Matter of Meegan v. Brown

Summary

The New York Appellate Division, Fourth Department, affirmed an order denying the City of Buffalo respondents’ motion to stay arbitration of a grievance concerning collective bargaining agreement benefits for police officers receiving General Municipal Law § 207-c benefits. The court held that the City could not unilaterally discontinue a longstanding past practice of paying those benefits and was required to negotiate any change with the bargaining representative. The scope and intent of the collective bargaining agreement’s maintenance-of-benefits clause and the past practice were held to be proper subjects for arbitration.

Holdings

1. The grievance concerning the scope and intent of the collective bargaining agreement's Maintenance of Benefits clause and the parties' longstanding past practice was properly subject to arbitration, and respondents were not entitled to a stay.
2. Respondents lacked authority to unilaterally discontinue payment of the benefits because the longstanding past practice could not be unilaterally modified and the collective bargaining agreement imposed a duty to negotiate changes to that practice.
3. The grievance did not improperly seek arbitration of the statutory § 207-c benefits obligation; it concerned additional collective bargaining agreement benefits and the unilateral discontinuance of a past practice.

Questions Presented

1. Whether respondents could obtain a stay of arbitration of a grievance concerning the unilateral discontinuance of collective bargaining agreement benefits paid to police officers receiving General Municipal Law § 207-c benefits.
2. Whether the City could unilaterally discontinue a longstanding past practice of paying collective bargaining agreement benefits to officers receiving General Municipal Law § 207-c benefits.
3. Whether the grievance improperly sought arbitration of respondents' statutory obligation to pay General Municipal Law § 207-c benefits.

Disposition

affirmed