Skip to main content

Search Google Appliance

Search Google Appliance

Decision No. 12,630

Appeal of RICHARD T. RUMPLE from action of the Board of Education of the Milford Central School District regarding denial of a work assignment.

Decision No. 12,630

(January 9, 1992)

Schlather & Birch, Esqs., attorneys for petitioner, Robert B. Schlather, Esq., of counsel

Scolaro, Shulman, Cohen, Lawler & Burstein, P.C., attorneys for respondent, Benjamin J. Ferrara and Henry F. Sobota, Esqs., of counsel

SOBOL, Commissioner.--Petitioner, a bus driver employed by the Milford Central School District, appeals from respondent's denial of a contractual grievance concerning the scheduling of a special transportation assignment. The appeal is dismissed.

Petitioner performs regular transportation assignments, driving students between home and school in the morning and afternoon. He also has been assigned several "special" runs. During the 1990-91 school year, one of petitioner's special assignments was a trip to and from BOCES during the noon hour to transport occupational education students. Another driver also had a special noontime assignment transporting special education students to and from BOCES. In light of dwindling enrollment, respondent determined that for the 1991-92 school year the two noontime trips to BOCES would be consolidated. Petitioner's noon run was thus eliminated and the consolidated run was not given to petitioner.

Pursuant to the collective bargaining agreement between respondent and the union representing the district's support staff, petitioner filed a grievance challenging respondent's action. Petitioner's grievance was denied by his supervisor, the superintendent and the board. This appeal ensued.

Since petitioner seeks review of a dispute involving his rights under a collective bargaining agreement that was previously submitted for resolution through the contractual grievance procedure, I do not have jurisdiction to review this matter. The Court of Appeals in Matter of Board of Education, Commack UFSD, 70 NY2d 501, has determined that a school employee who has submitted a contract issue for resolution through a contractual grievance procedure may not then bring an appeal to the Commissioner of Education pursuant to Education Law '310, seeking review of the same contract issue (seeAppeal of Perri, 30 Ed Dept Rep 277; Appeal of Reynolds, 29 id. 288).

THE APPEAL IS DISMISSED.

END OF FILE