IDCWLaw has extensive experience challenging municipal decisions to take away economic benefits from union members without bargaining.  This month, August 2022, after extensive arguments from Mr. Castro, the New York City Office of Collective Bargaining ordered the City of New York to reimburse all affected employees for their mileage and tolls because the City unilaterally took away from union members their take-home vehicles without first negotiating with the union.  In UFADBA v. City of New York, the union initially challenged the City’s decision to take away the vehicles. And, about one year ago OCB held the City improperly took away those vehicles. However, when it came to the remedy, the City, in negotiations, believed the only individuals who were entitled to any compensation were those who actually had the vehicles, not anyone else who would have received the vehicles but for the City’s decision to take them away. They also argued that benefit ended when the contract expired. Mr. Castro refused to give up on those other employees, and took the matter back to OCB to argue the City was again wrong, this time as to who was entitled to compensation and for how long.  In August 2022, OCB agreed with all our arguments, and ordered the City to pay anyone who had or would have had the vehicles but for the City’s decision, that the City pay them for every mile they drove or will drive until the union and City come to an agreement otherwise, and to reimburse their tolls in the City.  We are thrilled that the City’s disregard for the rights of union-represented members were vindicated in this case.

IDCWLaw has extensive experience with civil service disciplinary matters, up to and including termination.  For decades we have represented civil servants in disciplinary hearings and in appeals of disciplinary decisions before the Civil Service Commission and in State Supreme Court.  Just this month, August 2022, IDCWLaw Partner Liam L. Castro, Esq. convinced a Suffolk County Supreme Court Justice to overturn the Town of Islip’s decision to terminate an employee, in McMaster v. Town of Islip.   There, after a hearing, the Town terminated the employee for excessive absenteeism.  On appeal to the Supreme Court, Mr. Castro successfully argued that the Town’s decision was excessive. He also successfully argued the Town ignored the fact that a supervisor testified other employees had similar attendance records but were not disciplined.  He explained the Town did not give the employee a fair chance at the hearing, in the end. Specifically, they initially fired the employee, after a hearing, without even providing him a copy of the disciplinary Report and Recommendation. Mr. Castro convinced the Town that was plainly improper, which resulted in the initial rescission of the termination to give the employee and Mr. Castro a chance to respond to the Report and Recommendation.  The Town even had to recuse the Department’s commissioner from the final decision because of this initial decision to terminate the employee improperly But, in the end, they fired the employee anyway. Mr. Castro argued that the Town was heavy handed and did not give the employee a fair due process hearing.  As a result, the Court ordered him reinstated and remanded the matter back to the Town for a more appropriate penalty.

Congratulations to President Mario Bucceri and the Executive Board of the United Transit Leadership Organization on their re-election by acclamation after no opposition candidates were nominated at the union nomination meeting held August 3rd.

Howard Wien provided election counsel to UTLO.

In March 2022 two union officials requested time off from their midnight shift to attend union meetings beginning during regular business hours, after 8am. The County denied that request because the union meetings did not start until after the officials’ shifts ended. We very quickly went to the Supreme Court, Ulster County and convinced a Judge to prohibit the County from denying union officials’ from using County-paid release time until the parties go to arbitration to resolve the dispute.

At arbitration, the County argued the union meetings did not start until after the officials’ shifts ended and, in any event, the contract did not require them to release union officials from their shift before the union meetings occurred. They also argued releasing the officials would impact on staffing, which is a managerial prerogative, particularly when their shifts did not occur during the Union business.

We are happy to report that, in addition to convincing a judge to prevent them, pending arbitration, from denying union release time, the arbitrator agreed with the Union and sustained the grievance. She held there was a longstanding practice consistent with the Union’s position, and rejected the County’s staffing arguments to the contrary. 

IDC&W congratulates General President Shaam Somwaru and the Board of the Railway Independent Transit Union and the union members employed by the Port Authority Trans Hudson Railroad (PATH) on the overwhelming ratification of a new collective bargaining agreement. In particular, the union is commended for successfully breaking a decade long deadlock, shoring up both the health and pension benefits and increasing salaries by over 30%.

IDC&W Partner Howard Wien served as counsel to the RITU in the negotiations with PATH.