SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK COUNTY OF NEW YORK, IAS PART 6 ----------------------------------------------------------------------- x MICHAEL MULGREW, et ano.

, Petitioners, -againstBOARD OF EDUCATION OF THE CITY SCHOOL DISTRICT OF THE CITY OF NEW YORK, et ano., Respondents. ----------------------------------------------------------------------- x WHEREAS Petitioners commenced this proceeding by Order to Show Cause seeking to enjoin Respondents from making hiring decisions of certain staff prior to the resolution of grievances filed pursuant to their collective bargaining agreements; WHEREAS Respondents answered the Verified Petition and oral argument was held before the Honorable Joan B. Lobis, J.S.C., on May 16, 2012; WHEREAS the parties now desire expedited resolution of the underlying issues without further court intervention; IT IS THEREFORE AND HEREBY STIPULATED AND AGREED, by and between the parties, through their undersigned counsel, that: 1. The at-issue grievances shall be (i) consolidated; (ii) heard by arbitrator Scott Buchheit; and (iii) conducted on the three dates – June 7, 22, and 26, 2012 – that arbitrator Buchheit has currently committed to the UFT/BOE for June 2012, unless additional or alternative dates in June are agreed to by the parties; STIPULATION AND ORDER

Index No.: 600002/2012 (Lobis, J.)

2.

In light of the parties’ mutual desire to complete this hearing and receive a decision before the end of June, the parties will jointly speak with the arbitrator to seek earlier hearing times in June should they become available;

3.

The parties further agree that they shall be available and make their witnesses available earlier than and/or later than normal working hours and at other reasonable times to accomplish completion of the arbitration within the required timeframe and will jointly request that the arbitrator make himself available at such times;

4.

To further streamline the hearing, representatives for the parties will meet no less than three days prior to the first hearing date with the goal of arriving at a set of stipulated facts and to stipulate to the authenticity of proposed documentary exhibits;

5.

In advance of the hearing, the parties will jointly request that the arbitrator conduct a pre-hearing conference (whether in person or telephonically) to discuss allocation of hearing time evenly between the parties (including rebuttal witnesses), and the adherence to an agreed-upon schedule, or, if one cannot be agreed upon, to the one set by the arbitrator, unless mutually agreed otherwise (for the purposes of this Stipulation, the UFT and CSA shall be regarded as one party);

6.

The parties further agree that they will jointly request that the arbitrator limit time used between witnesses and between direct and cross (to prepare or caucus), so as to prevent delay and ensure the fair allocation of time between the parties;

7.

The parties shall jointly request that the arbitrator issue a decision, with opinion to follow, on the Consolidated Grievances no later than June 29, 2012 or within 48 hours after the completion of the hearing if completed earlier;

-2-

8.

Should the arbitrator determine that Respondents violated the collective bargaining agreements between the parties by violating Articles 17B and 18D, as applicable, of the UFT’s collective bargaining agreement, the remedy shall include an opportunity for all UFT-represented employees currently assigned to the 24 subject schools at issue in this proceeding to be, if they are not already, promptly (and in no event later than the start of the 2012-13 school year) assigned to and placed on the table of organization of their current school (or the school that may replace it) as though it were, for all labor and employment-related purposes, the same as the school they are currently assigned to and their service in the school was uninterrupted, including, but not limited to, reinstatement to their rightful place in seniority order;1

9.

Should the arbitrator determine that Respondents violated the collective bargaining agreements between the parties by violating Article VII-L of the CSA’s collective bargaining agreement, the remedy shall include an opportunity for all CSA-represented employees currently assigned to the 24 subject schools at issue in this proceeding to be, if they are not already, promptly (and in no event later than the start of the 2012-13 school year) assigned to and placed on the table of organization of their current school (or the school that may replace it) as though it were, for all labor and employmentrelated purposes, the same as the school they are currently assigned to and their service

For purposes of this remedy, the school an employee is “currently assigned to” is the school the employee was assigned to as of the date the petition in this matter was filed and it shall not matter whether the individual has thereafter voluntarily transferred to and/or accepted another position at a school or in some other pedagogical supervisory capacity. -3-

1

in the school was uninterrupted, including, but not limited to, reinstatement to their rightful place in seniority order;2 10. Should the arbitrator determine that Respondents violated the collective bargaining agreements between the parties by violating Articles 17B and 18D, as applicable, of the UFT’s collective bargaining agreement, the remedy shall also include all UFTrepresented staff who were newly-accepted for jobs at any of the 24 subject schools at issue in this proceeding being granted a right to promptly (and in no event later than the start of the 2012-13 school year) return to their prior school (or the school that replaced it), and be placed on the table of organization in the same manner as they were so placed on the date the petition in this matter was filed, including reinstatement to their rightful place in seniority order, as applicable; 11. Should the arbitrator determine that Respondents violated the collective bargaining agreements between the parties by violating Article VII-L of the CSA’s collective bargaining agreement, the remedy shall also include all CSA-represented staff who were newly-accepted for jobs at any of the 24 subject schools at issue in this proceeding being granted a right to promptly (and in no event later than the start of the 2012-13 school year) return to their prior school (or the school that replaced it), and be placed on the table of organization in the same manner as they were so placed on the date the petition in this matter was filed, including reinstatement to their rightful place in seniority order, as applicable;

For purposes of this remedy, the school an employee is “currently assigned to” is the school the employee was assigned to as of the date the petition in this matter was filed and it shall not matter whether the individual has thereafter voluntarily transferred to and/or accepted another position at a school or in some other pedagogical supervisory capacity. -4-

2

12. Should the operation of ¶¶ 8-11, above, result in any of the 24 subject schools having vacancies as a result of current staff opting not to exercise their right to return pursuant to ¶¶ 8-9, the schools shall fill those vacancies in the normal course; 13. Nothing in ¶¶ 8-11, above, shall be construed as a waiver of either party’s position or arguments with respect to the arbitration referenced in ¶ 1; 14. The five members already named to serve on the hiring committees for UFTrepresented staff at the 24 subject schools in accordance with Article 18D of the UFT collective bargaining agreement (the “18D committees”) shall be permitted to meet for planning purposes only, starting immediately, but should the arbitrator in the proceeding described in ¶ 15 find that additional members of the committee are required, the parties shall make best efforts to ensure the 18D committees are fullystaffed as soon as possible, with plans previously made by the five-member committee subject to adjustment, in reasonable fashion, in order to incorporate the input of the additional members and consider their contributions and schedules; 15. A separate grievance filed by the United Federation of Teachers against Respondents regarding the composition of the 18D committees shall be heard by arbitrator Jeffrey Tener, whose first available date to hear such issues is May 23, 2012, and the parties shall jointly request that the arbitrator issue a decision, with opinion to follow, on the grievance by no later than May 25, 2012; 16. Immediately upon receipt of the decision on the grievance referred to in ¶ 15 and in compliance therewith, Respondents shall be free to make and communicate UFT represented staff selection decisions and otherwise proceed with the process of staffing

-5-

the “new” schools at issue in this litigation pursuant to all applicable contractual and other provisions, except as provided below in ¶ 18; 17. Nothing in this Stipulation shall be construed to restrict Respondents’ ability to make selection decisions with respect to supervisors for the 24 schools at issue in this proceeding, or to communicate those decisions, except as provided below in ¶ 19; 18. Should Respondents and/or an 18D committee interview a UFT-represented person (or any new hire that would be so represented) for a position in one of the 24 subject schools, Respondents and/or the 18D committee shall, at the time a decision on whether to extend an offer to that individual is reached, inform that individual, in writing, that said decision is conditioned on the outcome of the pending arbitration set forth in ¶ 1 and that a decision is expected by the end of June; 19. Should Respondents inform any CSA-represented person (or any new hire that would be so represented) that Respondents intend to place him/her in an interim acting capacity when a school replaces one of the 24 subject schools at issue in this proceeding on July 1, 2012 or to commence a C-30 process for that position on or after that same date, Respondents shall notify the person in writing that said offer is conditioned on the outcome of the pending arbitration set forth in ¶ 1 and that a decision is expected by the end of June; 20. The parties agree that they and/or their representatives (including those representatives who serve on 18D committees) will not affirmatively seek to make representations or statements that are intended to dissuade applicants who are not currently assigned to

-6-

one of the 24 schools at issue in this proceeding from applying or accepting an offer to work at one of those schools because of the pending arbitration;3 21. This Stipulation is made in settlement of the above-captioned Article 75 proceeding only and shall not constitute a waiver of any other contractual or legal right, claim or defense related to the underlying grievances, including, but not limited to, the right to bring an Article 75 proceeding for any available remedy against enforcement of the final decision of the arbitrations referenced herein; and 22. This special proceeding shall be marked off the Court’s calendar, subject to restoration upon forty-eight hours written notice, and the Court shall retain jurisdiction to hear any disputes between the parties related to this proceeding.

Nothing in this Paragraph shall be intended to limit the parties’ abilities to render advice in good faith. -7-

3

IT IS FURTHER STIPULATED AND AGREED, by and between the undersigned attorneys
for the respective parties hereto, that scanned or fascimile signatures on this document shall be sufficient. Dated: New York, New York May 24, 2012 MICHAEL A. CARDOZO Corporation Counsel of the

STROOCK & STROOCK & LAVAN LLP

By:

Ci~O~
Chlarens Ors1and Assistant Corporation Counsel 100 Church Street New York, New York 10007 (212) 788-0904

10038

and

Attorneyfor Respondents
ADAM S. ROSS, ESQ. United Federation of Teachers 52 Broadway New York, New York 10004 (212) 701-9420 and DAVID N. GRANDWETTER, ESQ. Council of School Supervisors and Administrators 40 Rector Street, 12th Floor New York, New York 10006 (718) 852-3000

Co-Counsel for Petitioners
SO ORDERED: J.S.C.

Sign up to vote on this title
UsefulNot useful