From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

In re the Arbitration between Board of Education of the Armonk Central School District & Byram Hills Teachers Ass'n

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
Aug 23, 1982
89 A.D.2d 916 (N.Y. App. Div. 1982)

Opinion

August 23, 1982


In a proceeding pursuant to CPLR 7503 (subd [b]) to stay arbitration, the Byram Hills Teachers Association appeals from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Westchester County (Ferraro, J.), entered June 24, 1981, which granted the application. Judgment reversed, on the law, without costs or disbursements, and the application for a stay of arbitration is denied. The parties are directed to proceed to arbitration. In September of 1977, Myra Glaser, a member of the Byram Hills Teachers Association, commenced a three-year probationary appointment as a learning disabilities teacher in the Armonk Central School District. The probationary appointment, by its terms, was to end on June 30, 1980, at which time Ms. Glaser was eligible for tenure. At its meeting of May 6, 1980, the Board of Education of the Armonk Central School District "voted not to appoint Glaser on tenure." On May 13, 1980, Ms. Glaser's attorney, pursuant to subdivision (b) of section 3031 Educ. of the Education Law, wrote to the board requesting a statement of reasons for its preliminary action in voting to deny tenure. A statement of reasons was provided. At a meeting on June 16, 1980, the board reviewed the matter and again voted not to grant tenure. Ms. Glaser's probationary term expired and her services were terminated on June 30, 1980. Ms. Glaser filed a formal grievance, pursuant to the collective bargaining agreement between the board and the teachers association, alleging that in denying her tenure, the board improperly considered certain parents' complaints concerning her performance, which complaints were not discussed with her, in violation of Appendix E of the collective bargaining agreement. At the second stage of the grievance procedure, the association, on behalf of Ms. Glaser, amended the complaint to allege that: "On June 16, 1980, the Board of Education denied tenure to Mrs. Myra Glaser — stating reasons in such a manner as to demonstrate prima facie violations of article[s] V, H.1; XI, D and J * * * XI, -A, p. 18". The remedies sought included, inter alia, a demand that Ms. Glaser be reinstated as a teacher of learning disabilities. After failing to resolve this complaint at the informal stages of the grievance procedure, the association, in accordance with the contract provisions, filed a demand for arbitration, setting forth its complaint, as amended at the second stage of the grievance procedure, and seeking the same remedies. The board then applied, pursuant to CPLR 7503 (subd [b]), for a permanent stay of arbitration. Special Term granted the petition and stayed the arbitration. We reverse. The association's actual complaint involves the board's failure to comply with various contract provisions, a matter properly subject to arbitration pursuant to the parties' collective bargaining agreement (see Matter of Board of Educ. of Deer Park Teachers Assn., 50 N.Y.2d 1011; Matter of Board of Educ. [ Middle Is. Teachers Assn.], 50 N.Y.2d 426; Board of Educ. v Bellmore-Merrick United Secondary Teachers, 39 N.Y.2d 167, mot to resettle order den 39 N.Y.2d 1032; Matter of Vestal Cent. Schools [ Vestal Teachers Assn.], 60 A.D.2d 720, (affd 46 N.Y.2d 746 on mem at App. Div.). Whether the provisions of the contract, as set forth in the association's demand for arbitration, support the grievance is an issue we need not consider in determining the question of arbitrability (see CPLR 7501; Matter of Board of Educ. v. Deer Park Teachers Assn., supra; Board of Educ. v. Bellmore-Merrick United Secondary Teachers, supra). Further, the fact that the relief requested includes "reinstatement" of Ms. Glaser "does not, standing alone, justify judicial interference with the arbitration process at this stage" (see Matter of Port Washington Union Free School Dist. v. Port Washington Teachers Assn., 45 N.Y.2d 411, 418; see, also, Board of Educ. v Bellmore-Merrick United Secondary Teachers, supra). Finally, the arbitration proceeding is not barred "by limitation under subdivision (b) of section 7502" (see CPLR 7503, subd [b]; see, also, Matter of Paver Wildfoerster [ Catholic High School Assn.], 38 N.Y.2d 669). Titone, J.P., Lazer, Brown and Niehoff, JJ., concur.


Summaries of

In re the Arbitration between Board of Education of the Armonk Central School District & Byram Hills Teachers Ass'n

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
Aug 23, 1982
89 A.D.2d 916 (N.Y. App. Div. 1982)
Case details for

In re the Arbitration between Board of Education of the Armonk Central School District & Byram Hills Teachers Ass'n

Case Details

Full title:In the Matter of the Arbitration between BOARD OF EDUCATION OF THE ARMONK…

Court:Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department

Date published: Aug 23, 1982

Citations

89 A.D.2d 916 (N.Y. App. Div. 1982)

Citing Cases

University of Hawaii Professional Assembly v. University of Hawaii

We agree with those courts which favor arbitration in the area of promotion and tenure of public employees in…

Matter of Bd. of Coop. v. Nassau Boces Cent

eding requesting certain statutory and regulatory rights on behalf of duly designated adult educator…