Advocatz
  • Who We Are
  • What We Do
  • Blog
  • Areas Of Specialization
    • Education Law 3020-a Arbitration
    • Computer Fraud and Abuse
    • New York State Education Department Part 83
    • Article 75
    • Article 78
    • Impartial Hearings
    • Americans With Disabilities Act (ADA) Litigation
  • Contact
  • Testimonials
News Ticker
  • [ March 4, 2023 ] Appellate Court Temporarily Blocks Repeal of Vaccine Mandate For Health Workers ADVOCATZ
  • [ February 17, 2023 ] UPDATE: Educators Accused of Submitting Fake Vaccination Cards Win Jobs Back and Backpay ADVOCATZ Op-Ed
  • [ February 12, 2023 ] The New York City Department of Education, UFT, Problem Code, and Perpetual Fog Machine Continue To Prevent Unvaxxed Employees From Working ADVOCATZ
  • [ February 6, 2023 ] BREAKING NEWS: NYC Mayor Ends COVID Mandate For City Workers ADVOCATZ
  • [ January 5, 2023 ] EXCLUSIVE: Teachers Accused of Paying For Fake COVID Vaccination Cards Are Vindicated, Return To Their Jobs and Get Backpay ADVOCATZ Op-Ed
HomeAreas Of SpecializationEducation Law 3020-a Arbitration

Education Law 3020-a Arbitration

* Our main contractual weapon in discipline and discharge cases is usually the requirement that the boss must have “just cause” (or “fair cause” or “proper cause”) to take action against an employee. Even if these words are missing from the contract, many arbitrators use this standard, anyway.

* But, what is “just cause”? Simply put: it means the employer must have a reason (he or she must have “cause”) for imposing discipline and the reason must be fair (“just”).

* It is commonly accepted that there are seven tests as to whether the boss has used “just cause” in handing out discipline.

One of the main reasons workers join unions is to gain protection against unfair and unjust discipline that employers hand out. Stewards must be ready to handle all sorts of discipline cases, from warnings to suspensions to firings. Stewards must be ready to deal with situations of gross discrimination by the boss on who gets disciplined, to dealing with union members who sometimes seem to go out of their way to get themselves fired.

Our main contractual weapon is often times summed up in one short sentence, “Employees shall be disciplined or discharged only for just cause”. In some contracts the words used are “proper cause” or “fair cause”. The importance of a sentence like this is that it binds the employer to imposing discipline not just for any reason (cause) but the reason has to be a “just” reason. Many arbitrators have gone so far as to hold all employers to a “just cause” standard, whether the contract uses the words or not.

What is a “just cause” standard? It is commonly accepted that there are seven tests as to whether a boss has used “just cause” in handing out discipline. The Bureau of National Affairs lists them as follows:

1. NOTICE – Was the employee adequately warned of the consequences of his conduct?

Prior to imposition of discipline, employees must have notice of rules and expectations. The warning may be given orally or in printed form. An exception may be made for certain conduct, such as insubordination, coming to work drunk, drinking on the job, or stealing employer property, that is so serious that the employee is expected to know it will be punishable.

Example: If an employee is told to stop using vulgar language and told that if he continues he will be disciplined, that may be adequate warning. However if a boss comes up to an employee and says “I’m tired of your swearing, cut it out”, and then the next day fires the employee for swearing again, that may not be adequate warning.

2. REASONABLE RULES OR ORDERS – Was the employer’s rule or order reasonably related to efficient and safe operations?

Was the employer’s rule reasonably related to (a) the orderly, efficient, and safe operation of the employer’s business, and (b) the performance that the employer should properly expect of the employee?

Example: A boss makes a rule that all employees must wear red tee shirts and they must be tucked in so they don’t get caught in machinery. An employee is fired for wearing a blue tee shirt that was tucked in. Making a rule that tee shirts must be tucked in so they won’t get caught in machinery may be reasonable and related to safety, but demanding the tee shirt be red isn’t related to safety or efficiency.

3. INVESTIGATION – Did management investigate before administering the discipline?

Did the employer, before administering the discipline to an employee, make an effort to discover whether the employee did in fact violate or disobey a rule of management? The investigation normally should be made before the decision to discipline is made. Where immediate action is required, however, the best course is to suspend the employee pending investigation with the understanding that he will be restored to his job and paid for time lost if he is found not guilty.

Example: The boss fires a worker for stealing and then demands evidence from the union that the worker isn’t guilty. At the grievance meeting the boss admits he never investigated the incident, just took another employee’s word. This probably wouldn’t hold up. If the union has facts to prove the employee’s innocence they should be presented to the boss, even though he failed to properly investigate the case.

4. FAIR INVESTIGATION – Was the investigation fair and objective?
Example: If an incident happened does the employer interview everyone present or only management people who were present. If the employer refuses to interview nonmanagement workers then the investigation may not be fair.

5. PROOF – Did the investigation produce substantial evidence or proof of guilt?

It is not required that the evidence be preponderant, conclusive, or “beyond reasonable doubt,” except where the alleged misconduct is of such a criminal or reprehensible nature as to stigmatize the employee and seriously impair his chances for future employment.
Example: Here it is obvious that workers have fewer rights inside the workplace than they would have in civil court, but still the boss must have real evidence, not guesses. Again the boss cannot just try to make a worker prove his or her innocence, without presenting proof of guilt.

6. EQUAL TREATMENT – Were the rules, orders, and penalties applied evenhandedly and without discrimination?

If enforcement has been lax in the past, management cannot suddenly reverse its course and begin to crack down without first warning employees of its intent.

Example: This is the most common form of discrimination. An employer decides to suspend Mary for taking too long at lunch, but lets the employees who eat lunch with a supervisor take extra time every day. This would not hold up. However, if the employer tells everyone that starting on Monday employees will be disciplined for taking too long at lunch and on Tuesday Mary comes back late and everyone else has been on time, she may be disciplined.

7. PENALTY – Was the penalty reasonably related to the seriousness of the offense and the past record?

Was the degree of discipline administered by the employer in a particular case reasonably related to (a) the seriousness of the employee’s proven offense, and (b) the record of the employee in his or her service with the employer?

If employee A’s past record is significantly better than that of employee B, the employer properly may give employee A lighter punishment than employee B for the same offense. The degree of discipline, is important because arbitrators want to ensure that the “punishment fits the crime.” An employer’s use of progressive discipline often gives the employer an advantage in arbitration.

Example: The classic example is two employees get in an argument and shove each other. One has 25 years service with a clean record. The other has 3 years service with lots of warnings and discipline. Based upon the workers seniority and records, the employer may give the older worker less punishment than the other worker.

Education Law 3020-a Arbitration

The New York Times Publishes Fake News About Employees in the Absent Teacher Reserve (ATR) Pool

October 16, 2017 Betsy Combier 0

I keep hoping that some major media will report on the ATR situation correctly. Unfortunately this hasn’t happened. The title of the article in the New York Times on Friday October 13, 2017, “Caught Sleeping […]

TEAM ADVOCATZ

ADVOCATZ

The New York City Department of Education, UFT, Problem Code, and Perpetual Fog Machine Continue To Prevent Unvaxxed Employees From Working

February 12, 2023 0

The Problem Code and the COVID Mandate By Betsy Combier, Editor In June 2022 I was asked by the attorneys in the Kane-Keil case to submit a Declaration Betsy Combier declaration on the “Problem Code” […]

ADVOCATZ Op-Ed

EXCLUSIVE: Teachers Accused of Paying For Fake COVID Vaccination Cards Are Vindicated, Return To Their Jobs and Get Backpay

January 5, 2023 1

We won! ORDER OF JUDGE ABADI in Kambouris et al. v New York City Department of Education, David Banks, Chancellor, and David Weisberg, Deputy Chancellor  (Index No. 518863/2022) On January 5, 2023, the 30 teachers […]

ADVOCATZ Op-Ed

Teacher Tenure Trials “3020-a” and Ending Mandatory Arbitration

February 24, 2022 0

In New York City, any tenured educator and member of the UFT who works for the NYC Department of Education and is accused of misconduct or incompetency (2 or more Ineffective APPR ratings) must choose either […]

CHANGING THE FORMULA FOR CLIENT REPRESENTATION IN DISPUTE RESOLUTION AND LITIGATION

Experts in New York State and New York City 3020-a Arbitration. We have won more than 40 incompetency and misconduct cases.

Advocatz is a client-centered consulting business for people who need a partner as they go through the Courts, grievances, or life problems. We are experts in labor and employment arbitration, particularly the arbitration or due process hearing for tenured teachers known as 3020-a.

We are paralegals, non-attorney advocates, and Expert witnesses who support all of our clients as they pursue a just and fair resolution through litigation, negotiation, arbitration, and mediation.

Team Advocatz always puts the needs of the client first.
We have a unique strategy wherein we fill the communication gap between representative/lawyer and client by working on a set-fee basis, not an hourly rate, and by giving unlimited time to each client for research and discussion. Our goal is to assure each client that he or she has someone in their corner at all times and that the arguments presented are accurate and comprehensive.
We keep all parties on the same page.
We specialize in 3020-a Arbitration throughout New York State as well as in New York City, and we also assist Attorneys hired to do  Article 75 and 78 appeals, Part 83 Appeals, First Department Appeals, and civil actions in State and Federal Court.
Additionally, for more than 15 years we have represented parents/guardians at Impartial Hearings, where we obtain public funding for non-public and private schools. We also attend IEP meetings, evaluations and conferences as part of our set fee.

F For Fraud Award

A For Accountability Award

Parentadvocates.org

Betsy Combier

betsy@advocatz.com

Betsy Combier

Publications

NYC Rubber Room Reporter
Parentadvocates.org
New York Court Corruption
National Public Voice
NYC Public Voice
Inside 3020-a Teacher Trials

RSS Advocatz RSS

E Mail

betsy@advocatz.com

TV Appearances

Betsy Combier on FOX and Friends

Betsy Combier, Attorney Bryan Glass, and Attorney Michael Mazzariello on Lawline

NYC Rubber Room Reporter

 
The Hidden Rubber Rooms of New York City Create a Fiscal Nightmare

Why The NYC DOE and UFT/NYSUT Cannot Say They Protect Tenure Rights

Down The Rabbit Hole: The NYC Department of Education’s “Problem Code”

Principal Lisa Mars is Removed From “FAME” School Fiorello H. LaGuardia High School of Music & Art and Performing Arts

NYC DOE Chancellor Carranza Rules With Hate

UFT VIP Paul Egan is Ousted From His Job

Howard Nash, ATR Teacher, Sues The NYC DOE Pro Se and Wins An Interim Order

The NYC DOE Strategic Response Group Intercepts All Communications To The Chancellor

Disgraced Principal Caterina Lafergola is Re-Hired By Chancellor Carranza

 

ParentAdvocates

Firing Bad Teachers and the Chicago Teacher’s Union By Kristen Mcquery, Chicago Tribune

The New York City Department of Education’s “Problem Code” is an Unlawful Flag on an Employee’s Fingerprints

Asian Parents in NYC Demand That Schools Chancellor Richard Carranza Be Fired

Nick Hanauer in The Atlantic: “Education Isn’t Enough”

District 75: ‘The Toughest Job You’ll Ever Love’ By Laura McKenna

Fred Rogers and His Language For Children

COPAA Releases Statement Saying School Safety Commission Report Fails Students with Disabilities and Students of Color

AP: Lawmakers Buy Industry Fix to Protect Schools From Guns

 

Inside 3020-a Teachers’ Trials

New York State Education Law 3020-a + Memos To The Field

If Charged With 3020-a and You Retire, Your Teaching License is Permanently Terminated

 

National Public Voice

Law Professors Say That Sexism is The Problem

 

NYC Public Voice

Aaron Carr and The Housing Rights Initiative Investigate Compliance With Tenant Protections

 

Courtbeat-New York Court Corruption

NY Daily News: Aitabdellah Salem Sat In Rikers For $1, Now Wants City To Pay

3020-a ARBITRATION NEWSWIRE

Winning Your 3020-A: the Investigation (Part 1)

ADVOCATZ President Betsy Combier Unravels The 3020-a Arbitration Procedure in New York City

Advocacy at 3020-a: Open and Public Hearings

The Partnership of Bully Power and Media Can Convict a Teacher at 3020-a

The Unlawful Randomness of Labor Arbitration 3020-a in New York City

Winning Your 3020-a Arbitration: Fire Your NYSUT Attorney, Don’t Settle

Prohibit The Department of Education Lawyers From Using The Danielson Rubric For Observation Reports and 3020-a Arbitration

Stellar, Dedicated Teacher Eileen Ghastin Fights the Arbitrator’s Decision To Suspend Her For Four Weeks After Almost Being Beaten Up in Her Class

The New York City Teachers’ Union Contract: Shackling Principals’ Leadership.

Outrage Spreads Throughout New York City And State At The Sell-out of Members’ Rights By The United Federation of Teachers (UFT) And the Unity Caucus

Attorney Michael Francis: Suborning Perjury at 3020-a

Why Observation Reports Should Not Be Used To Terminate a Tenured Employee by Betsy Combier

Inside 3020-a Teacher Trials

Changing “Rules”

Ten of the twenty-four 3020-a Arbitrators Quit the NYC UFT/DOE Panel

The New York City Rubber Room Anti-Teacher Charging Process Shows How Corrupt the Carmen Farina-Bill De Blasio Department of Education Really Is. by Betsy Combier

NYSUT Changes To Tenure and the Tenured Teacher Removal Process in 3020-a….What a Scam

Retirement After Being Charged With 3020-a Automatically and Permanently Terminates a NYC Teaching License

Dennis Walcott’s Speech on “Ending Just Cause at 3020-a

The 3020-a Arbitration Newswire: Gotcha Squad Attorney Ian Nikol

Winning and Losing Appeals and the Teacher-Principal Relationship

Digging Up The Garbage on The XEROX Machine

Digging Up The Garbage on the DOE Lawyers -Shareema Abel

Digging Up The Garbage on the Rubber Room

Digging Up The Garbage on the Vouchers Paid To Arbitrators

Stay connected

  • Facebook
  • Google Plus
  • Twitter

Follow By Email

Archives

  • March 2023
  • February 2023
  • January 2023
  • December 2022
  • November 2022
  • October 2022
  • September 2022
  • August 2022
  • July 2022
  • June 2022
  • May 2022
  • April 2022
  • March 2022
  • February 2022
  • January 2022
  • December 2021
  • November 2021
  • October 2021
  • September 2021
  • August 2021
  • June 2021
  • December 2020
  • October 2020
  • June 2020
  • March 2019
  • January 2019
  • November 2018
  • October 2018
  • September 2018
  • August 2018
  • June 2018
  • May 2018
  • April 2018
  • March 2018
  • February 2018
  • January 2018
  • December 2017
  • November 2017
  • October 2017
  • September 2017
  • Terms Of Service

© Advocatz.com