Page 8 - Work Force March 2021

Unified Court System employees seek fairness in new work policy
The Unified Court System (UCS)
is New York’s judicial branch, charged with administering justice and due process rights for all New Yorkers. It’s perhaps the ultimate irony, therefore, that CSEA has had to push back against recent UCS management actions that have diminished fairness and due process for the judiciary’s own workers.
The issue started with the admirable intentions of eliminating any discriminatory behaviors within the court system. In the wake of a settlement of a disciplinary case from last year, UCS Chief Judge Janet DiFiore recently sent out a memo calling that settlement a “mistake” and directing all future employee discrimination matters to undergo full disciplinary hearings. Going forward, penalties in these cases would be decided by a new oversight panel of in-house UCS
officials. The union
has big issues with
these changes.
CSEA does
not condone
discrimination of any
form and the union
completely agrees
with the premise that
workers deserve a court system free of discrimination or bias. However, union members are also entitled
to their due process rights in any disciplinary matter. The union is concerned the new policy represents management overreach to achieve a discrimination-free workplace.
An imbalanced report leads to unfair and possibly illegal changes
The court system’s new work rules stem from the results of a third-party report commissioned
last year following the murder of George Floyd. Among the report’s recommendations was to “strengthen current court system practices investigating bias complaints against
court personnel.” “Court officers
felt the report was imbalanced,” said Region IV Judiciary Local President Scott Gartland. “No one is against rules that are fair and applied to
all equally. But,
when it seems that
certain titles are being imposed on more heavily than others, it becomes harder to justify; especially when the stated goal is equality.”
And the new policies have big flaws that may violate the law.
By barring settlements for one specific type of disciplinary charge and adding an additional layer of oversight to review disciplinary penalties, the new procedure and
work rules constitute
a change in terms
and conditions of employment. That must by law be negotiated. The changes were
not negotiated, and
no employee unions were involved in the development of the new
policies or procedures.
CSEA is investigating whether or
not this violates New York’s Taylor Law. As this edition went to press, the union was preparing to file a contract grievance.
A biased system cannot police itself
The Court System admits in its memorandum that bias already exists within the system. CSEA strongly believes that workers cannot receive their right to a fair hearing without these types of disciplinary charges being decided by a completely neutral third party.
“We’re all of the same opinion that an agency that polices itself, it’s impossible for it to be unbiased,”
said Central Region Judiciary Local President Ian Spencer. “When you appoint a panel without
a third-party
independent
reviewing the
case from both
sides, it puts
union members
in a situation where they’re sitting in front of the judge, jury, and executioner.”
“All of the
hearing officers
are employees of
the court system,
which makes it
unfair and biased
for the employees
and the victims,”
said Southern
Region Judiciary
Local President
Kevin Mahler. “It’s only fair that there be an independent arbitrator and a clear set of rules to promote justice inside the system that provides justice for others.”
A better solution: binding arbitration
After the memorandum was released, a coalition of union representatives, including CSEA Local presidents who represent UCS employees from across the state, submitted a letter to the Chief Judge urging the court system to switch
to the more fair and independent process of binding arbitration to
ensure worker rights.
“If the court
system really wants
fair and successful
outcomes when
addressing
employee
workplace
complaints, we Hart
should move
toward binding
arbitration,” said Western Region Judiciary Local President Bill
Hart. “The new anti-discrimination policies, which require a full disciplinary hearing, is being handled by just another layer of bureaucracy that reports directly to the Chief Judge. It shatters any notion of due process and fairness.”
“Any system
that inherently
polices itself,
cannot be
impartial,” said
Long Island
Judiciary Local
President Diane
Hansen. “It’s no
different from
court proceedings;
the judge has to be
impartial. Why should our members have to go before somebody who
is UCS [Unified Court System] appointed and therefore biased in their employer’s favor?”
— Mark M. Kotzin, Therese Assalian, Wendi Bowie, Jessica Ladlee, Nicholas Newcomb and Ove Overmyer
8 The Work Force
March 2021
“We’re all of the same opinion that an agency that polices itself, it’s impossible for it to be unbiased.”
Gartland
Spencer
Mahler
Hansen
Your voice at every level of government is important!
Visit CSEA’s new Legislative Action Center to take ! action on the issues important to union members.
Our elected state representatives need to hear your voice.
https://cseany.org/issues