Opinion
1423 CA 17–01165
02-02-2018
In the MATTER OF ARBITRATION BETWEEN CITY OF WATERTOWN, Petitioner–Appellant, and WATERTOWN PROFESSIONAL FIREFIGHTERS' ASSOCIATION LOCAL 191, Respondent–Respondent.
BOND, SCHOENECK & KING, PLLC, GARDEN CITY (TERRY O'NEIL OF COUNSEL), FOR PETITIONER–APPELLANT. BLITMAN & KING LLP, SYRACUSE (NOLAN J. LAFLER OF COUNSEL), FOR RESPONDENT–RESPONDENT.
BOND, SCHOENECK & KING, PLLC, GARDEN CITY (TERRY O'NEIL OF COUNSEL), FOR PETITIONER–APPELLANT.
BLITMAN & KING LLP, SYRACUSE (NOLAN J. LAFLER OF COUNSEL), FOR RESPONDENT–RESPONDENT.
PRESENT: WHALEN, P.J., SMITH, LINDLEY, NEMOYER, AND TROUTMAN, JJ.
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
Memorandum:Petitioner, City of Watertown (City), commenced this proceeding pursuant to CPLR article 75, seeking a permanent stay of arbitration of a grievance filed by respondent. In its grievance and demand for arbitration, respondent alleged, inter alia, that the City violated the parties' collective bargaining agreement (CBA) with respect to the assignment and compensation of firefighters who performed out-of-title work as Acting Captains.
Supreme Court properly denied the petition. We reject the City's contention that arbitration of the grievance is contrary to public policy or those provisions of the Watertown City Charter defining the authority of the City Manager. At the outset, we note that, as a general proposition, arbitration of an out-of-title work dispute is not contrary to public policy (see County of Rockland v. Rockland County Unit of Rockland County Local of Civ. Serv. Empls. Assn., 74 A.D.2d 812, 812–813, 425 N.Y.S.2d 365 [2d Dept. 1980], affd for reasons stated 53 N.Y.2d 741, 439 N.Y.S.2d 357, 421 N.E.2d 849 [1981] ; Matter of Buffalo Sewer Auth. [Buffalo Sewer Auth. Unit, CSEA, Local 815], 112 A.D.2d 743, 743, 492 N.Y.S.2d 239 [4th Dept. 1985] ). Nor is arbitration of the dispute inconsistent with the authority of the City Manager to approve expenditures of City funds (see Watertown City Charter Title III, § 26), or to act as administrative head of the fire department (see Title V, §§ 44[4]; 45).
As in a prior appeal arising out of a proceeding commenced by the City to stay arbitration of a related grievance ( Matter of City of Watertown [Watertown Professional Firefighters' Assn. Local 191], 152 A.D.3d 1231, 59 N.Y.S.3d 238 [4th Dept. 2017] ), we conclude that the parties agreed to arbitrate this grievance. Here, respondent alleges that the City violated the CBA by, inter alia, retroactively reversing out-of-title assignments made by the Battalion Chief and failing to compensate firefighters who performed out-of-title work at the appropriate rate of pay. As we concluded in the prior appeal, the instant dispute concerning out-of-title work "is reasonably related to the general subject matter of the CBA" ( id. at 1233, 59 N.Y.S.3d 238 ; see Matter of City of Lockport [Lockport Professional Firefighters Assn., Inc.], 141 A.D.3d 1085, 1088, 34 N.Y.S.3d 834 [4th Dept. 2016] ).
Finally, we again "reject the City's contention that arbitration should be stayed with respect to the issue of out-of-title work because such compensation for such work falls within the meaning of ‘salary,’ which is expressly excluded from the CBA's definition of ‘grievance’ " ( City of Watertown, 152 A.D.3d at 1234, 59 N.Y.S.3d 238 ). That contention is for the arbitrator to address (see id. ).
It is hereby ORDERED that the order so appealed from is unanimously affirmed without costs.