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

Labor & Employment Law

: New York Public Personnel Law

Stay of arbitration

Stay of arbitration
City of White Plains v Professional Firefighters Association, Local 274 I.A.F.F., 298 A.D.2d 456

From time to time a party to a collective bargaining agreement [CBA] will attempt to prevent a grievance from being submitted to an arbitrator by seeking a stay of arbitration pursuant to Article 75 of the Civil Practice Law and Rules. The City of White Plains case concerns the effort by the City to obtain such a stay of arbitration in a grievance filed by Local 274. The decision succinctly sets out the elements that courts consider in determining whether or not to issue a stay of arbitration.

The genesis of the action was Local 274's demanded for the arbitration of a grievance that it had filed challenging the ordering of a firefighter to report for a medical examination on the grounds the directive violated the provisions CBA between the Local and the White Plains Fire Department.

According to the ruling, firefighter John McGillan called in sick the day before and after his scheduled time off on a number of occasions. This resulted in the Fire Chief's ordering McGillan to report to the Department's physician for a physical examination.

Although McGillan complied with this directive and reported for the medical examination as instructed, Local 274 filed a contract grievance contending that the Chief's order violated the CBA and demanded that the matter be submitted to arbitration.

White Plains objected and obtained a stay of arbitration from a Supreme Court judge. The basis for court's issuing the stay: the Supreme Court judge decided that "there was no reasonable relationship between the parties' collective bargaining agreement and the grievance." The Local appealed the Supreme Court judge's determination.

The Appellate Division agreed that the general rule in such cases is that a court may stay a demand for arbitration if it finds that there is no reasonable relationship between the subject matter of the dispute and the general subject matter of the collective bargaining agreement. In this instance, however, the Appellate Division concluded that the facts did not support the Supreme Court's determination.

Here, said the Appellate Division, the CBA "(1) provides for arbitration of any grievances; (2) defines the term "grievance" very broadly; and (3) incorporates by reference certain past employment practices, `including the medical procedures that are to be followed by the Fire Department' [emphasis supplied]."

Coupling the CBA's broad definition of a grievance with the fact that the "medical procedures" to be followed by the Fire Department were incorporated in the CBA by reference, the Appellate Division concluded that the grievance filed by Local 247 was reasonably related to the general subject matter of the CBA.

Accordingly, the court ruled the Local's grievance was appropriate for submission to arbitration and vacated the lower court's stay.

Full post as published by New York Public Personnel Law on August 21, 2009 (boomark / email).