Labor & Employment Law

Broad contract grievance procedure bars litigating employee?s complaint in court

Broad contract grievance procedure bars litigating employee?s complaint in court
Mitchell v New York City Tr. Auth., 44 A.D.3d 543

James Mitchell sued the New York City Transit Authority alleging that the Authority had refused to pay him for sick time and refused to proceed with hearings on his claims because he arrived for the hearings either late or not in uniform. He also complained that the Authority refused to comply with an order to pay him for lost wages and to restore vacation time charged to his leave accruals after he sustained a job-related injury. In addition, Mitchell contended that Authority has engaged in ?a pattern of harassment in an attempt to drive him out of its workforce on account of a chronic medical condition even though he is nonetheless able to carry out his responsibilities with minimal accommodations.?

Supreme Court rejected the Authority?s motion to dismiss Mitchell?s lawsuit. The Appellate Division reversed the Supreme Court?s ruling, holding that Mitchell?s complaints constitute ?contract interpretation grievances? that must be arbitrated in accordance with provisions set out in the controlling Collective Bargaining Agreement [CBA] and ?thus are not properly before the court.?

The decision notes that Mitchell is an employee of the Authority and is represented by the Transport Workers Union of America, Local 100 (the Union). The court said that both a detailed disciplinary procedures and a contract interpretation grievance procedure are contained in the CBA for the purpose of resolving disputes arising under the Agreement and included multiple steps that culminate in final and binding arbitration.

As, said the court, the CBA defines a ?contract interpretation grievance? as ?a complaint on the part of any covered employee or group of such employees that there has been on the part of Management, non-compliance with or a misinterpretation of any of the provisions of this Agreement or of any written rule, or policy of the Authority governing or affecting its employees,? claims that are contract interpretation grievances, such as those presented by Mitchell, must be resolved through the contract grievance procedure rather than by the courts.

Full post as published by New York Public Personnel Law on May 07, 2008 (boomark / email).