Acting Supt. of Schools of Liverpool Cent. School Dist. v. United Liverpool Faculty Assn., 42 N.Y.2d 509 (1977)
Even though a school board has the exclusive right to deny tenure, a bargained-for right to specific procedural steps preliminary to the tenure determination is enforceable through arbitration and cannot be considered a nullity.
Summary
This case addresses whether a probationary teacher, denied tenure for alleged professional incompetence outside the classroom, can arbitrate claims of breached contract evaluation procedures related to classroom performance. The Court of Appeals held that arbitration is permissible. While tenure decisions are not subject to negotiation, performance evaluations leading to tenure are. The school board’s fear that arbitration would undermine its tenure denial authority is not a valid reason to stay arbitration, as the bargained-for procedural steps are distinct from the tenure decision itself. The Court emphasized that the school board must adhere to the agreement it negotiated, and failure to do so is a valid grievance subject to arbitration.
Facts
A probationary teacher was denied tenure, allegedly due to professional incompetence in non-classroom duties. The teacher’s union sought arbitration, claiming that the school district had breached contractual evaluation procedures, particularly those related to the teacher’s classroom performance. The school district sought to stay the arbitration, arguing that the tenure decision was based on non-arbitrable reasons unrelated to classroom performance.
Procedural History
The lower court initially ordered arbitration. The Appellate Division reversed, staying the arbitration, reasoning that the tenure denial was based on factors independent of classroom performance. The Court of Appeals then reversed the Appellate Division’s decision, reinstating the order to proceed with arbitration.
Issue(s)
Whether a probationary teacher, denied tenure for reasons of alleged professional incompetence in the performance of non-classroom duties, has a right to arbitrate alleged breaches of contract evaluation procedures specifically referable to classroom performance.
Holding
Yes, because even though the decision to grant tenure is not within the permissible area of negotiation, the performance of a probationary teacher preliminary to a tenure determination is arbitrable.
Court’s Reasoning
The Court of Appeals reasoned that while the decision to grant tenure is not subject to arbitration, the procedures used to evaluate a teacher’s performance leading up to the tenure decision are. The Court applied the two-tier analysis from Matter of Acting Supt. of Schools of Liverpool Cent. School Dist. (United Liverpool Faculty Assn.), finding that arbitration was authorized under the Taylor Law and that the subject matter was encompassed by the arbitration clause. The Court rejected the school board’s argument that arbitration should be stayed because it might interfere with the board’s authority to deny tenure. The Court emphasized that bargained-for procedural rights preliminary to a tenure determination cannot be considered meaningless. The court stated, “Even though the board has the right to deny tenure to a probationary teacher without an explanation, the bargained for right to procedural steps preliminary to the tenure determination cannot be considered a nullity.” The Court further noted, “The courts should not, by staying arbitration, “foreclose any remedy for alleged violations of procedural guarantees as well as substantive rights said to be afforded under the contract””. The Court held that the school board was bound by its agreement and that the failure to perform as required was a valid grievance subject to arbitration. The procedural aspects of the contract are discrete from the denial of tenure and should be treated separately.