DC37, L. 2906, 4OCB2d62(BCB2011) (IP) (Docket No. SummaryofDecision: TheUnionsallegedthatDEPrefusedtobargaininviolation of NYCCBL§ 12-306(a)(1) and (4) over employment forCaptainswhenDEPdecidedtoceasecontracting-outtheshipment of sludgetoafacilityinNewJerseyandinsteaduseDEPboats, DEPCaptainstoobtainanadditional pilot NewJerseyfacility. DEParguedthat thePetitionisuntimelyandthat right torequireitsCaptainstoacquireadditional that thePetitionwastimelyandthat, onthesefacts, anewqualificationforcontinuedemployment DEPdecidedtouseits ownboats andpersonnel Jersey facility and, thus, constituted employment as to such employees. (Official decisionfollows.) OFFICEOFCOLLECTIVEBARGAINING BOARDOFCOLLECTIVEBARGAINING IntheMatteroftheImproperPracticeProceeding -between-DISTRICTCOUNCIL37, anditsaffiliate, Petitioners, -and-THENEWYORKCITYOFFICEOFLABORRELATIONSandTHENEW YORKCITYDEPARTMENTOFENVIRONMENTALPROTECTION, Respondents. DECISIONANDORDER OnJune 1, 2010, District Council 37,~AFSCME, Local 2906(“Local 2906”) (collectively, the“Unions”), against theNewYorkCityOfficeofLaborRelations(“OLR”) BCB-2863-lO). a unilateral changeina conditionof whichrequired licensefor thewaterssurroundingthe DEPhasa pilot licenses. TheBoardfound theadditional pilotlicensewas forCaptainswhowerehiredbefore to shipthesludgetotheNew a unilateral change in a condition of Accordingly, the Petition was granted. AFSCME, AFL-CIO, LOCAL2906, AFL-CIO(“DC37”), andits affiliate, filedaVerifiedImproperPracticePetition andtheNewYorkCityDepartment
4OCB2d62(BCB2011) of Environmental Protection (“DEP”) (collectively, 12-306(a)(1) and (4) of the NewYork City CollectiveBargaining AdministrativeCode, Title12, Chapter 3) (“NYCCBL”). tobargainover a unilateral changeina conditionof BoatswhenDEPdecidedtoceaseusingacontract Valley Sewage Commission (“PVSC”) and decided personnel whichrequiredCaptainstoobtainanadditional thePVSC.’ TheCityarguesthat thePetitionisuntimelyandthat Captainstoacquireadditional pilot licenses. TheBoardfindsthat onthesefacts, therequirement foranadditional pilot createdanewqualificationfor continuedemployment DEPdecidedtouse its ownboats and personnel constitutedaunilateral changeinaconditionofemployment wegrant thePetition. BACKGROUND Local 2906representsDEPemployeesinthetitleofCaptain(SludgeBoat). areDEPvesselsthat transport sludgefromwastewatertreatmentfacilities. forCaptain(SludgeBoat) listsas atask“[plilotsthesludgevessel” foremployment, that all Captains“obtainavalidFirst 1 TheImproper PracticePetitionalso alleges impact oftheintroductionofanew, largersludgeboat. onSeptember28, 2011, and, thus, isnolongerbeforetheBoard.2 the “City”) alleging that DEPviolated§ Law(City of NewYork TheUnionsclaimthat theCityrefused employment for Captains of DEPSludge bargeservicetosendsludgetothePassaic instead to use DEP’s own vessels and pilot licenseforthewaterssurrounding DEPhas aright torequireits thePetitionistimelyandthat, licenseforthewaterssurroundingthePVSC for thoseCaptainswhowerehiredbefore to ship the sludgetothePVSCand, thus, astosuchemployees. Accordingly, Sludgeboats Thejobspecification andrequires, as aqualification ClassPilot’sLicenseonall waterssailedby that DEPrefused to bargainover thepractical That issuewaswithdrawnbytheUnions
4OCB2d62(BCB2011) [DEP’s] sludge boats withina year followingappointment.” Classifications and Compensation for the Department (“DCAS”) submittedanaffidavit statingthat DCASinterpretstheabovequalificationtomeanthat Captainshave“anongoingobligationtoobtainalicensetosail (Ans., Ex. 5, ¶4). Apilot licenseiscommonlyreferredtoas Amongthelocationsthat DEPsent sludgewas contract bargeservice, not itsownsludgeboatsor preparingtobringintouse a newsludgeboat, Captainstodeliver sludgetothePVSC. OnApril (“BD09-04”) toCaptains, stating, inpertinent part: The [DEP] has beensendingsludgeto now. . . . Presentlyacontract bargeserviceisused, onusingourownvesselstogothere. Takingavessel toPVSCrequirespilotagethat not have.. .. Itwasconcludedthat pilotagefor waterstheyaredirectedtooperateinbaseduponthe followinglanguageinthejobspecification: obtaina validFirst Class Pilots [DEP’s] sludgeboatswithinayear Inorder tofacilitatetransitioningtoPVSCwithCaptainsthat havepilotage, a contractedharbor will behiredtogowiththeCaptainsonthesetrips. After completingtherequirednumber apply for and take the necessary endorsementstopilot thesludgevesselstothePVSCfacility. (Pet., Ex. B). AcquiringpilotageforthewaterssurroundingthePVSCtakesat two examinations and 12 round trips. In a 3 (Pet, Ex. A). TheDirector of of Citywide Administrative Services onall waterssailedbythe[DEP].” “pilotage.” thePVSC, andprior to2009it useda Captains, todoso. In2009, whenDEPwas DEPdecidedtouse its ownsludgeboats and 2, 2009, DEPissuedBureauDirective09-04 [PVSC] for several years but weintend someCaptainsmay theCaptainsarerequiredtoget “all candidates must Licenseon all waters sailedby followingappointment.” don’t pilot withappropriatepilotage of trips, theCaptains must tests to obtain pilotage least 46hours, including letter dated May 21, 2009, DC37 requested
4OCB2d62(BCB2O11) bargaining, stating“that therequirement toobtainnewpilotageforthewatersaround[PVSC] unilateral change inthe conditions of employment Captainscurrentlyperform.” (Pet., Ex. C). OnFebruary 1, 2010, DEPissuedadirectivetoCaptainsstating, accordancewiththejobdescription.. . all Captainsmust onall waterssailedby[DEP’s] sludgeboatswithinayear travel to [PVSC]. Youaredirectedtoobtainthis letter.” (Pet., Ex. D). TheUnionsandOLRmet reiterateditspositionthat obtainingpilotageforwaterssurroundingthePVSCwascoveredunder theCaptains’ jobspecificationandthat it was not rather, arequiredqualificationfor thetitle. OnMay26, date, noCaptainshiredprior to2010havebeenrequiredtoobtainthe[PVSC] again the Unionobjects to DEFs unilateral implementationof employees.” (Pet, Ex. E). DC37requestedthat bargainoverthenewpilotagerequirement. OnJune 1, 2010, the Unions filedthe Respondents violated the NYCCBL by refusing requirement, a unilateral changeintheconditionsof additional pilotagerequirement, stemmingfromDEP’s personnel toshipsludgetothePVSC. TheUnionsrequest tobargainover theadditional pilotagerequirement, order any other relief it deemsjust andproper. 4 isa and has a practical impact on the duties inpertinent part: “in obtainavalidFirst ClassPilot’sLicense followingappointment. Thisincludes pilotagewithinoneyear of thedateof this onMarch8, 2010, todiscussthisissue. OLR anewtermor conditionof employment but, 2010, DC37wrotetoOLRthat “[tjo pilotage. Once this requirement for current DEPrescindtheFebruary1, 2010directiveand instant Petition, seeking a declarationthat the to bargain over the additional pilotage employment for Captainshiredbeforethe decisiontouseitsownsludgeboatsand that theBoardordertheRespondents post appropriatenotices; andthat theBoard InJuly2011, DEP~brought charges against a
4OCB2d62(BCB2O11) Captain, but OLRhasrepresentedtotheTrial Examiner chargesinabeyanceuntil theresolutionoftheinstant POSITIONSOFTIlEPARTIES Unions’ Position TheUnionsarguethat thePetitionistimelybecauseit February 1, 2010directive, whichis theearliest licenseforthewaterssurroundingthePVSCcameintoeffect. 2, 2009, didnot start thestatuteoflimitationsperiodbecauseBD09-04didnot pilotagerequirement wouldcomeintoeffect. Additionally, several timesthereafter totryandresolvethis 2010, whichiswithinfourmonthsofthefilingoftheinstant TheUnionsarguethat, byrequiringbargainingunit waterssurroundingthePVSC, DEPmadeaunilateral Captainshiredprior totherequirement toobtainthisnewpilotage. thisnewrequirement, theRespondentshaveviolatedNYCCBL§ management hasarighttoestablishqualificationsforemployment, employees areamandatorysubject ofbargaining. Captainstosail thewaterssurroundingthePVSC; TheUnions arguethat Labor Law§ 220does Unions’ argument that therehasbeenaunilateral existsseparateandapart fromtheanydemandfor 5 that DEPwill holdproceedingsonthose ImproperPracticePetition. wasfiledwithinfourmonthsofthe datethat therequirement of obtaininga pilot TheissuanceofBD09-04onApril indicatewhenthe it is undisputedthat thepartiesmet matter, withthelast meetingbeingonMarch8, Petition. memberstoobtainpilotagefor the changeintheconditionsofemployment for Byrefusingtobargainover 12-306(a)(1) and(4). While newqualificationsforexisting Prior toApril 2009, DEPdidnot requireits thus, pilotageforthat areaisanewrequirement. not divest theBoardofjurisdictionbecausethe changeinatermandconditionof employment wages andsupplements. Further, thismatter
4OCB2d62(BCB2011) shouldnot bedeferredtoarbitration. City’sPosition TheCityarguesthat theinstant Petitionisuntimely. 2009that Captainswholackedpilotagefor waters instant Petitionwas filedinJune2010, after thefour Further, theCityarguesthat theUnionisseekingadditional lacksjurisdictionover wages andsupplements LaborLaw§ 220. Thus, thePetitionshouldbedismissed. The City argues that the Unions have 12-306(a)(4). ThejobspecificationforCaptainsstatesthat waterssailedbyDEP. Thus, thereis anobligationuponall waters surroundingthe PVSC, and DEP’s requiringsuch managerial authority under NYCCBL§ 12~307(b). 12-306(a)(4), thereisnoderivativeviolationofNYCCBL§12-306(a)(1). Finally, theCityarguesthat thismatter parties’ collectivebargainingagreement. Thus, DISCUSSION We address timeliness as a thresholdmatter. 2009); OSA, 1 OCB2d45, at 13(BCB2008). Animproperpracticecharge“mustbefilednolater thenfourmonthsfromthetimethedisputedactionoccurredor or shouldhaveknownof saidoccurrence.” Raby, 6 TheUnionswereinformedinApril surroundingthePVSCmust obtainit. The monthstatuteof limitations hadlapsed. compensation. TheBoard, however, becausetheemployees at issuearecoveredby failedto establish a violationof NYCCBL§ theymust obtainvalidpilotageforall Captainstoobtainpilotagefor the pilotage is a validexercise of its As there is no violationof NYCCBL§ turnsontheapplicationandinterpretationof the thePetitionshouldbedeferredtoarbitration. Nardiello, 2 OCB2d 5, at 27-28 (BCB fromthetimethepetitionerknew 71OCB14, at 9(BCB2003), affd. Matterof
4OCB2d62(BCB2011) Rabyv. OfficeofCollectiveBargaining, IndexNo. seealsoNYCCBL§ 12-306(e); OCBRule§ 1-07(b)(4); TheCityarguesthat thestatuteoflimitationsbegantorunwiththeissuanceofBD09-04 onApril 2, 2009, as BD09-04explicitlystates necessaryteststoobtainpilotageendorsementstopilot (Pet., Ex. B). However, “[wjedonot necessarilyconsider apartyannouncesanintendedchange.” UFT, 4OCB2d2, of limitationsbeginstorun‘after theintendedactionis partyis injuredthereby.” Id. (quotingDC37, 09-04set notimelimit for Captainstoacquiretheadditional PVSC. DEPfirst set adateforwhenthisrequirement directive. Thus, February1, 2010, istheearliest implemented. TheinstantRequest forArbitrationwasfiledfourmonthslaterand, AstotheCity’sargumentregardingLaborLaw§220, jurisdictionbyvirtueofthefact that thetitleCaptain(SludgeBoat) issuebeforeusconcernsanewconditionofemployment, 2 NYCCBL§ 12-306(e) provides, inrelevant part: Apetitionallegingthat apublicemployer. engaginginanimproperpracticeinviolationofthissectionmaybe filedwiththeboardof collectivebargainingwithinfour theoccurrenceoftheactsallegedtoconstitutetheimproperpractice or of thedatethepetitioner knewor occurrence.... OCBRule§ 1-07(b)(4) provides, inrelevant part, monthsoftheallegedviolation.”7 109481/03(Sup. Ct. N.Y. Co. Oct. 8, 2003); Tucker, 51OCB24, at 5(BCB1993).2 that “theCaptainsmust applyfor andtakethe thesludgevesselstothePVSCfacility.” anactiontohaveoccurredonthedate at 9(BCB2011). Rather, the“statute actuallyimplementedandthecharging L. 1508, 79OCB21, at 19(BCB2007)). BD pilotagefor waterssurroundingthe hadtobesatisfiedintheFebruary1, 2010 datethat thechangecanbefoundtohavebeen thus, istimely. wedonotfindourselvesdivestedof isaprevailingratetitle. The not compensation, andthusnot wagesor . . hasengagedinor is monthsof shouldhaveknownof said that “[t]hepetitionmust befiledwithinfour
4OCB2d62(BCB2011) supplements~ SeeLocal 1157, 3 OCB2d40, at divest the Board of its exclusive non-delegablejurisdictionover practices).3 Astothemerits, theissuepresentediswhetherDEP’s shipment of sludgetoPVSCandto start usingits Captains toobtainnewpilotageas a qualificationfor subject of bargaining. It is animproper practiceunder employer“torefusetobargaincollectivelyingoodfaithonmatterswithinthescopeofcollective bargainingwithcertifiedordesignatedrepresentativesofitspublicemployees.” It is well-settled“that a termandconditionof bargaining, but that setting qualifications for mandatorysubject ofbargaining.” UFOA, 71OCB6, Sch. Dist., 13PERB¶3051(1980), affd., 15PERB¶7003, 39OCB24(1987), affd., Matter of Carusov. 1987), affd., 145A.D.2d1004(1st Dept. 1988), leavedenied, IrondequoitBd. ofEducation, 4PERB¶4511, affd. (1971), affd. onothergroundssubnom., WestIrondequoitTeachersAssn. (1974). Tn West Irondequoit Boardof Education, RelationsBoard(“PERB”)definedtheterm“qualifications” employment.” Id., 4PERB¶4511. Suchinitial SeeCWA, L.1182, 57OCB26, at 18-19(BCB1996). ~ IftheCitybelievesthat anydemandmadebytheUnionsinbargainingisimproper, scopeofbargainingpetition.8 14-15(BCB2010) (Labor Law§ 220does not improper public employer decisiontoceasecontractingoutthe ownvessels andpersonnel, thus requiring continuedemployment, is a mandatory NYCCBL§ 12-306(a)(4) for a public employment is a mandatorysubject of initial employment or for promotion is not a at 7(BCB2003) (citingRensselaer City 87A.D.2d718(3dDept. 1982); PBA, Anderson, 138 Misc. 2d719(Sup.Ct. N.Y. Co. 73N.Y.2d709(1989)); seealsoWest inpart~andmodifiedinpart, 4PERB¶3070 v. Helsby, 35N.Y.2d46 the NewYork State Public Employment as “preconditions, not conditionsof qualificationscanincludeappropriatelicensure. it mayfilea
4OCB2d62(BCB2011) However, “wehaveheldthat ‘what is aqualificationinsomesituationsmaybecomea conditionof employment inother circumstances.” (quotingCIR, 37OCB38, at 14(BCB1986)).~ HHCparamedics are certifiedtopracticebybothNewYorkState CommitteeoftheCityofNewYork(“MACCommittee”). all requirementsset forthbytheMACCommittee. paramedics to performthree additional procedures. become capable of performingtheseadditional petitionalleginga unilateral changeina conditionof respondent attributesthenecessityof imposingtheserequirementstotheactionsofathirdparty, i.e., theMACCommittee, this fact does not shieldHHCfromtheobligationtobargainwhen compliancehasadirect effect uponatermor conditionofemployment.” 15; seealsoCIR, 49OCB22, at 17(BCB1992) theemployer arguablymayhavenocontrol, isnot charge.”). Wefoundthat “theimpositionofnewqualificationsforrecertificationonemployees currently holding the job constitutes a unilateral employment.” DC37, 43OCB26, at 14. Thus, theapplicationoftheMACCommittee’snewrequirementsto[paramedics] ~ CIRconcerned whether a newrequirement Corporation (“HHC”) that Chief Residents possess bargainable. Indicta, wenotedthat requiringChief licenserequirementtoobtainthelicensewouldbeamandatorysubject OCB38, at 15; seealsoUFOA, 71OCB6, at 8(explainingCIR). thedutiesofChiefResidents, norwasthenewlicenserequirement toperformtheir duties. That is, thelicenserequirement not alegal requirement. Thus, CIRisdistinguishablefromtheinstant 9 DC37, 43 OCB26, at 11 (BCB 1989) Liketheinstant case, DC37involvedlicensing. andtheMedical Advisory HHCwaslegallyobligatedtofollow InJune1987, theMACCommitteerequired When HHCrequired its paramedics to procedures, DC37 filedan improper practice employment. Wenotedthat “[a]lthough DC37, 43OCB26, at (“theexistenceofanexternal statute, overwhich acompletedefenseagainst arefusal tobargain change in a termand condition of their weorderedHHCtobargainoverthe“effectsof whohadbeenhiredin of the NewYork City Health and Hospitals a NewYork State medical license was Residents whowerehiredbeforethisnew ofnegotiation. SeeId., 37 InCIR, therewasnochangein necessaryforthemtocontinue inCIRreflectedHHC’spreferenceand case.
4OCB2d62(BCB2011) that titlepriortoimplementation” ofthenewrequirements. WesimilarlyfoundinDoctorsCouncil, havetobargainover aspectsofimplementingalegal determinationbytheNewYorkCityConflictsofInterest of Interest Lawset forthinChapter 68 of the applicableto HHC. Theunionallegedthat HHCviolatedtheNYCCBLwhenit revokeditsCodeofEthicsandunilaterallyimplementedChapter68. employer may not insulate its actions fromcompliancewith NYCCBLmerelybydemonstratingthat itsactionswereinaccordwithstatutorylaw,” that “[e]venif management actionis takenpursuant example, bargainingover mandatorysubjects—mayariseunder (citationsomitted). Wethenheldthat: Here, whilethe questionwhether withChapter 68is amatter of lawthat bargaining, weacknowledgethat bargainover proceduresfor implementationof Chapter 68 whichdo not relate application of the law. Althoughthe preciselywhat proceduresit seekstobargain, implementationof Chapter 68 directly termsandconditionsofemployment. right to request bargaining over requirementsofChapter 68totheextent ~ DC37, inadditiontoCIR, 37OCB38, relieduponPERBdecisionsholdingthat violatesthedutytobargainingoodfaithwhenit continuedemployment. SeeId., 43 OCB26, at PERB¶3085(1979) (employermaynotunilaterallyimposeageographical uponemployeeswhowerenothiredsubjecttosucharequirement); York, 13PERB¶3006(1980) (same); CountyofMontgomery, 3077 (1985) (employer may not unilaterallyimpose additiontothepreviouslyrequiredStatedriver’slicense).10 Id. at 15.~ 69OCB31 (BCB2002), that anemployer may obligation. DoctorsCouncil concernedthe Boardthat theNewYorkCityConflicts NewYork City Charter (“Chapter 68”) was unilaterally Afternotingthat “apublic applicable requirements of the westated toanother statute, certainobligations—for ourlaw.” Id., 69OCB31, at 10 HHCemployees must comply is not subject tocollective theUnionmaymakedemandsto therequirementsof to questions of interpretationor Union has not specified it has shownthat the relates to the employees’ Therefore, theUnionhasthe the implementation of the that suchnegotiationsare anemployer unilaterallyimposes a newqualificationfor 12, n. 18 &19(citingCityofAuburnCSEA, 9 residencyrequirement Bd. ofEduc. oftheCityofNew 18PERB¶4589, affd., 18PERB¶ a county driver’s licenserequirement in
4OCB2d62(BCB2011) not inconsistent withthestatute. Id.6 Intheinstant case, wefindthat DEPhastheright promotion, andthat DEP’s requirement that all newCaptainsofsludgeboatshavepilotageforthe waterssurroundingthePVSCisnon-mandatorysubject that priortoFebruary1, 2010, CaptainsemployedbyDEPwerenot the waters surrounding the PVSC. Thus, on requirement is a newqualificationfor continuedemployment effects thereof are bargainable. Accordingly, 12-306(a)(4) by failingto bargain over the subject violatedNYCCBL§12-306(a)(1). Theinstant PetitionisgrantedandDEPisorderedtobargain withtheUnionsover theeffectsof thenewpilotagerequirement PVSConCaptains(SludgeBoat) whohadbeenhiredinthat that requirement onFebruary1, 2010. 6 WenotedinDoctorsCouncil that ourcaselawwas“inlinewiththeCourt ofCityofWatertownv. StateofNewYorkPublicEmployment (2000).” Id., 69OCB31, at 11. Watertownheldthat disability status under General Municipal Law bargainingbut that theproceduresfor challengingthedeterminations, conditionsof employment, hadtobenegotiated. theright to ‘negotiatetheforum—andprocedures relatedtosuchdeterminationsareprocessed.” 11 toset qualificationsforemployment and ofbargaining. However, it isundisputed requiredtohavepilotagefor these facts, we find that the PVSCpilotage as to thoseemployees, andthe wefindthat theCityhas violatedNYCCBL§ prior to implementationand derivatively for thewaterssurroundingthe titleprior totheimplementationof ofAppealsinMatter RelationsBoard, 95 N.Y.2d73 amunicipality’sinitial determinationof § 207(c) was a non-mandatory subject of as theyaffectedtermsand Thus, inWatertown, “theUnionwas afforded associatedtherewith—through whichdisputes Id. (quotingWatertown, 95N.Y.2dat 76).
4OCB2d62(BCB2011) ORDER Pursuant tothepowersvestedintheBoardofCollectiveBargainingbytheNewYorkCity CollectiveBargainingLaw, it ishereby DETERMINED, that the unilateral decision Environmental Protection to require additional employment of employees inthetitleof Captain(SludgeBoat), PassaicValleySewageCommissionwasanewtermandconditionofemployment employedonor beforeFebruary1, 2010, inthetitleof improper publicemployer practice, inviolationof CityCollectiveBargainingLaw; andit istherefore ORDERED, that theImproper PracticePetitionfiledbyDistrict AFL-CIO, andits affiliate, Local 2906, docketedas granted, totheextent that it allegesarefusal tobargainwithrespect decisionbytheNewYorkCityDepartment of obtainadditional pilotagefor thewaterssurroundingthePassaicValleySewageCommissionon individualsemployedonorbeforeFebruary1, 2010, further ORDERED, that the NewYork City bargainingood faithwithDistrict Council 37, unilateral decisiontorequireemployeesinthetitleofCaptain(SludgeBoat) pilotage for the waters surrounding the Passaic employedonorbeforeFebruary1, 2010, inthetitleofCaptain(SludgeBoat); 12 by the NewYork City Department of pilotage, a new qualification for continued for thewaterssurroundingthe forindividuals Captain(SludgeBoat) andconstitutesan Section12-307(a)(1) and(4) oftheNewYork Council 37, AFSCME, BCB-2863-10, beandthesameherebyis, totheeffectsoftheunilateral Environmental ProtectiontorequireCaptainsto inthetitleofCaptain(SludgeBoat); andit is Department of Environmental Protection shall AFSCME, AFL-CIO, over the effects of its toobtainadditional Valley Sewage Commission on individuals andit isfurther
4OCB2d62(BCB2011) DIRECTED, that theCityof NewYorkpost Order fornoless thanthirty(30) daysat all locationsusedbytheNewYorkCityDepartment Environmental Protectionfor writtencommunications Council 37, AFSCME, AFL-CIO, anditsaffiliate, Dated: NewYork, NewYork December20, 2011 13 theaccompanyingNoticeof Decisionand of withemployees representedbyDistrict Local 2906. MARLENEA. GOLD CHAIR GEORGENICOLAU MEMBER M. DAVIDZURNDORFER MEMBER PAMELAS. SILVERBLATT MEMBER CHARLESG. MOERDLER MEMBER PETERPEPPER MEMBER
OFFICEOFCOLLECTIVEBARGAINING 40Rector NewYork, (212)306-7160 FAX(212) IMPARTIALMEMBERS MARLENEA. GOLD, CHAIR GEORGENICOLAU CAROLA. WITTENBERG DEPUTYCHAIRS STEVENC. DECOSTA SUSAN3. PANEPENTO NOTICE TO ALLEMPLOYEES PURSUANTTO THEDECISIONANDORDEROFTHE BOARDOFCOLLECTIVEBARGAINING OFTHECITYOFNEWYORK andinordertoeffectuatethepoliciesofthe NEWYORKCITYCOLLECTIVEBARGAININGLAW Weherebynotify: That the Board of Collective Bargaining determinationoftheimproperpracticepetitionbetweenDistrict its affiliate, Local 2906, and the City of NewYork Environmental Protection. Pursuant tothepowersvestedintheBoardofCollectiveBargainingbytheNewYorkCity CollectiveBargainingLaw, it ishereby: DETERMINED, that the unilateral decision Environmental Protectiontorequireadditional pilotage, of employees inthetitleof Captain(SludgeBoat), SewageCommissionwas anewtermandconditionofemployment before February 1, 2010, inthetitleof Captain(SludgeBoat) employer practice, inviolationof Section l2-307(a)(l) BargainingLaw; andit istherefore OPWERED, that the Improper Practice AFL-CIO, anditsaffiliate, Local 2906, docketedasBCB-2863-10,beandthesameherebyis, totheextent that it allegesarefusal tobargainwithrespect theNewYorkCityDepartment ofEnvironmental pilotageforthewaterssurroundingthePassaicValleySewageCommissiononindividualsemployed onorbeforeFebruary1, 2010, inthetitleofCaptain(SludgeBoat); Street, 7thFloor -N.Y. 10006 306-7167 CITYMEMBERS M. DAVIDZURNDORFER PAMELAS. SILVERBLATT LABORMEMBERS CHARLESG. MOERDLER GABRIELLESEMEL has issued 4 OGB2d 62 (BCB2011), in final Council 37, AFSCME, AFL-CIO, and and the NewYork City Department of by the New York City Department of anewqualificationforcontinuedemployment for thewaters surroundingthePassaic Valley for individualsemployedonor andconstitutes an improper public and (4) of theNewYorkCityCollective Petition filedby District Council 37, AFSCME, granted, totheeffectsoftheunilateral decisionby ProtectiontorequireCaptainstoobtainadditional andit isfurther
ORDERED, that theNewYorkCityDepartment ofEnvironmental Protectionshall bargainin goodfaithwithDistrict Council 37, AFSCME, AFL-CIO, over theeffectsofitsunilateral decisionto requireemployees inthetitleof Captain(SludgeBoat) toobtainadditional pilotagefor thewaters surroundingthePassaicValleySewageCommissiononindividualsemployedonorbeforeFebruary1, 2010, inthetitleofCaptain(SludgeBoat); andit isfurther DIRECTED, that theCityofNewYorkpost thisNoticeofDecisionandOrderfornolessthan thirty(30) daysat all locationsusedbytheNewYorkCityDepartment ofEnvironmental Protection forwrittencommunicationswithemployeesrepresentedbyDistrict Council 37, AFSCME, AFL-CIO, anditsaffiliate, Local 2906. TheCityofNewYork NewYorkCityDepartment ofEnvironmental Protection Dated:_________________ ____________________________________________________ (PostedBy) (Title) ThisNoticemust remainconspicuouslypostedfor30consecutivedaysfromthedateofposting, andmust not bealtered, defaced, orcoveredbyanyothermaterial.
You are being directed to the most recent version of the statute which may not be the version considered at the time of the judgment.