BILL NUMBER: S7369
SPONSOR: RAMOS
 
TITLE OF BILL:
An act to amend the civil service law, in relation to unlawful strikes
by public employees
 
PURPOSE:
To amend the Taylor law in regards to unlawful strike
 
SUMMARY OF PROVISIONS:
Section 1 Amends the statement of policy, section 200 of civil service
law
Section 2 Amends section 201 of civil service law to include the term
unlawful strike
Section 3 Amends section 207 of civil service law to include the term
unlawful strike
Section 4 Amends section 209 of civil service law to outline the updated
duties of the MTA in the resolution of disputes
Section 5 Amends section 210 of civil service law to include the term
unlawful strike
Section 6 Amends section 210 of civil service law to include the term
unlawful strike
Section 7 Amends section 210 of civil service law to include the term
unlawful strike
Section 8 Amends section 210 of civil service law to include the term
strike
Section 9 Amends section 211 of civil service law to update the applica-
tion for injunctive relief pursuant to the rest of the article.
Section 10 This act shall take effect immediately.
 
JUSTIFICATION:
The right of workers to withhold their labor (to strike) in furtherance
of equality of opportunity for working people and their ability to
obtain better wages, benefits, and working conditions is a fundamental
principle of workers' rights. This has been affirmed by many bodies,
including the International Labor Organization, which found in 2006 that
the New York State Taylor law violates fundamental rights.
How to reconcile that finding against the justified concern that public
employees maintain critical services that must continue without inter-
ruption? The proposed bill does just that. It would place transit work-
ers represented by TWU Local 100 and other similar transportation unions
in New York State under the same framework as the Railway Labor Act
model, which already governs the Long Island Railroad, for example.
It establishes a structured negotiating process and timetable for the
MTA/NYCT and its respective employee organizations to bargain, allow for
mediation, the impaneling of an emergency board, and finally grants the
fundamental right to strike upon the exhaustion of this lengthy process.
Allowing for the right to strike without the draconian penalties now in
place under the New York State Taylor law benefits New Yorkers in
several ways.
First, there is an association between the right to strike and the
reduction of inequality in society. The Gini Index, a widely respected
measure of relative inequality in countries, shows that countries in
which the right to strike can be exercised by public employees have less
disparities between the incomes of the rich and the poor. The right to
strike helps incomes be more fairly distributed in society, and this is
a social good.
Second, the New York State Taylor Law was put in place before the recent
Janus v. AFSCME decision which struck a serious blow to the interests of
public sector workers. Janus tilted the playing field toward the employ-
er by limiting the power of unions to represent all workers in a partic-
ular bargaining unit or shop. Amending the Taylor Law helps place unions
on a more equal footing.
Third, mirroring the Railway Labor Act's provisions, which allow the
right to strike after an extended negotiation process, has produced a
record of ensuring labor peace in the rail industry over the last centu-
ry, without an extended rail strike during that period. By contrast the
Taylor Law in New York State, in full effect, did not prevent two NYC
Transit strikes undertaken by TWU Local 100 in 1980 and 2005.
Fourth, the current situation in New York State affords some transporta-
tion workers the right to strike (LIRR), while restricting others. This
is deeply divisive and creates obstacles to labor peace within New York
State.
 
LEGISLATIVE HISTORY:
2023-24: Died in Civil Service and Pensions
 
FISCAL IMPACT:
TBD
 
EFFECTIVE DATE:
Effective immediately

Statutes affected:
S7369: 200 civil service law, 201 civil service law, 207 civil service law, 207(3) civil service law, 209 civil service law, 210 civil service law, 210(1) civil service law, 211 civil service law