Opinion
2015-09184, Index No. 1162/15.
07-26-2017
In the Matter of BOARD OF EDUCATION OF the NEWBURGH ENLARGED CITY SCHOOL DISTRICT, respondent, v. NEWBURGH TEACHERS' ASSOCIATION, appellant.
Richard E. Casagrande, Latham, NY (Paul D. Clayton of counsel), for appellant. Shaw, Perelson, May & Lambert, LLP, Poughkeepsie, NY (Mark C. Rushfield of counsel), for respondent.
Richard E. Casagrande, Latham, NY (Paul D. Clayton of counsel), for appellant.
Shaw, Perelson, May & Lambert, LLP, Poughkeepsie, NY (Mark C. Rushfield of counsel), for respondent.
MARK C. DILLON, J.P., JEFFREY A. COHEN, COLLEEN D. DUFFY, and FRANCESCA E. CONNOLLY, JJ.
In a proceeding pursuant to CPLR article 75 to permanently stay arbitration, the Newburgh Teachers' Association appeals from an order of the Supreme Court, Orange County (Sciortino, J.), dated July 2, 2015, which granted the petition to permanently stay arbitration and denied its cross motion to compel arbitration.
ORDERED that the order is affirmed, with costs.
In determining whether a dispute between a public sector employer and employee is arbitrable, a court must first determine whether " ‘there is any statutory, constitutional or public policy prohibition against arbitration of the grievance’ " (Matter of County of Chautauqua v. Civil Serv. Empls. Assn., Local 1000, AFSCME, AFL–CIO, County of Chautauqua Unit 6300, Chautauqua County Local 807, 8 N.Y.3d 513, 519, 838 N.Y.S.2d 1, 869 N.E.2d 1, quoting Matter of City of Johnstown [Johnstown Police Benevolent Assn.], 99 N.Y.2d 273, 278, 755 N.Y.S.2d 49, 784 N.E.2d 1158 ; see Matter of Board of Educ. of Yorktown Cent. Sch. Dist. v. Yorktown Congress of Teachers, 98 A.D.3d 665, 666–667, 949 N.Y.S.2d 777 ). If there is no prohibition against arbitration, the court must examine the parties' collective bargaining agreement to determine "whether the parties in fact agreed to arbitrate the particular dispute" (Matter of County of Chautauqua v. Civil Serv. Empls. Assn., Local 1000, AFSCME, AFL–CIO, County of Chautauqua Unit 6300, Chautauqua County Local 807, 8 N.Y.3d at 519, 838 N.Y.S.2d 1, 869 N.E.2d 1 ; see Matter of New York City Tr. Auth. v. Transport Workers Union of Am., Local 100, 88 A.D.3d 889, 890–891, 931 N.Y.S.2d 334 ; Matter of Board of Educ. of Yorktown Cent. Sch. Dist. v. Yorktown Congress of Teachers, 98 A.D.3d at 666–667, 949 N.Y.S.2d 777 ).
Here, the appellant demanded arbitration to compel the petitioner, the Board of Education of the Newburgh Enlarged City School District, to implement certain measures regarding the discipline and suspension of students. Since New York's Education Law grants discretion to boards of education to implement disciplinary rules and regulations in schools (see Education Law §§ 1709[2] ; 2503[2]; 2801 et seq. ), such demands are nonarbitrable on public policy grounds (see Matter of United Fedn. of Teachers, Local 2, Am. Fedn. of Teachers, AFL–CIO [ Board of Educ. of City School Dist. of N.Y.], 2003 WL 25780827, affd. 11 A.D.3d 256, 782 N.Y.S.2d 906 ).
The appellant's remaining contentions are without merit.
Accordingly, the Supreme Court properly granted the petition to permanently stay arbitration and denied the cross motion to compel the arbitration.