Stay of Arbitration Properly Denied, Collective Bargaining Agreement Allowed Issue to Be Determined in Arbitration
In affirming Supreme Court’s dismissal of an Article 75 petition seeking a permanent stay of arbitration (with respect to a collective bargaining agreement [CBA]), the Fourth Department explained the operative analysis:
In determining whether an issue is subject to arbitration under a collective bargaining agreement (CBA), a court must apply the two-step analysis set forth in Matter of Acting Supt. of Schs. of Liverpool Cent. Sch. Dist. (United Liverpool Faculty Assn.) (42 NY2d 509, 513). “First, a court must determine whether there is any statutory, constitutional or public policy prohibition against arbitration of the grievance” … . If the court determines that there is no such prohibition and thus that the parties have the authority to arbitrate the grievance, it proceeds to the second step, in which it must determine whether that authority was in fact exercised, i.e., whether the CBA demonstrates that the parties agreed to refer this type of dispute to arbitration … . With respect to the second step, where there is a broad arbitration clause such as the one in the CBA at issue, “[a] determination of arbitrability is limited to ‘whether there is a reasonable relationship between the subject matter of the dispute and the general subject matter of the CBA’ ” … . “Succinctly, the test centers on two distinct inquiries as to the public parties’ purported entry into the arbitral forum: may they do so and, if yes, did they do so” … . Here, with respect to the issue whether petitioner properly followed the procedures mandated by the CBA in terminating the employee in question, we conclude that the court properly determined that the parties had the authority to agree to arbitrate this grievance, and that they in fact agreed to do so. Matter of Arbitration…, 1019, 4th Dept 10-4-13