Labor & Employment Law

Substantial evidence test used to resolve challenges to an administrative decision

By Harvey Randall, Esq.

Substantial evidence test used to resolve challenges to an administrative decision
Matter of Incorporated Vil. of Lake Success v New York State Pub. Empl. Relations Bd., 41 A.D.3d 599, Appellate Division, Second Department

The Public Employment Relations Board [PERB] sustained a determination made by an administrative law judge granting the petition of the Civil Services Employees Association, Inc., Local 1000, to place the position of Police Dispatcher into its already existing negotiating unit. The Appellate Division confirmed PERB?s decision.

Citing Jennings v New York State Off. of Mental Health, 90 NY2d 227, the Appellate Division said that in applying the ?substantial evidence test ? an administrative agency?s determination need not be the only rational conclusion to be drawn from the record ? the existence of other, alternative rational conclusions does not warrant annulment of the agency?s conclusion.?

In this instance the court found that there was substantial evidence in the record to support the PERB finding that ?the police dispatchers and the CSEA unit employees share a community of interest, that there is no conflict of interest that would affect the conduct of meaningful and effective negotiations, and that the placement would not cause administrative inconvenience.?

Full post as published by New York Public Personnel Law on March 25, 2008 (boomark / email).