Court Dismisses Miraglia et al. v. New York City Department of Education et al.
Judge Ozzi rejected a claim that the arbitration award that set the terms for implementing the Department of Education mandate was invalid, deciding against 51 adversely affected DOE employees.
[9/24/24 UPDATE: The petitioners’ attorney, Austin Graff, commented on the dismissal, saying, “I am extremely disappointed. I can see errors of law and fact that should have changed the outcome. We will file a Notice of Appeal, which gives us six months to perfect the appeal if that is what the clients want to do.”]
Richmond County Supreme Court Judge Wayne Ozzi has dismissed Miraglia et al. v. New York City Department of Education et al., denying the petition filed by 51 Department of Education employees who were adversely affected by the DOE’s COVID-19 vaccine mandate.
The dismissal comes after a July 18 hearing where attorney Austin Graff argued for the petitioners against five lawyers representing the DOE, United Federation of Teachers (UFT), and Council of Supervisors and Administrators (CSA) in a courtroom packed with petitioners, their supporters, and other workers who lost jobs under the mandates.
In his decision, Judge Ozzi denied the petitioners’ claim seeking to vacate the arbitration award that laid out the terms for implementing the DOE mandate. In addition to siding with the respondents on issues of standing and time barring, Ozzi cited the appellate decision in O’Reilly et al. v. Board of Education of the City School District of New York City et al., which is currently being reviewed by New York’s highest court, the Court of Appeals. Attorney Jimmy Wagner gave oral arguments before the Court of Appeals in that case earlier this month.
Ozzi rejected one of the key arguments made by the Miraglia petitioners, that the UFT and CSA—the unions representing teachers and administrators—did not have the right to go to arbitration to resolve their impasse with the DOE over the mandate’s implementation.
Graff argued for the petitioners that under New York Civil Service Law, section 209.3(f) an impasse in negotiations between school districts and public employees’ unions must be resolved through further negotiations, so the unions should have continued to negotiate on behalf of their members instead of seeking arbitration.
It’s not clear to me how an eventual Court of Appeals decision on O’Reilly might affect the Miraglia petitioners’ chances in an appeal.
For more on the legal arguments in this case: Petitioners’ attorney Austin Graff discussed them in this podcast episode:
It sounds like they're playing hot potato.