A 7191 —

Compared against the New York Consolidated Laws as published AI-generated reading aid — verify against the official bill.

This bill amends 1 section(s) of the New York Consolidated Laws: Section 75 of the civil service law.

• Section 75 of the civil service law

  An who his or her A state employee who is designated managerial or confidential under article fourteen of this chapter, shall, at the time of questioning, where it appears that such employee is a potential subject of disciplinary action, have a right to representation and shall be notified in advance, in writing, of such right. him he his him him his Pending he he his he his he him Pending → ; New York city employees For any employee in the service of the city of New York described in paragraph (a), (b), (c), (d), or (e) of subdivision one of this section, if such , such employee their italics such person they their such person against whom charges are preferred them their and for the purpose described in subdivision two-b of this section 2-b. Procedure; non-New York city employees. For any employee described in paragraph (a), (b), (c), or (e) of subdivision one of this section not in the service of the city of New York, the following proce- dure shall apply: An employee under this subdivision who at the time of questioning appears to be a potential subject of disciplinary action shall have a right to representation by their certified or recognized employee organization under article fourteen of this chapter and shall be notified in advance, in writing, of such right. A state employee who is designated managerial or confidential under article fourteen of this chapter, shall, at the time of questioning, where it appears that such employee is a potential subject of disciplinary action, have a right to representation and shall be notified in advance, in writing, of such right. If representation is requested a reasonable period of time shall be afforded to obtain such representation. If the employee is unable to obtain representation within a reasonable period of time the employer has the right to then question the employee. A hearing officer under this section shall have the power to find that a reasonable period of time was or was not afforded. In the event the hearing officer finds that a reasonable period of time was not afforded then any and all statements obtained from said questioning as well as any evidence or information obtained as a result of said questioning shall be excluded, provided, however, that this subdivision shall not modify or replace any written collective agreement between a public employer and employee organization negotiated pursuant to article fourteen of this chapter. A person against whom removal or other disciplinary action is proposed shall have written notice thereof and of the reasons thereof, shall be furnished a copy of the charges preferred against such person and shall be allowed at least eight days for answering the same in writing. The hearing upon such charges shall be held by a hearing officer who shall be selected by the mutual agreement of the person against whom discipli- nary action is proposed and of the employing officer or body. If such mutual agreement cannot be reached, then the hearing officer shall be selected from a list of seven names to be provided by the public employ- ment relations board pursuant to subdivision two-a of this section. The parties shall select the hearing officer by alternately striking names from the list of seven. Such hearing officer shall, for the purpose of such hearing, be vested with all the powers of such officer or body and shall make a record of such hearing which shall, with their recommenda- tions and decision, be referred to such officer or body for implementa- tion. The hearing officer holding such hearing shall, upon the request of the person against whom charges are preferred, permit such person against whom charges are preferred to be represented by counsel, or by a representative of a recognized or certified employee organization, and shall allow them to summon witnesses on their behalf. The burden of proving incompetency or misconduct shall be upon the person alleging the same. Compliance with technical rules of evidence shall not be required. The cost incurred in obtaining the independent hearing officer shall be divided equally between the parties; provided that as may be determined upon the circumstances of the case, the hearing officer shall be author- ized to allocate such cost on the basis of the frivolous nature of any claim made or any defense interposed in the manner provided for in para- graph (a) of subdivision two-a

  amended

Similar bills in other states

Bills in other jurisdictions that match this one by MEANING — title, summary and subject, compared across every state we track. A strong signal the same policy is moving elsewhere.

• A 2289 New Jersey 100% Compare text
• A 2017 New Jersey 100% Compare text
• A 2952 New Jersey 100% Compare text
• A 4164 New Jersey 100% Compare text
• S 3565 New Jersey 100% Compare text
• A3760 New Jersey 100% Compare text
• A4075 New Jersey 100% Compare text
• A1632 New Jersey 100% Compare text