HIS TERMINATION WAS REVERSED AND CASE REMANDED FOR LESSER PENALTY
After a hearing and the exhaustion of administrative appeals, “CK,” a custodial worker employed by the Yonkers Board of Education was fired for “incompetence, insubordination, and misconduct.” In response, CK commenced a special proceeding – pursuant to CPLR Article 78 – to have the underlying agency determination, ending his employment, annulled.
When the dispute reached the Appellate Division, Second Department, the court noted that there was “substantial evidence” in the record supporting the charges in question. Apparently, after discovering a knife and some pepper spray under a radiator, CK left the items there for some three hours (even though students and staff were in the building). He also purportedly wagered and rewarded two kids $25 each for competing in a basketball game against the other, and, reportedly circulated photos of himself shirtless to another staff member.
Given that backdrop, the AD2 thought CK’s conduct supported the underlying finding that there had been some “dereliction or neglect of duty." But, interestingly, given his “length of service and lack of a prior disciplinary record,” the AD2 found CK’s termination to be “shocking,” and “disproportionate to the offense,” and remanded the case to the Board of Education for the imposition of a “lesser penalty.”
Did CK mop that up?
# # #
DECISION