Vestal Employees Association v. Public Employment Relations Board, 94 N.Y.2d 410 (2000)
r
r
A school district’s decision to subcontract printing services to a Board of Cooperative Educational Services (BOCES) is not subject to mandatory collective bargaining under the Taylor Law.
r
r
Summary
r
This case addresses whether a school district must collectively bargain with its employees’ union before subcontracting printing services to a BOCES. The Vestal Central School District subcontracted its printing services to Broome-Tioga BOCES, affecting one employee who consented to the transfer. The Vestal Employees Association filed an improper practice charge. The Court of Appeals held that Education Law § 1950 (4)(d) authorizes such subcontracting without mandatory collective bargaining, reversing the Appellate Division’s order and dismissing the petition. The Court reasoned that the statutory scheme demonstrates a legislative intent to exempt these decisions from mandatory bargaining, similar to its holding in Matter of Webster Cent. School Dist. v Public Empl. Relations Bd.
r
r
Facts
r
In September 1995, the Vestal Central School District subcontracted its printing services to the Broome-Tioga BOCES. This affected one district employee, who consented to the transfer and continued performing the same duties at the same location. After the transfer, the employee became a member of the BOCES Support Services Association.
r
r
Procedural History
r
r
The Vestal Employees Association filed an improper practice charge with the Public Employment Relations Board (PERB). An Administrative Law Judge (ALJ) initially held that the District committed an improper practice. PERB reversed the ALJ’s decision and dismissed the charge. The Employees Association then commenced a CPLR article 78 proceeding challenging PERB’s determination. Supreme Court upheld PERB’s decision. The Appellate Division reversed, annulling PERB’s determination. The Court of Appeals then reversed the Appellate Division’s order and dismissed the petition.r
r
r
Issue(s)
r
r
Whether Education Law § 1950 (4)(d) authorizes a school district to subcontract its printing services to a BOCES without engaging in collective bargaining with its employees’ union.r
r
r
Holding
r
r
Yes, because the statutory scheme, including Education Law § 1950 (4)(d) and related provisions, demonstrates a legislative intent to exempt a school district’s decision to subcontract printing services to a BOCES from mandatory collective bargaining.r
r
r
Court’s Reasoning
r
r
The Court began by examining whether