PEF Protects The Rights of Its Members

ALBANY, NY (08/18/2015)(readMedia)-- A decision sustaining PEF's lawsuit seeking an injunction preventing the Office of Information Technology Services (ITS) from mandated fingerprinting and background checks on PEF members at ITS has been granted by State Supreme Court Justice Richard E. Sise.

PEF President Wayne Spence said, "Protecting PEF members' rights is a primary responsibility of the union. Without this injunction, there was the potential for immediate and irreparable damage to PEF-represented employees at ITS who did not want to voluntarily undergo fingerprinting/background checks and would be required to do so before PEF's Improper Practice Charge was heard. We are pleased the court agreed with PEF's and PERB's position that this injunction was warranted."

In May 2015, PEF filed an Improper Practice charge before the Public Employment Relations Board (PERB) alleging that ITS had begun unilaterally implementing fingerprinting and background checks with PEF-represented employees, without respecting the negotiation process – in violation of the Taylor Law. In spite of PEF's filing, ITS began unilaterally imposing the fingerprinting and background checks, at which point PEF filed an application with PERB seeking relief. PERB agreed that injunctive relief was warranted under the standards set forth in the Taylor Law (which are somewhat different than the standards required to be met for most court-imposed injunctions) and authorized PEF to petition an injunction in court to stop ITS from implementing the checks.

In its decision, the court agreed with PEF that since the Taylor Law provides the right for union members to negotiate their terms and conditions of employees and ITS has operated for years without fingerprinting all employees, there is at least reasonable cause that failure to bargain over this issue constitutes an improper practice. In addition, the court said if the issue was ultimately resolved in favor of PEF and ITS had already begun the fingerprinting/background checks, ITS would be in possession of sensitive, personal information to which it is not entitled, which it would then be able to use to the detriment of the employees PEF represents.

The state has 30 days to appeal the decision.