CWA 1180 - News

High court strips Weingarten rights for public employees

March 2007

A February 21 New York State Court of Appeals decision stripped public

RIGHT TO UNION REPRESENTATION

Civil Service Law section 75 reads:
“An employee who at the time of questioning appears to be a potential subject of disciplinary
action shall have a right to representation by his or her certified or recognized employee organization under article 14 of this chapter and shall be notified in advance, in writing, of such a right….If representation is requested a reasonable period of time shall be afforded to obtain such representation. If the employee is unable to obtain representation within a reasonable period of time the employer has the right to then question the employee. A hearing officer under this section shall have the power to find that a reasonable period of time was or was not afforded. In the event the hearing officer finds that a reasonable period of time was not afforded then any and all statements obtained from said questioning as well as any evidence or information obtained as a result of said questioning shall be excluded.”

HOW TO REQUEST UNION REPRESENTATION

If you are called to a meeting with management, read the following:
If this interview could in any way lead to my being disciplined or affect my personal working conditions, I respectfully request that my shop steward or another union representative be present at this meeting. Until my represent-ative arrives, I choose not to participate in this discussion.

THE STATEMENT ABOVE COULD SAVE YOUR JOB!

employees of rights previously protected under the state’s Taylor Law. By a 4-2 decision, the state’s highest court reversed a lower court ruling that employees have the right to union representation when facing any meeting with a supervisor that could result in disciplinary action.

These so-called “Weingarten rights” took their name from a 1975 U.S. Supreme Court decision holding that the National Labor Relations Act granted such rights to private sector workers. Until the Appeals Court ruling, it was understood that the same rights applied to public employees in New York State. The case arose when a New York City Transit employee was charged with misconduct and asked to write a statement of his version of events. Together with his union steward, he submitted a statement that management found unacceptable. Managers then required the worker to attend a closed-door session in the superintendent’s office and barred his
steward and three other union officials from participating. The worker’s union, Transport Workers Union Local 100, filed an improper practice complaint against the employer, contending that it had “interfered with, coerced, or restrained” the worker from participating in his union.

As a practical matter, the court’s decision means that a public sector employer has not committed an improper practice when it refuses to permit union reps to accompany members in disciplinary meetings. However, Section 75 of the Civil Service Law does confer the right to union representation; that section says if union reps aren’t present, any information gleaned at the meeting can’t be used in disciplinary proceedings. (See the exact language, and how to use it, in the box at right.) Chief Justice Judith Kaye, in a strong dissent, expressed her hope that the state legislature would move quickly to restore Weingarten rights.

In the meantime, Local 1180 is reviewing all our public sector contracts to determine whether we should bargain for changes in the contract language to guarantee these rights. The local will also ask AFSCME District Council 37, which negotiates work terms for all civil servants through the Citywide Contract, to push for stronger language there. “While it may no longer be an
improper practice to deny such representation,” says Local 1180 second
vice president Bill Henning, “we urge all members covered under Section 75 to assert their right to have a shop steward present at any meeting that might result in discipline. If you don’t ask for a steward, you run the risk of not being able to challenge it later.”

Back to News & Views page