Board of Education of the City School District v. New York State Public Employment Relations Board, 75 N.Y.2d 660 (1990)

While public employers have a strong interest in detecting and deterring corruption, employee financial disclosure requirements beyond those mandated by statute are terms and conditions of employment subject to mandatory collective bargaining under the Taylor Law, unless the legislature explicitly prohibits such bargaining.

Summary

This case concerns whether New York City’s Board of Education can unilaterally impose financial disclosure requirements on its employees or whether such requirements are subject to collective bargaining under New York’s Taylor Law. Following improprieties by a former Chancellor, the Board adopted regulations requiring certain employees to submit detailed financial disclosure statements and undergo background investigations. Several unions filed charges with the Public Employment Relations Board (PERB), arguing that these requirements were terms and conditions of employment subject to mandatory negotiation. PERB ruled that the Board had no duty to negotiate the specific financial reporting requirements set out in Education Law § 2590-g (13) but must negotiate the disclosure of additional information under section 2590-g (14). The Court of Appeals reversed the Appellate Division’s ruling that public policy barred all negotiation on the subject, holding that unless explicitly prohibited by statute, terms and conditions of employment are subject to mandatory negotiation.

Facts

In 1975, the New York Legislature amended Education Law § 2590-g, granting the New York City School Board the authority to obtain certain financial disclosures from its employees. In 1984, the Board, prompted by a former Chancellor’s improprieties, adopted regulations requiring designated employees to submit annual financial disclosure statements and undergo background investigations. The regulations included consent to verification of tax and credit information, disclosure of former employers’ records, health information, disclosure of certain political party associations, consent to be fingerprinted, and an agreement to hold the City harmless for all damages arising out of the investigation, save for those resulting from a breach of confidentiality. Non-compliance could lead to termination or denial of appointment, assignment, or promotion.

Procedural History

Several unions filed improper employer practice charges with PERB, arguing that the disclosure requirements were