Home -> Law Blog Directory -> Labor & Employment Law Blogs -> New York Public Personnel Law

Labor & Employment Law

: New York Public Personnel Law

Commissioner of Education asked to void collective bargaining agreement between school district and an employee organization

Commissioner of Education asked to void collective bargaining agreement between school district and an employee organization
Appeal of Theresa Budich, from actions of the Board of Education of the Monroe-Woodbury Central School District relating to the ratification of a collective bargaining agreement, and application for the removal of Michael DiGeronimo as a member of the board. Decisions of the Commissioner of Education, Decision No. 15,892

Theresa Budich, a taxpayer and member of the Board of Education of the Monroe-Woodbury Central School District objected to certain actions taken the board and asked the Commissioner to remove a fellow board member, Michael DiGeronimo from his position as a member of the board.

The Commissioner dismissed Budich?s appeal and her application to remove DiGeronimo.

Budich alleged that DiGeronimo wilfully violated his role as president and board member by ratifying an agreement with Monroe-Woodbury Teachers Association that ?was not in the best interest of the district?s taxpayers or students.? She sought DiGeronimo?s removal from the board because of he failed to recuse himself from district negotiations with the MWTA due to an alleged conflict of interest, i.e., his wife?s membership in the MWTA. In addition, Budich asked the Commissioner to overturn the board?s ratification? of the collective bargaining agreement and to declare it null and void.

The Commissioner said that Budich?s application to remove DiGeronimo as president and member of the board must be denied. A president or member of the board may be removed from office pursuant to Education Law §306 when it is proven to the satisfaction of the Commissioner that the board member or board president has engaged in a willful violation or neglect of duty under the Education Law or has willfully disobeyed a decision, order, rule or regulation of the Board of Regents or the Commissioner of Education. In this context, willful means the challenged actions must have been intentional and with a wrongful purpose.

Budich, said the Commissioner, failed to establish that DiGeronimo?s actions constituted a conflict of interest and/or a wilful violation or neglect of duty under law. Citing General Municipal Law §801, the Commissioner noted that §801 ?prohibits a board member from having an interest in any contract with the municipality of which he is an officer or employee, when such officer or employee, individually or as a member of a board, has the power or duty to negotiate, authorize or approve the contract.? However, the Commissioner pointed out that General Municipal Law §802 sets forth exceptions to such prohibitions that were relevant in this appeal.

The Commissioner ruled that: ?The contract central to this dispute is a collective bargaining agreement between the district and the MWTA, a teachers? union, of which DiGeronimo?s spouse is a member and from which she receives benefits. General Municipal Law §802(f) exempts from prohibited conflicts of interest a ?contract with a membership corporation or other voluntary non-profit corporation or association?. The association in this case is a non-profit teachers? union, in which membership is completely voluntary. It thus falls within the exception of General Municipal §802(1)(f).?

Further, the Commissioner?s decision notes that ?General Municipal Law §800(3) ?explicitly excludes a spouse?s employment contract from coverage under the conflict of interest provision and therefore, does not bar a board member from negotiating or voting on the contract of a spouse.?

As to Budich?s request that the Commissioner nullify the collective bargaining agreement, an appeal to the Commissioner, a petitioner has the burden of demonstrating a clear legal right to the relief requested and the burden of establishing the facts upon which petitioner seeks relief.

Although Budich contended that the Agreement was not in the best financial interests of the taxpayers or students, the Commissioner decided that she failed to prove that the board?s actions were improper.

The full text of the Commissioner?s decision is posted on the Internet at:
http://www.counsel.nysed.gov/Decisions/volume48/d15892.htm

Full post as published by New York Public Personnel Law on March 24, 2009 (boomark / email).