Arbitration decision upheld regarding Transit Authority employee's termination

Matter of Transport Workers Union, Local 100 v New York City Transit Authority

An Article 75 appeal was brought about to vacate an arbitration award. The New York City Transit Authority then appeals from an order of the Supreme Court granting the petition and directing the reinstatement of Edward Miller to the position of track specialist with back pay and lost benefits.

Since there is a policy supporting arbitration and discouraging judicial interference with either the process or its outcome in this State, an arbitration award should not be vacated unless it violates a strong public policy, is irrational, or clearly exceeds the limitations of an arbitrator’s power. In this case, the arbitrator did not exceed her power nor was the award irrational. The award was consistent with the evidence provided, the federal regulations governing drug testing for transit employees, and the collective bargaining agreement between the parties.

Accordingly, the Court reversed the order, with costs, denied the petition to vacate the arbitration award, and dismissed the proceeding.

Matter of Transport Workers Union Local 100, v New York City Tr. Auth. (2008 NY Slip Op 09807)

Article 75 petition to vacate arbitration in favor of PBA denied

Matter of Town of Wallkill Police Benevolent Association

This Article 75 proceeding was brought about to vacate an arbitration decision that the Town of Wallkill violated the collective bargaining agreement. The issue at hand was whether the Town of Wallkill violated the collective bargaining agreement between it and the Town of Wallkill Police Benevolent Association (PBA) by placing a Town police officer on modified duty and not permitting him to serve overtime following an incident in December 2003. The arbitrator found that the collective bargaining agreement was violated and ordered the police officer be returned to full duty and be compensated for the overtime he was denied. The Supreme Court agreed that vacating the arbitration award would not be warranted since it was not irrational nor did it violate a strong public policy.

Accordingly, the Court ordered the judgment affirmed, with costs.