Search for: "TAYLOR v. UNION COUNTY" Results 21 - 40 of 147
Sorted by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
1 Oct 2007, 12:43 pm
Greene County Includes the cities of Greensboro, Siloam, Union Point, White Plains and Woodville. [read post]
10 Sep 2010, 3:07 am
Creating new negotiating unitsErie County v PERB, Appellate Division, 247 A.D.2d 671The Erie County v PERB case suggests that PERB has become more flexible regarding splitting sheriff’s department employees into separate collective bargaining units.In Erie County Teamsters Local 264 represented a single large negotiating unit that included both Deputy Sheriff-criminal [“criminal deputies”] and Deputy Sheriff-officer [“officer… [read post]
22 Jul 2009, 4:15 am
Dismissal during an employee's disciplinary probationary periodMatter of Bradford v New York City Dept. of Correction, 2006 NY Slip Op 30569(U), July 11, 2006, Supreme Court, New York County, Docket Number: 111044/05, Judge: Debra A. [read post]
3 Jul 2019, 6:56 am by MBettman
Union, 2004-Ohio-5770 (Termination of employment is a matter that arises out of the employment relationship.) [read post]
15 Dec 2008, 12:05 pm
Random drug testing of teachersSource: National Law Journal ArticleEducators are challenging new policies being adopted by school districts requiring them to submit to random drug tests for illegal drugs.Pending cases include Jones v Graham County [North Carolina] Board of Education [COA 08-477]; American Federation of Teachers v Kanawah County [West Virginia] Board of Education [08-Misc 421]; and Hawaii State Teachers Association and Hawaii Labor Relations Board… [read post]
14 Mar 2024, 6:00 am by Public Employment Law Press
The employee's Collective Bargaining Representatives [Unions*] filed an improper practice complaint with PERB contending that County improperly terminated the benefit of providing full prescription drug coverage for employees. [read post]
14 Mar 2024, 6:00 am by Public Employment Law Press
The employee's Collective Bargaining Representatives [Unions*] filed an improper practice complaint with PERB contending that County improperly terminated the benefit of providing full prescription drug coverage for employees. [read post]
23 Nov 2010, 3:46 am
Notice requirements for filing an complaint with PERB alleging an improper practiceUnion Endicott CSD v PERB, 250 AD2d 82, motion to appeal denied, 93 NY2d 805In the Union Endicott decision the Appellate Division, Third Department, affirmed its position that a union’s failure to file a timely notice of claim with a school district as mandated by Section 3813(1) of the Education Law prevents it from prosecuting improper practice charges filed against the district with… [read post]
30 Jun 2011, 4:37 am
Relations Bd., 2011 NY Slip Op 05170 The Public Employment Relations Board found ruled that Monroe County had committed an improper employer practice in violation of the Taylor Law when it conducted a survey “to assess whether to hold a secret ballot election” to determine if CSEA should continue as the union representing certain of the County’s part-time employees. [read post]
30 Jul 2018, 4:00 am by Public Employment Law Press
In Burnham and UFT, 28 PERB 4590, PERB ruled that the union's "duty of fair representation" runs only to employees; there is no such duty with respect to former unit members such as retirees [See, also,  McDonald PBA v City of Geneva, 92 N.Y.2d 326; Kolbe v Tibbetts, 22 NY3d 344].** Retirees are not employees for the purposes of collective bargaining for the purposes of Article 14 of the Civil Service Law [the Taylor Law] The decision… [read post]
26 Aug 2020, 4:00 am by Public Employment Law Press
 The Appellate Division explained that §80 of the Civil Service Law "reflects a legislative imperative" that the City was powerless to bargain away, citing County of Chautauqua v Civil Service Employees Ass'n, 8 N.Y.3d 513, in which the Court of Appeals held that once an informed decision as to which positions are to be abolished is made, Civil Service Law "§80(1) obligates the employer to respect the seniority rights of its employees. [read post]
26 Aug 2020, 4:00 am by Public Employment Law Press
 The Appellate Division explained that §80 of the Civil Service Law "reflects a legislative imperative" that the City was powerless to bargain away, citing County of Chautauqua v Civil Service Employees Ass'n, 8 N.Y.3d 513, in which the Court of Appeals held that once an informed decision as to which positions are to be abolished is made, Civil Service Law "§80(1) obligates the employer to respect the seniority rights of its employees. [read post]