Bill S7801-2013

Declares that all competitive class employees are entitled to collective bargaining with respect to matters pertaining to disciplinary procedures

Declares that all competitive class employees are entitled to collective bargaining with respect to matters pertaining to disciplinary procedures.

Details

Actions

  • Jun 19, 2014: returned to senate
  • Jun 19, 2014: passed assembly
  • Jun 19, 2014: ordered to third reading rules cal.497
  • Jun 19, 2014: substituted for a9853
  • Jun 18, 2014: referred to codes
  • Jun 18, 2014: DELIVERED TO ASSEMBLY
  • Jun 18, 2014: PASSED SENATE
  • Jun 18, 2014: ORDERED TO THIRD READING CAL.1549
  • Jun 18, 2014: COMMITTEE DISCHARGED AND COMMITTED TO RULES
  • Jun 10, 2014: REFERRED TO CIVIL SERVICE AND PENSIONS

Meetings

Votes

VOTE: COMMITTEE VOTE: - Rules - Jun 18, 2014
Ayes (22): Skelos, Libous, Bonacic, Carlucci, Farley, Flanagan, Hannon, Larkin, LaValle, Marcellino, Maziarz, Nozzolio, Seward, Valesky, Little, Stewart-Cousins, Breslin, Dilan, Hassell-Thompson, Montgomery, Parker, Perkins
Ayes W/R (2): Krueger, Gianaris
Excused (1): Espaillat

Memo

BILL NUMBER:S7801

TITLE OF BILL: An act to amend the civil service law, in relation to the negotiability of disciplinary procedures affecting employees in the competitive class of civil service of the state of New York or any civil division thereof

PROVISIONS OF THE BILL: This bill amends Section 76 of the Civil Service Law to modify the language of subpart 4 thereof relied on by several courts in holding disciplinary procedures to be outside the protection of the Taylor Law where any other law commits discipline to the discretion of local officials and to make it clear that police officers and all other competitive class public employees in this state are entitled to collectively bargain the disciplinary procedures that affect them in their employment. The bill would also restore the provisions of any collective bargaining agreements or interest arbitration awards between public employers and public employee organizations relative to discipline that were invalidated by judicial or administrative decisions since the New York City PBA case was decided in 2006.

JUSTIFICATION: The fundamental purpose of the Taylor Law adopted in 1967 was to make all term and conditions of employment in the public sector subject to collective bargaining. Early Taylor Law decisions established that disciplinary procedures were terms and conditions of employment subject to collective bargaining, and many collective bargaining agreements containing disciplinary provisions and procedures were adopted across the state, including those negotiated by police labor unions. Over time, a series of judicial decisions, including most notably the New York City PBA case decided by the Court of Appeals in 2006, found a countervailing policy in favor of strong local control of discipline to override the public policy expressed in the Taylor Law favoring the collective bargaining of all terms and conditions of employment based on language in the current § 76(4) to the effect that Sections 75 and 76 did not repeal or modify any local law or charter provisions vesting control of discipline in local authorities. Although the New York City PBA case involved the New York City Charter and the Rockland County Police Act, the Court in its decision also noted that the Town Law and the Village Law also contained provisions favoring t he local control of police discipline that would override the Taylor Law presumption of negotiability.

Thus, at the present time, all police officers in the City of New York, in Rockland County, and numerous other towns and villages across the state have had their contractual disciplinary procedures taken away from them without compensation and are subject to autocratic local control of the discipline of their members without even the rudimentary protections provided in Sections 75 & 76 of the Civil Service Law which were adopted in 1958, 9 years prior to the Taylor Law. Every police officer employed in any town or village in the State of New York that has not already been divested of his contractual disciplinary procedure is subject to immediate divestment by the simple expedient of the passage by the town or village that employs him of a local law declaring local control over police discipline.

This bill would legislatively overrule the judicial decisions on this issue and would belatedly make § 75 & 76 of the Civil Service Law

consistent with the Taylor Law by declaring it to be the public policy of the State of New York that all terms and conditions of public employment including police discipline are subject to mandatory negotiability under the Taylor Law. It would also restore those collective bargaining provisions that were previously declared invalid on grounds of public policy by prior judicial or administrative decisions.

PRIOR LEGISLATIVE HISTORY: None.

FISCAL IMPLICATIONS: None.

EFFECTIVE DATE: Immediately.


Text

STATE OF NEW YORK ________________________________________________________________________ 7801 IN SENATE June 10, 2014 ___________
Introduced by Sen. GOLDEN -- read twice and ordered printed, and when printed to be committed to the Committee on Civil Service and Pensions AN ACT to amend the civil service law, in relation to the negotiability of disciplinary procedures affecting employees in the competitive class of civil service of the state of New York or any civil division thereof THE PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK, REPRESENTED IN SENATE AND ASSEM- BLY, DO ENACT AS FOLLOWS: Section 1. Legislative findings and declarations. The Taylor Law requires collective bargaining over all "terms and conditions of employ- ment." Our courts have often stressed the importance of this policy and have made clear that "the presumption...that all terms and conditions of employment are subject to mandatory bargaining" cannot easily be over- come. IN THE MATTER OF PATROLMEN'S BENEVOLENT ASSOCIATION OF THE CITY OF NEW YORK, INC. V. NEW YORK STATE PUBLIC EMPLOYMENT RELATIONS BOARD, 6 N.Y. 3d 563 at 572 (2006) (Hereinafter NYC PBA case). However, while paying homage to our state's strong and sweeping policy to support collective bargaining of all terms and conditions of employment under the Taylor Law, the Court of Appeals in the case cited above held that that policy must yield to any other legislation which specifically commits police discipline to the discretion of local officials, includ- ing the New York City charter, the Rockland County Police Act, section 155 of the town law and section 8-804 of the village law, provided only that those laws were passed prior to 1958 when Sections 75 and 76 of the civil service law providing minimum or back-stop provisions for due process disciplinary procedures for public employees were enacted. In doing so, the court cited specifically to the first sentence of subdivi- sion 4 of section 76 of the civil service law which says that sections 75 and 76 of the civil service law shall not be construed to repeal or modify pre-existing laws relating to the removal or suspension of offi- cers or employees in the competitive class of the civil service of the state or any civil division. Since the Taylor Law was enacted in 1967 making all terms and condi- tions of employment subject to collective bargaining, matters pertaining
to employee discipline, including disciplinary procedures, have been negotiated into many collective bargaining agreements in municipalities across the state covering all types of public employees, including police officers. Those agreements were honored until 2006 when the NYC PBA case was decided. The impact of the NYC PBA case has been to deprive many, but not all, police officers of the right to enforce their negoti- ated disciplinary procedures and of the right to collectively bargain with regard to matters pertaining to discipline in the future that all other public employees enjoy. The purpose of this act is to expressly overrule this decision and those that have followed it and to replace them with a legislative declaration that police officers and all other competitive class public employees in the state of New York are entitled to collectively bargain with respect to all matters pertaining to disci- pline and, in the absence of a negotiated procedure, to at least the minimum due process protections provided by sections 75 and 75 of the civil service law. S 2. Subdivision 4 of section 76 of the civil service law, as amended by chapter 283 of the laws of 1972, is amended and a new subdivision 5 is added to read as follows: 4. [Nothing contained in section seventy-five or seventy-six of this chapter shall be construed to repeal or modify any general, special or local law or charter provision relating to the removal or suspension of officers or employees in the competitive class of the civil service of the state or any civil division. Such sections may be supplemented, modified or replaced by agreements negotiated between the state and an employee organization pursuant to article fourteen of this chapter. Where such sections are so supplemented, modified or replaced, any employee against whom charges have been preferred prior to the effective date of such supplementation, modification or replacement shall continue to be subject to the provisions of such sections as in effect on the date such charges were preferred.] THIS SECTION OR SECTION SEVENTY-FIVE OF THIS TITLE SHALL BE CONSTRUED TO REPEAL OR MODIFY ANY GENERAL, SPECIAL OR LOCAL LAW OR CHARTER PROVISION RELATING TO THE REMOVAL OR SUSPENSION OF OFFICERS OR EMPLOYEES IN THE COMPETITIVE CLASS OF THE CIVIL SERVICE OF THE STATE OR ANY CIVIL DIVISION. THIS SECTION AND SECTION SEVENTY-FIVE OF THIS TITLE MAY BE SUPPLEMENTED, MODIFIED OR REPLACED BY AGREEMENTS NEGOTIATED BETWEEN THE STATE OR ANY POLITICAL SUBDIVISION THEREOF AND AN EMPLOYEE ORGANIZATION PURSUANT TO ARTICLE FOURTEEN OF THIS CHAPTER. WHERE SUCH SECTIONS ARE SO SUPPLEMENTED, MODI- FIED OR REPLACED, ANY EMPLOYEE AGAINST WHOM CHARGES HAVE BEEN PREFERRED PRIOR TO THE EFFECTIVE DATE OF SUCH SUPPLEMENTATION, MODIFICATION OR REPLACEMENT SHALL CONTINUE TO BE SUBJECT TO THE PROVISIONS OF SUCH SECTIONS AS IN EFFECT ON THE DATE SUCH CHARGES WERE PREFERRED. 5. THE TERMS OF ANY CURRENT OR EXPIRED COLLECTIVE BARGAINING AGREEMENT OR INTEREST ARBITRATION AWARD BETWEEN ANY PUBLIC EMPLOYER AND ANY PUBLIC EMPLOYEE ORGANIZATION RELATING TO ANY ASPECT OF POLICE OFFICER DISCI- PLINE WHICH WERE INVALIDATED OR RENDERED UNENFORCEABLE BY ANY DECISION, ORDER OR JUDGEMENT OF ANY COURT, ADMINISTRATIVE AGENCY OR OTHER ADJUDI- CATORY TRIBUNAL ON GROUNDS OF PUBLIC POLICY SHALL BE DEEMED VALID FROM THE DATE ANY SUCH AGREEMENTS OR AWARDS WERE FIRST REACHED OR ISSUED, AND THOSE AGREEMENTS OR AWARDS SHALL BE APPLIED AND ENFORCED AS TO ANY DISCIPLINARY CHARGES PENDING ON THE EFFECTIVE DATE OF THIS SUBDIVISION AND TO ANY DISCIPLINARY CHARGES FILED THEREAFTER. S 3. This act shall take effect immediately.

Comments

Open Legislation comments facilitate discussion of New York State legislation. All comments are subject to moderation. Comments deemed off-topic, commercial, campaign-related, self-promotional; or that contain profanity or hate speech; or that link to sites outside of the nysenate.gov domain are not permitted, and will not be published. Comment moderation is generally performed Monday through Friday.

By contributing or voting you agree to the Terms of Participation and verify you are over 13.

Discuss!

blog comments powered by Disqus