Matter of the Board of Education of the City School District of the City of Yonkers v. Yonkers Federation of Teachers, 40 N.Y.2d 268 (1976)
r
r
A provision in a collective bargaining agreement guaranteeing public employees job security for a reasonable period is not per se against public policy and is a permissible subject of voluntary negotiation and arbitration.
r
r
Summary
r
The Yonkers City Board of Education, facing financial difficulties, laid off teachers despite a “job security” clause in their collective bargaining agreement with the Yonkers Federation of Teachers. The union demanded arbitration, but the Board sought a stay, arguing the clause was against public policy. The New York Court of Appeals reversed the lower courts, holding that public employers can voluntarily bargain and agree to arbitrate disputes about job security, absent explicit statutory or decisional prohibitions, or restrictive public policy. The court emphasized the importance of collective bargaining in maintaining stable public employment relationships and the limited duration of the job security clause at issue.
r
r
Facts
r
In November 1974, the Yonkers City Board of Education and the Yonkers Federation of Teachers entered into a collective bargaining agreement effective from July 1, 1974, to June 30, 1977. The agreement included a clause (Article VIII, Section A) stating that no bargaining unit member would be terminated due to budgetary reasons or program abolition, but only for unsatisfactory job performance under the Tenure Law. In October 1975, due to budget cuts, the Board decided to lay off approximately 50 employees, including teachers. The union filed a grievance and demanded arbitration.
r
r
Procedural History
r
The Board of Education sought a stay of arbitration in Supreme Court, which was granted, declaring the job security provision invalid. The Appellate Division affirmed. The Teachers’ Union appealed to the New York Court of Appeals.
r
r
Issue(s)
r
Whether a public employer is prohibited from voluntarily bargaining about job security and agreeing to submit disputes about job security to arbitration.
r
r
Holding
r
No, because there is no statute, controlling decisional law, or restrictive public policy that prohibits a public employer from voluntarily agreeing to a job security clause for a reasonable duration; therefore, the Board of Education was free to bargain voluntarily and to agree to arbitration of prospective disputes about job security.
r
r
Court’s Reasoning
r
The Court of Appeals emphasized the public policy favoring collective bargaining in resolving disputes between government and its employees, citing Section 200 of the Civil Service Law (Taylor Law). The Court noted that public employers have broad power to voluntarily negotiate all matters in controversy, even those not strictly “terms and conditions of employment,” as long as there are no “plain and clear” prohibitions in statute, decisional law, or restrictive public policy. The court distinguished Matter of Lippmann v. Delaney, stating it was incorrectly decided. The court cited Matter of Susquehanna Val. Cent. School Dist. at Conklin [Susquehanna Val. Teachers’ Assn.], as dispositive. The Financial Emergency Act for the City of Yonkers, passed after the collective bargaining agreement was made, did not evince a policy favoring the abrogation of collective agreements. The court stated, “[n]othing contained in this act shall be construed to impair the right of employees to organize or to bargain collectively.” The court emphasized the limited duration of the job security clause, and that it was negotiated before the financial emergency. While the court acknowledged that job security clauses cannot be a “suicide pact” for a municipality, the agreement was enforceable in this case. The court held that it is for the arbitrators to decide the merits of the dispute and to fashion an appropriate remedy, considering the city’s financial condition. “A job security clause is useless if the public employer is free to disregard it when it is first needed.”