Home -> Law Blog Directory -> Labor & Employment Law Blogs -> New York Public Personnel Law
(866) 635-2689 for Personal Injury or (866) 635-9402 for Criminal Defense
Find a Local Lawyer
Divorce (866) 635-6190
Personal Injury (866) 635-2689
Criminal Defense (866) 635-9402
Labor & Employment Law
: New York Public Personnel LawIndividuals performing services for a public employer may be designated "non-employees" by statute
Levitt v NYC Office of Collective Bargaining, 273 AD2d 104
For the purposes of collective bargaining Article 14 of the Civil Service Law -- the Taylor Law -- applies to all individuals in the services of a public employer except judges, individuals in the military service and public employees designated managerial or confidential.*
The point made clear by the Levitt decision -- individuals who might otherwise satisfy the criteria for public employment, and thus otherwise covered by the Taylor Law, may be denied such status by statute.
Kenneth Levitt challenged a ruling by New York City?s Office of Collective Bargaining [OCB] declaring that four hearing examiners employed by the city?s Parking Violations Bureau [PVB] were ineligible for inclusion in a collective bargaining unit representing city employees.
OCB?s rationale: Section 236(2)(d) of the Vehicle and Traffic Law provides that [s]uch hearing examiners shall not be considered employees of the city in which the administrative tribunal has been established.**
The Appellate Division, First Department, agreed, ruling that [g]iven this clear statutory language, the PVB hearing officers cannot be considered City employees entitled to collectively bargain pursuant to the Taylor Law even though, as OCB found following a hearing, in all other respects these hearing officers meet the criteria for public employment.
Does Levitt have any recourse? Perhaps. As the court pointed out, this was an issue for the Legislature, not the courts, to address.
* Certain individuals have been declared managerial or confidential within the meaning of the Taylor Law by statute.
** Civil Service Law Sections 210 - Prohibition against strikes - and Section 211 - Injunctive relief to prohibit a strike - specifically apply to judges, military personnel and managerial or confidential employees within the meaning of the Taylor Law. Presumably these provisions would not apply to Section 236(2)(d) hearing examiners as the incumbents of such positions are not employees of the jurisdiction in which they serve.
Full post as published by New York Public Personnel Law on January 27, 2011 (boomark / email).
Pre-paid Leagal Services
What are Prepaid Legal Benefit Plans
Discouraging Union Organizers
Strict work place rules
Employee Lawsuits: Negligent Hiring and Retention
Employers must check references, criminal records, other background material.
Restaurant Staff
Win Lawsuit Suit Against Employer for Infiltrating their MySpace Forum
Overtime for Programmers
alleging that some companies try to avoid paying employees overtime by categorizing them as "salaried" employees.
Cell Phone Services
AT&T Mobility may have to pay $10 million to Florida customers after charging for third-party services.
Clopidogrel Marketed as Plavix FDA Issues Public Health Advisory
Clopidogrel Marketed as Plavix FDA Issues Public Health Advisory
Nursing Home Abuse
New Data Made Public
The Princeton Reivew
Personal Data Made Public on Tens of Thousands of Florida Students

Large Number of San Diego Employees Opt Out of Performing Gay Marriages
Information on Substandard Nursing Homes
Austrac Public Legal Interpretation No. 3 of 2008 remittance services providers
U.S. Designates Iranian Proliferation Individuals and Entities
Employer Commits ULP By Unilaterally Requiring Employees To Have Drivers License
EMPLOYMENT RETALIATION A FORM OF DISCRIMINATION








