New York court finds part of collective agreement unenforceable
A termination dispute arising from a collective bargaining agreement (CBA) was not arbitrable because giving for-cause termination protection to an exempt-class employee via the CBA would violate a statute, decisional law, or public policy, a recent New York ruling said.
Exempt-class civil service employees are those who have positions of a confidential nature and personal qualities that an examination cannot practicably test. This class of employees is terminable at will. In 2012, the Town of Monroe appointed to its planning board a new secretary, whose role was deemed an exempt position.
In 2015, the town entered a CBA with Teamsters Local 445. The CBA defined the bargaining unit to include the secretary, vested certain exempt employees with for-cause termination protection, made the discipline and termination procedures in sections 75 and 76 of the Civil Service Law applicable to the secretary and to most other employees, and provided grievance procedures leading to binding arbitration.
In 2017, the town terminated the employee. This prompted the union to file a grievance alleging violations of the CBA’s just cause termination provision and of the requirements of section 75. When the town refused to address the grievance, the union filed a petition to compel arbitration.
Read more: What happens if a worker sues for wrongful termination, age discrimination – after signing a release
The town filed a motion to...
The court found the relator did not allege specific reimbursement requests or facts linking challenged promotional statements to government payments. A Maryland federal district court dismissed a ...