Get News Updates RSS RSS Feed
General Display
Schools & Instruction
Legal Services
Legal Notices
Classifieds
Salute to Civil Service Organization Month
February 8, 2008
Search Archives



Deny Injunction on TWU Payout

By ARI PAUL

A Federal judge has denied a motion by a group of New York City Transit workers for an injunction against the 1.5 percent of earnings deducted from their paychecks for health care under the current contract with Transport Workers Union Local 100.

DANIEL D'ANTONIO: Charges subterfuge.
A group of transit workers, led by Train Operator Daniel D'Antonio, filed a lawsuit in June 2006 against the Metropolitan Transportation Authority and Local 100 charging that while transit workers made additional health-benefit contributions in the mid-1990s to pay for full health coverage for retirees between the ages of 55 and 62, a past administration of Local 100 concealed the circumstances under which that payment became linked to legislation granting a full pension at age 55 after 25 years of service.

In early December, the plaintiffs moved to have all of the 1.5 percent of earnings workers contribute toward their health coverage put into an escrow account while health-benefits finances are being audited.

"Because plaintiffs fail to demonstrate that an injunction is necessary to prevent irreparable harm, the court denies their motion," U.S. District Judge Kimba M. Wood said in her decision Jan. 25.

KIMBA WOOD: 'No irreparable harm.'
The plaintiffs had argued that the 1.5-percent deduction would leave workers without sufficient health-care coverage in retirement.

"This argument is unconvincing," Judge Wood said. "First, any depletion of the 1.5-percent deduction funds is a monetary injury which can be redressed after trial through a monetary award."

She continued, "Second, plaintiffs present no evidence that they face an imminent deficiency in or denial of retirement health-care benefits."

An MTA attorney argued in January that the motion should be denied because the 1.5-percent contribution had not been mentioned in the plaintiffs' original or amended complaints and that they had not yet exhausted their administrative remedies by bringing the matter before the New York State Public Employment Relations Board.
 


Please click here for our Copyright Notice.
Click ads below
for larger version