Search for: "Yorke v. Taylor"
Results 21 - 40
of 986
Sorted by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
17 Oct 2011, 1:35 pm
The BIA used the categorical approach set forth in Taylor v. [read post]
15 Apr 2019, 4:00 am
Citing Viruet v City of New York , 97 NY2d 171, the Appellate Division explained that as the Taylor Law is incorporated into the New York City Health and Hospitals Corporation Act and the exemptions in the Act are substantially consistent with Article 14 of the Civil Service, "the override provision of Unconsolidated Laws §7405(5) does not apply" in this instance.Noting that the exclusions for managerial and confidential employees are an… [read post]
15 Apr 2019, 4:00 am
Citing Viruet v City of New York , 97 NY2d 171, the Appellate Division explained that as the Taylor Law is incorporated into the New York City Health and Hospitals Corporation Act and the exemptions in the Act are substantially consistent with Article 14 of the Civil Service, "the override provision of Unconsolidated Laws §7405(5) does not apply" in this instance.Noting that the exclusions for managerial and confidential employees are an… [read post]
8 Feb 2011, 3:22 am
Taylor Law considerations concerning General Municipal Law Section 207-a/207-cBarnes v Council 82, [David Monroe], Court of Appeals, 94 NY2d 719Watertown v Watertown PBA, Court of Appeals, 95 NY2d 73Local 2562, IAFF, AFL-CIO, v Cohoes, Court of Appeals, 94 NY2d 686The Court of Appeals has handed down three rulings concerning issues involving collective bargaining under the Taylor Law as they relate to negotiating procedures to implement and administer… [read post]
1 Jul 2023, 6:00 am
Assn. of Firefighters, AFL-CIO, Utica Professional Firefighters Assn. v New York State Pub. [read post]
1 Jul 2023, 6:00 am
Assn. of Firefighters, AFL-CIO, Utica Professional Firefighters Assn. v New York State Pub. [read post]
14 Jul 2009, 4:35 pm
Do Denim v. [read post]
12 Oct 2023, 5:01 am
From Judge Edgardo Ramos's decision Tuesday in Jacob v. [read post]
28 Oct 2007, 7:20 pm
Last week the New York Court of Appeals handed down its decision in People v Taylor, 2007 NY Slip Op 07911. [read post]
10 Sep 2015, 4:27 pm
Professor Ruthann Robson, City University of New York (CUNY) School of Law In its opinion in Taylor v. [read post]
6 Mar 2010, 9:00 pm
Pfau v. [read post]
15 Sep 2008, 7:30 pm
County Supreme Court issued a ruling on September 10 in Taylor v. [read post]
21 Sep 2011, 4:28 am
An entity not a party to a collective bargaining agreement negotiated pursuant to the Taylor Law may not be bound by its termsMatter of Council of School Supervisors & Adm'rs, Local 1 v New York City Dept. of Educ., 2011 NY Slip Op 06451, Appellate Division, First Department The Council filed a contract grievance in response to a city-wide plan applicable to all city agencies that reduced the number of parking permits issued to municipal workers for parking on… [read post]
3 Apr 2018, 11:36 am
The day before the Second Circuit shut down reverse-Avila claims with its decision in Taylor v. [read post]
29 Mar 2013, 12:46 pm
Similarly, in Port Washington Union Free School Dist. v Port Washington Teachers Assn., 268 AD2d 523, the Appellate Division ruled that a CBA provision that allowed a teacher to be absent with pay on "any of the religious holidays designated by the New York State Commissioner of Education" without charging his or her absence to leave credits violated the Establishment Clause of the First Amendment of the United States Constitution. [read post]
15 Oct 2020, 12:16 pm
In United States v. [read post]
8 Sep 2017, 4:00 am
* The decision, City of Schenectady v New York State Pub. [read post]
18 Dec 2018, 3:24 pm
In Taylor v. [read post]
28 Feb 2024, 3:41 pm
ShareThe argument Tuesday in Cantero v. [read post]
12 Dec 2018, 4:00 am
Taylor Law amended to clarify an employee organization's duty of fair representation of non-members in a collective bargaining unit Section 209-a.2 of the Civil Service LawIn Janus v American Federation of State, County, and Municipal Employees, Council 31, et al, 138 SCt 2448, the Supreme Court held that "States and public-sector unions may no longer extract agency fees from nonconsenting employees. [read post]
