect of duty and conduct unbecoming her profession” being filed against the educator by the appointing authority. [See 34 Misc 3d 1220(A].

The O’Brien case: In re Tenure Hearing of Jennifer O’Brien, No. A-2452-11T4 (N.J. Super. Ct., App. Div. Jan. 11, 2013), the Appellate Division, New Jersey Superior Court, sustained a decision by an administrative law judge, affirmed by New Jersey’s Commissioner of Education, upholding the school district’s termination of an elementary school teacher for posting derogatory remarks about her students on Facebook. The court decided that the teacher’s remarks were not protected by the First Amendment of the U.S. Constitution as the remarks were not made on a matter of public concern.

The Palleschi case: In Fire Department of the City of New York v Palleschi, OATH Index #551/11, a New York City emergency medical technician [EMT] was served with disciplinary charges that alleged such postings resulted in “bringing the agency into disrepute and showing disrespect to the public.” OATH Administrative Law Judge Joan Salzman recommended the termination of  the EMT, who admitted that he had posted private and confidential patient information on his Facebook page, "where 460 of his friends could see it for their amusement."

The Appeal of G.I. case: Commissioner of Education Decision 16,121 considered disciplinary action initiated against a student alleged to have engaged in cyber-bullying. The appeal, Appeal of G.I, on behalf of her daughter K.I., from action of a Board of Education, concerned an alleged threatened “fist fight” resulting from a dispute following the publication of "inappropriate statements" about C.H. on C.H.’s “Facebook” page placed there by K.I.and another student, D.N. K.I. admitted to her teacher that she and D.N. had C.H.’s Facebook password and that they posted the derogatory statements. The Commissioner of Education sustained the school principal’s decision, approved by the school superintendent and the school board, to remove K.I. from her classroom for one day and have her spend the day under the supervision of an administrator.

In any event, there is another lesson here: posting information on a social network may prove to be an example of the Doctrine of Unintended Consequences should such postings be targeted for the purposes of discovery in the course of litigation or arbitration. 

This is a legal issue that courts being asked to address with increasing frequency. In Patterson v Turner, 88 AD3d 617, the court ruled that material on Facebook, if relevant, was subject to discovery while in Abrams v. Pecile, 83 A.D.3d 527, the court declined to permit discovery of material posted on social network sites because the party seeking such access was unable to demonstrate that such material would be relevant in the lawsuit. Presumably the same criteria would be used in situations involving efforts to obtain information posted on a social network account such as Facebook in an administrative disciplinary action or an arbitration.

The Rubino decision is posted on the Internet at:

 http://www.courts.state.ny.us/reporter/3dseries/2012/2012_50189.htm

The O’Brien decision is posted on the Internet at:

https://www.judiciary.state.nj.us/opinions/a2452-11.pdf

The Palleschi decision is posted on the Internet at:

http://archive.citylaw.org/oath/11_Cases/11-192.pdf

The Commissioner’s decision in Matter of K.I. is posted on the Internet at:

http://www.counsel.nysed.gov/Decisions/volume50/d16121.htm