ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE IS NOT USED, IN WHOLE OR IN PART, IN THE SUMMARIES OF JUDICIAL AND QUASI-JUDICIAL DECISIONS PREPARED BY NYPPL

February 11, 2014

An employer's rights under Workers' Compensation Law §11 are not extinguished merely because the injured employee is an undocumented alien


An employer's rights under Workers' Compensation Law §11 are not extinguished merely because the injured employee is an undocumented alien
New York Hosp. Med. Ctr. of Queens v Microtech Contr. Corp., 2014 NY Slip Op 00897, Court of Appeals

In Balbuena v IDR Realty, LLC, 6 NY3d 338 [2006], the Court of Appeals held that an injured employee's status as an undocumented alien does not preclude his or her recovery of lost wages in a personal injury action against a landowner under the state's Labor Law.

In deciding New York Hospital Medical Center of Queens [Hospital] v Microtech Contr. Corp., the Court of Appeals held that an employer's statutory rights under the Workers' Compensation Law are not extinguished merely because the injured employee is an undocumented alien.

Hospital sued Microtech for common-law and contractual contribution and indemnification to recover any damages it had incurred in the course of litigation in which Microtech’s injured employees alleged their injuries resulted from Hospital’s alleged violations of the Labor Law.  

Supreme Court had granted the employees summary judgment on liability on their causes of action grounded in Labor Law §§240 (1) and 241 (6). Hospital's attorney said that Hospital and the employees had entered into “a high-low agreement”* at the damages trial that followed and, after the verdict, the judgment was paid in keeping with this arrangement. The hospital then sued Microtech seeking indemnification for the damages it suffered.

The Court of Appeals, affirming the Appellate Division’s decision, held that Microtech’s alleged violations of the Immigration Reform and Control Act (8 USC §1324a) claimed by the hospital did not abrogate Microtech’s protection from third-party claims available to it pursuant to §11.

In other words, the court ruled that, “under the facts and circumstances presented by this case,” an employees' immigration status does not affect his or her employer's rights under Workers' Compensation Law §11.

* A high/low agreement is “a settlement in which a defendant agrees to pay the plaintiff a minimum recovery amount in return for the plaintiff’s agreement to accept a maximum amount regardless of the outcome of the trial.” 

The decision is posted on the Internet at:
http://www.nycourts.gov/reporter/3dseries/2014/2014_00897.htm
.

Resolving ties in seniority in the event of a layoff


Resolving ties in seniority in the event of a layoff
Decisions of the Commissioner of Education, Decision 16,584

In this appeal concerning the appointment and preferred eligibility rights involving two teachers of Spanish the Commission reviewed the events leading to their respective appointments and determined that both teachers “had the same amount of full-time service in the foreign language tenure area.”

As to a school board’s resolving “ties” in seniority to determine which of two or more teachers were to be excessed, the Commissioner said that “the board may use an objective means to break the tie in determining seniority.”

In this instance the school board elected to determine which one of the two teachers to retain in service by considering their names in alphabetical order.

The Commissioner concluded that this method was “objective” and ruled that board’s decision to retain the teacher whose last name started with “A” rather than the teacher whose last name started with the letter “G” was not arbitrary and capricious.

Other means of breaking seniority ties in the event of a reduction of staff include: one teacher was "certified” in a second tenure area that “could be beneficial to the district in the future;" it would be "cost effective" to terminate the teacher having the higher rate of compensation consistent with the district's efforts to reduce its expenditures; the date of a school board's resolution appointing the individuals; the date of receipt of the application; the individual’s date of birth; a lottery system.

Although a collective bargaining agreement negotiated pursuant to the Taylor Law [Article 14 of the Civil Service Law] may provide for the determination of certain benefits based on seniority such as shift selection or priority in scheduling vacation,such provisions may not be used to defeat certain rights based on seniority set by law. For example, the rights of an individual in layoff situations in the classified service set out in §§80 and 80-a of the Civil Service Law are based on seniority which rights may not be adversely affected by the terms of a collective bargaining agreement [see City of Plattsburgh v Local 788, 108 AD2d 1045].

The Commissioner’s decision is posted on the Internet at:
http://www.counsel.nysed.gov/Decisions/volume53/documents/d16584.pdf




=========================
The Layoff, Preferred List and Reinstatement Manual - a 645 page e-book reviewing the relevant laws, rules and regulations, and selected court and administrative decisions is available from the Public Employment Law Press. Click On http://nylayoff.blogspot.com/ for information about this electronic reference manual.
=========================
.
.

February 10, 2014

An employee in a non-competitive class position designated as confidential or policy-influencing not within the ambit of Civil Service Law §75


An employee in a non-competitive class position designated as confidential or policy-influencing not within the ambit of Civil Service Law §75
2014 NY Slip Op 00659, Appellate Division, Second Department

A former employee [Petitioner] of the New York City Transit Authority [NYCTA] filed an Article 78 action challenging [1] NYCTA terminating him without a formal hearing pursuant to Civil Service Law §75 and [2] rejecting of his request for a lump sum payment for unused leave “based on his election to retire in response to an investigation into certain timekeeping violations which he subsequently was found to have committed.”

Supreme Court, Kings County dismissed the Article 78 proceeding and the Appellate Division affirmed the lower court’s ruling.

Addressing Petitioner’s claim that he was denied due process as a result of NYCTA’s failing to provide him with a pre-termination disciplinary hearing, the Appellate Division explained that NYCTA had demonstrated that Petitioner was an employee to whom the provisions of Civil Service Law §75 did not apply as he was employed in a non-competitive class position that had been designated as confidential or policy-influencing.

§75 applies to certain persons holding permanent appointment in the Classified Service and, in pertinent part, provides that a person holding a position by permanent appointment in the non-competitive class of the classified civil service in “other than a position designated in the rules of the state or municipal civil service commission as confidential or requiring the performance of functions influencing policy….” *

Turning to Petitioner’s claim that NYSTA could not deny his request for a lump sum payment without first affording him a formal disciplinary hearing pursuant to Civil Service Law §75,**the Appellate Division ruled that the Authority’s action “was not improper.”

Citing Pell v Board of Educ. of Union Free School Dist. No. 1 of Towns of Scarsdale & Mamaroneck, Westchester County, 34 NY2d 222, the Appellate Division dismissed this branch of Petitioner’s appeal noting that NYCTA's determination denying Petitioner's request for a lump sum payment for his unused vacation credits was in accordance with its established policy and was neither arbitrary and capricious nor so disproportionate to the offense as to be shocking to one's sense of fairness.

* See §75.l[c]

** See 4 NYCRR 23.1, which applies to employees of the State as the employer and provides for payment of leave accruals upon separation. 4 NYCRR 23.1, in pertinent part, provides that “No employee who is removed from State service as a result of disciplinary action or who resigns after charges of incompetency or misconduct have been served upon him shall be entitled to compensation for vacation credits under the provisions of this Part.” Many local civil service commissions have adopted a similar rule.

The decision is posted on the Internet at:


===================
The 2014 edition of the Discipline Book, a 2,200+ page e-book providing a concise guide to disciplinary actions involving public employees in New York State is available from the Public Employment Law Press. Click on http://thedisciplinebook.blogspot.com/for information concerning this electronic reference manual.
=======================

.

February 08, 2014

Selected reports and information published by New York State's Comptroller Thomas P. DiNapoli during the week ending February 8, 2014


Selected reports and information published by New York State's Comptroller Thomas P. DiNapoli during the week ending February 8, 2014
Click on text highlighted in color to access the full report

Comptroller DiNapoli Releases Municipal Audits

New York State Comptroller Thomas P. DiNapoli on Tuesday, February 4, 2014, announced his office completed audits of










DiNapoli: Funds Dedicated for Highway & Bridge Capital Projects Continue to be Diverted for Operating and Debt Costs

Money in the Dedicated Highway and Bridge Trust Fund continues to be diverted for non–capital purposes, leaving critical highway and bridge projects at increased risk as the state faces fiscal challenges and shrinking debt capacity, according to a reportissued on Wednesday, February 5, 2014, by New York State Comptroller Thomas P. DiNapoli.


DiNapoli: ‘Early Warning’ System Finds 15 Villages in Fiscal Stress

State Comptroller Thomas P. DiNapoli’s Fiscal Stress Monitoring System has identified 15 villages in New York in some level of fiscal stress. DiNapoli’s office evaluated 535 villages with fiscal years ending on May 31, 2013.


DiNapoli: Audit Cites East Clinton Fire District for Improper Gifts

Officials in Dutchess County’s East Clinton Fire District improperly paid nearly $35,000 in personal expenses for members, including rent, cable television and college fees, according to an audit released on Tuesday, February 4, 2014, by State Comptroller Thomas P. DiNapoli. The findings of the Comptroller’s audit and investigation were referred to Dutchess County District Attorney William V. Grady.


DiNapoli, Stringer Lead Investors Calling on Olympic Sponsors to End Their Silence, Defend Russian LGBT Rights

State Comptroller Thomas P. DiNapoli, as trustee of the $160.7 billion New York State Common Retirement Fund, along with New York City Comptroller Scott Stringer and a coalition of 19 investors, on Wednesday, February 5, 2014 released letterswritten to four major corporate sponsors of the upcoming Winter Olympic Games in Sochi, Russia that failed to respond to an earlier request they use their influence to ensure the protection of the human rights of Russian citizens, as well as athletes and visitors to the Olympics.

.

February 07, 2014

State employer entitled to reimbursement by the Workers’ Compensation Board for personal leave credits used by State employee injured on the job


State employer entitled to reimbursement by the Workers’ Compensation Board for personal leave credits used by State employee injured on the job
2014 NY Slip Op 00153, Appellate Division, Third Department

A guard [Guard] at a State psychiatric center [Employer] suffered a work-related injury and his claim for workers' compensation benefits was approved. Guard was awarded benefits for the period July 2 until September 7. During that period Guard received his full salary, which included payment for five days of absence charged to his personal leave credits.

The Employer then requested reimbursement at the workers' compensation benefit rate for the advance payment of compensation* it paid to Guard during his disability, including for the time Guard charged against his personal leave credits. The Workers' Compensation Board ultimately ruled that Employer was not entitled to reimbursement related to Guard's use of personal leave credits and Employer appealed.

Here, said the court, personal leave credits, in contrast to sick leave credits, may not be accrued from year to year or converted into cash or retirement credits. In the opinion of the Appellate Division, Guard’s use of his personal leave time during his absence for disability did not result in a permanent benefit to Employer or a net detriment to Guard as Guard did not surrender "valuable vested rights" in return for the payment of full wages.

Rather, said the court, the denial of reimbursement for Employer’s payments related to personal leave credits would result in Guard receiving both full wages and compensation benefits for the time in question. Such a result is disfavored and requires that Employer be reimbursed for the personnel leave credits used by Guard.

The Appellate Division reversed the Board’s decision and remitted the matter  “to the Workers' Compensation Board for further proceedings not inconsistent with this Court's decision.”

* Workers' Compensation Law §25(4)(a) provides that, "[i]f the employer has made advance payments of compensation, or has made payments to an employee in like manner as wages during any period of disability, [the employer] shall be entitled to be reimbursed out of an unpaid installment or installments of compensation due." Citing Houda v Niagara Frontier Hockey, 16 AD3d 926, the decision notes that, "[a]n employer can be reimbursed for compensation paid to a claimant even if that compensation was paid in accordance with a contract or a collective bargaining agreement" and reimbursement must be awarded to the employer "unless such reimbursement would achieve a disproportionate result, either to the employer or employee"

The decision is posted on the Internet at:
http://www.nycourts.gov/reporter/3dseries/2014/2014_00153.htm
.

CAUTION

Subsequent court and administrative rulings, or changes to laws, rules and regulations may have modified or clarified or vacated or reversed the decisions summarized here. Accordingly, these 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 Blog Editor 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.
Copyright 2009-2024 - Public Employment Law Press. Email: nyppl@nycap.rr.com.