Matter of Bd. of Educ. of the City Sch. Dist. of the City of New York v. United Fed'n of Teachers, Local No. 2, Aft, Afl-Cio

New York Court of Appeals

Matter of Bd. of Educ. of the City Sch. Dist. of the City of New York v. United Fed'n of Teachers, Local No. 2, Aft, Afl-Cio

389 N.E.2d 1057, 46 N.Y.2d 1018, 416 N.Y.S.2d 535, 1979 N.Y. LEXIS 1939, 101 L.R.R.M. (BNA) 2205

CourtNew York Court of Appeals

DecidedMarch 29, 1979

StatusPublished

Cited by5 cases

This text of 389 N.E.2d 1057 (Matter of Bd. of Educ. of the City Sch. Dist. of the City of New York v. United Fed'n of Teachers, Local No. 2, Aft, Afl-Cio) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering New York Court of Appeals primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Matter of Bd. of Educ. of the City Sch. Dist. of the City of New York v. United Fed'n of Teachers, Local No. 2, Aft, Afl-Cio, 389 N.E.2d 1057, 46 N.Y.2d 1018, 416 N.Y.S.2d 535, 1979 N.Y. LEXIS 1939, 101 L.R.R.M. (BNA) 2205 (N.Y. 1979).

Pincite

Opinion

OPINION OF THE COURT

Memorandum.

The order of the Appellate Division should be reversed, with costs, and the order of Supreme Court, Kings County, reinstated.

Neither public policy nor the provisions of former paragraph (f) of subdivision 2 of section 210 of the Civil Service Law (L 1967, ch 392, § 2, repealed L 1978, ch 465, § 1), prohibit a public employer from augmenting the procedural mechanisms available to review the dismissal of an employee subject to the Taylor Law penalty probation (cf. Tuller v Central School Dist. No. 1 of Towns of Conklin, Binghamton, Kirkwood & Vestal, 40 NY2d 487, 491-492). Since the board of education has not bargained away its ultimate right to terminate a nontenured teacher (see Cohoes City School Dist. v Cohoes Teachers Assn., 40 NY2d 774, 777-778), the courts may not intervene and thwart the intent of the parties to arbitrate the issue of whether the board has followed the supplemental procedural steps available to these probationers (cf. Board of Educ. v Bellmore-Merrick United Secondary Teachers, 39 NY2d 167).

Chief Judge Cooke and Judges Jasen, Gabrielli, Jones, Wachtler and Fuchsberg concur in memorandum.

Order reversed, etc.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

OPINION OF THE COURT

Memorandum.

The order of the Appellate Division should be reversed, with costs, and the order of Supreme Court, Kings County, reinstated.

Neither public policy nor the provisions of former paragraph (f) of subdivision 2 of section 210 of the Civil Service Law (L 1967, ch 392, § 2, repealed L 1978, ch 465, § 1), prohibit a public employer from augmenting the procedural mechanisms available to review the dismissal of an employee subject to the Taylor Law penalty probation (cf. Tuller v Central School Dist. No. 1 of Towns of Conklin, Binghamton, Kirkwood & Vestal, 40 NY2d 487, 491-492). Since the board of education has not bargained away its ultimate right to terminate a nontenured teacher (see Cohoes City School Dist. v Cohoes Teachers Assn., 40 NY2d 774, 777-778), the courts may not intervene and thwart the intent of the parties to arbitrate the issue of whether the board has followed the supplemental procedural steps available to these probationers (cf. Board of Educ. v Bellmore-Merrick United Secondary Teachers, 39 NY2d 167).

Chief Judge Cooke and Judges Jasen, Gabrielli, Jones, Wachtler and Fuchsberg concur in memorandum.

Order reversed, etc.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

389 N.E.2d 1057, 46 N.Y.2d 1018, 416 N.Y.S.2d 535, 1979 N.Y. LEXIS 1939, 101 L.R.R.M. (BNA) 2205, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/matter-of-bd-of-educ-of-the-city-sch-dist-of-the-city-of-new-york-v-ny-1979.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack