NY State Senate Bill 2025-S1671

Senate Bill S1671

2025-2026 Legislative Session

Authorizes the commissioner of corrections and community supervision to discipline certain employees for acts of serious misconduct

download bill text pdf

Current Bill Status - In Senate Committee Crime Victims, Crime And Correction Committee

Introduced
- In Committee Assembly
- In Committee Senate
- On Floor Calendar Assembly
- On Floor Calendar Senate
- Passed Assembly
- Passed Senate
Delivered to Governor
Signed By Governor

Please enter your contact information

First Name

Last Name

Email Address

A valid email address is required.

Home address is used to determine the senate district in which you reside. Your support or opposition to this bill is then shared immediately with the senator who represents you.

Optional services from the NY State Senate:

Create an account. An account allows you to officially support or oppose key legislation, sign petitions with a single click, and follow issues, committees, and bills that matter to you. When you create an account, you agree to this platform's terms of participation.

Include a custom message for your Senator? (Optional)

Enter a message to your senator. Many New Yorkers use this to share the reasoning behind their support or opposition to the bill. Others might share a personal anecdote about how the bill would affect them or people they care about.

Actions

View Actions

	Assembly Actions - Lowercase Senate Actions - UPPERCASE
Jan 13, 2025	referred to crime victims, crime and correction

co-Sponsors

2025-S1671 (ACTIVE) - Details

Current Committee:: Senate Crime Victims, Crime And Correction
Law Section:: Correction Law
Laws Affected:: Add §12, amd §112, Cor L; amd §§50 & 61, Civ Serv L
Versions Introduced in 2023-2024 Legislative Session:: S8480

2025-S1671 (ACTIVE) - Summary

Authorizes the commissioner of corrections and community supervision to discipline certain employees for acts of serious misconduct; defines serious misconduct; establishes procedures for such disciplinary action; prohibits employees who have been removed for serious misconduct from being placed on the eligible list after such removal.

2025-S1671 (ACTIVE) - Sponsor Memo

                                 
BILL NUMBER: S1671

SPONSOR: SALAZAR
 
TITLE OF BILL:

An act to amend the correction law and the civil service law, in
relation to discipline of certain persons for serious misconduct

 
PURPOSE OR GENERAL IDEA OF BILL:

To establish a new and more accountable procedure for making determi-
nations regarding allegations of serious misconduct on the part of NYS
Department of Corrections and Community Supervision ("DOCCS") employees.

 
SUMMARY OF PROVISIONS:

Section 1 adds a new section 12 to the correction law with the following
subsections:

Subsection 1 defines "serious misconduct" as:

-an act of excessive use of force;

-an act of false reporting regarding one or more acts of excessive use
of force;

-an intentional failure to report an act of excessive use of force;

-the introduction of a cellular device, a controlled substance, marijua-
na or any other significantly incapacitating substance to an institution
of DOCCS; or

-an inappropriate sexual relationship or contact with an incarcerated
person or a person under community supervision.

Subsection 2 provides that when a NYS DOCCS employee is alleged to have
committed an act of serious misconduct, the disciplinary procedure that
may be applied shall be the procedure established in this new section 12
of the correction law.

Subsection 3 establishes the categories of employees subject to the
procedure established in this section.

Subsection 4 establishes the disciplinary procedure to be followed when
a covered NYS DOCCS employee is alleged to have engaged in an act of
serious misconduct. Covered employees are afforded full due process
rights in this procedure, including a reasonable period of time to
obtain representation, to be provided with a copy of the charge or
charges, to answer the charge(s) in writing, to summon witnesses on
their behalf, to have a hearing before a hearing officer who shall make
a recommendation to the commissioner who would then make the final
determination, and to receive a transcript of the hearing without
charge. The burden of proof in the hearing shall be on the department.

Subsection 5 states that an employee charged with serious misconduct may
be suspended without pay pending the hearing and determination.  This
subsection also lists the range of permissible penalties if an employee
is found to have engaged in an act or acts of serious misconduct.

Subsection 6 provides a right to appeal a finding via the procedure set
forth in Article 76 of the NY Civil Procedure Laws and Rules.

Subsection 7 provides that the commissioner may terminate the employment
of an employee who is convicted of a crime whenever the commissioner
determines the continued employment of such person would not be in the
best interest of the department.

Section 2 adds a new paragraph (i) to civil service law section 50 (4)
adding a new category to the list of individuals whom the state civil
service department or a municipal civil service commission may refuse to
examine, or after examination refuse to certify, specifically, an indi-
vidual who has been disciplined for an act of serious misconduct pursu-
ant to correction law section 12.

Section 3 makes a conforming change to civil service law section 61 (1).

Section 4 amends correction law section 112 (1) to add that the commis-
sioner has authority to place reasonable limits or restrictions on items
an employee may bring into a correctional facility or community super-
vision office that could pose a threat or be used as a weapon.

Section 5 provides for the effective date.

 
JUSTIFICATION:

This bill places final decision-making authority regarding discipline of
DOCCS staff for acts of serious misconduct in the hands of the DOCCS
Commissioner. Currently, such authority rests with outside arbitrators.
Under the existing procedure, DOCCS has rarely been able to terminate a
correction officer DOCCS alleges to have used excessive and unjustified
physical force against an incarcerated person. That is, even when DOCCS
has concluded an employee has violated the law by, for example, using
excessive and unlawful force, they almost always fail to be able to
terminate such an employee. This is an untenable situation.

This bill was first introduced early in 2024. Since that time the neces-
sity of enacting the reforms contained in this bill has become even
clearer. In December 2024 a group of DOCCS staff members at Marcy
Correctional Facility killed Robert Brooks in a vicious beating within
an examination room in the prison infirmary, a beating caught without
the knowledge of the staff members involved on video. The widely shared
video shows multiple officers directly involved in physically attacking
Mr. Brooks, who was handcuffed behind his back and who appears at some
point in the process to be completely nonresponsive. The video also
depicts other staff members, uniformed officers or supervisors as well
as civilian medical personnel, standing by, observing the brutal beat-
ing, and not intervening to stop the attack or to assist Mr. Brooks. In
fact, it appears from the video that none of the DOCCS staff present -
more than a dozen individuals appeared to think anything out of the
ordinary was occurring. That is, they appear to have believed they would
never be held accountable for their actions. Several of the officers who
appear to have been involved in beating Mr. Brooks were already facing
civil legal actions based on allegations of other incidents of excessive
force.  This incident raised significant concerns as to how it could be
that state employees could engage in the conduct shown in the Brooks
videos and the incident brought to light the serious failures and inef-
fectiveness of the existing employee disciplinary procedures within
DOCCS. The need for change in regard to staff discipline in DOCCS is
plain and obvious.

This bill was drafted in response to an in-depth investigation by the
Marshall Project regarding the existing disciplinary system for NY's
prison staff. In a series of reports first published in the New York
Times in May 2023 (1), a stark picture emerged of a staff disciplinary
system that is essentially completely broken and ineffective. The Mars-
hall Project found, for example, that over a twelve-year period, DOCCS
"tried to fire officers or supervisors the agency accused of physically
abusing prisoners or covering up their misconduct in 290 cases. But in
only 10% of those cases did the officers get fired." (2)

The existing arbitrator system provides that the union representing an
accused officer essentially has veto power over the selection of the
arbitrator for the case.

As shocking examples of the dysfunction of the existing system, the
Marshall Project reported:

An officer who broke his baton hitting a prisoner 35 times, even after
the man was handcuffed, was not fired. Neither were the guards who beat
a prisoner at Attica Correctional Facility so badly he needed 13 staples
to close gashes in his scalp. Nor were the officers who battered a
mentally ill man, injuring him from face to groin. The man hanged
himself the next day. (3)

The investigation also revealed numerous instances of significant
assaults by staff on incarcerated individuals where DOCCS did not even
charge any officers with misconduct.

This bill, by eliminating the arbitrator system in cases of allegations
of serious misconduct, directly addresses one of the reasons for the
extraordinarily low rate of successful disciplinary cases even when
DOCCS believes there was sezious misconduct. This bill also addresses
the so-called a "blue wall" by which officers protect each other by
either providing false information or simply declining to report abuse
they have witnessed. This is accomplished by the definition in the bill
of "serious misconduct", which includes - in addition to acts of exces-
sive force - an act of false reporting regarding one or more acts of
excessive use of force and an intentional failure to report an act of
excessive use of force.

The failure of the existing staff disciplinary procedure to appropriate-
ly address acts of serious misconduct has far-reaching and devastating
consequences. First, people are injured by this serious misconduct, some
quite severely. Second, the ability of officers to use violence with
impunity has a ripple effect of encouraging more violence from staff and
violence from incarcerated individuals. Third, the existing dysfunction-
al system costs New York State large sums of money in settlements and
court verdicts against DOCCS for excessive and unlawful force by staff
against incarcerated individuals.

Enactment of this bill would be an important step forward in holding
staff accountable if they engage in serious misconduct, in making NY's
prisons safer, in ensuring that the human rights of individuals who are
incarcerated in NY are safeguarded and protected, in helping individuals

engage in positive rehabilitation and transformation while incarcerated,
and in saving the state significant sums of money.

 
SOCIAL JUSTICE IMPACT

A prison system that is unable to hold staff members who engage in seri-
ous misconduct accountable - including those who use excessive force or
fail to report the use of excessive force - is a system that, at least
tacitly, views excessive and unjustified violence by state employees
against individuals who are incarcerated as acceptable. This has a far-
reaching impact, causing immediate harm to individuals, as well as
establishing an atmosphere of lawlessness withing prisons, and subject-
ing individuals and their families to extended trauma. As people of
color continue to be significantly disproportionately represented in the
prison system, this type of governmental official abuse and lack of
accountability hits Black and brown people and communities the hardest.
Enacting this bill would ensure a measure of justice and dignity for
incarcerated individuals and their loved ones.

 
LEGISLATIVE HISTORY:

SENATE:

2024: S8980 (Salazar) - referred to Crime Victims, Crime & Correction

ASSEMBLY: No Same as

 
FISCAL IMPLICATIONS FOR STATE AND LOCAL GOVERNMENTS:

Enactment of this bill will result in significant savings for the State
as the procedures established with this legislation will result in NY's
prisons being safer and in a reduction in the number of successful and
expensive lawsuits against the State based on instances of excessive and
unjustified force by staff against incarcerated individuals.

 
EFFECTIVE DATE:
This act shall become effective on the thirtieth day after it shall
become law, provided, however, that section 1 of the act shall take
effect upon the expiration of the current collective bargaining agree-
ment that governs impacted employees of the department.
1 Santo, Neff, and Meagher, "In N.Y. Prisons, Guards Who Brutalize Pris-
oners Rarely Get Fired",
https://www.nytimes.com/2023/05/19/nvregion/ny-prison- guards-brutality-
fired.html Neff, Santo, and Meagher, "How a 'Blue Wall' Inside N.Y.
State Prisons Protects Abusive Guards",
https://www.nytimes.com/2023/05/22/nyregion/ ny-state-prison-guardsa-
buse.html
Santo and Neff, "A 'Crazy System': How Arbitration Puts Abusive Guards
Back in New York Prisons",
https://nysfocus.com/2023/12/14/arbitration-prison-abuse- corrections-
officers
Santo and Neff, "How We Investigated Abusive Prison Guards Getting Their
Jobs Back in New York",
https://www.themarshallproject.2023/12/14/new-york-prison-guard- arbi-
tration-how-we-investigated
2 Santo and Neff, "We Spent Two Years Investigating Abuse by Prison
Guards in New York. Here are Five Takeaways.",
https://www.themarshaliprojectorg/2023/05/22/new-york-prison- correc-
tions-officer-disciplinefindings
3 Santo, Neff, and Meagher, "In N.Y. Prisons, Guards Who Brutalize Pris-
oners Rarely Get Fired",
https://www.nytimes.com/2023/05/19/nvregion/ny-Prison-guards- brutali-
ty-fired.html

2025-S1671 (ACTIVE) - Bill Text download pdf

                             
                     S T A T E   O F   N E W   Y O R K
 ________________________________________________________________________
 
                                   1671
 
                        2025-2026 Regular Sessions
 
                             I N  S E N A T E
 
                             January 13, 2025
                                ___________
 
 Introduced  by Sens. SALAZAR, MYRIE, SEPULVEDA -- read twice and ordered
   printed, and when printed to be committed to the  Committee  on  Crime
   Victims, Crime and Correction
 
 AN  ACT  to  amend  the  correction  law  and  the civil service law, in
   relation to discipline of certain persons for serious misconduct

   THE PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK, REPRESENTED IN SENATE AND  ASSEM-
 BLY, DO ENACT AS FOLLOWS:
 
   Section 1. The correction law is amended by adding a new section 12 to
 read as follows:
   § 12. DISCIPLINE OF CERTAIN SERIOUS MISCONDUCT. 1. DEFINITION. FOR THE
 PURPOSES  OF  THIS SECTION, THE TERM "SERIOUS MISCONDUCT" SHALL MEAN: AN
 ACT OF EXCESSIVE USE OF FORCE; AN ACT OF FALSE REPORTING  REGARDING  ONE
 OR MORE ACTS OF EXCESSIVE USE OF FORCE; AN INTENTIONAL FAILURE TO REPORT
 AN ACT OF EXCESSIVE USE OF FORCE; THE INTRODUCTION OF A CELLULAR DEVICE,
 CONTROLLED  SUBSTANCE,  MARIHUANA  OR OTHER SIGNIFICANTLY INCAPACITATING
 SUBSTANCE TO AN INSTITUTION OF THE DEPARTMENT; OR AN INAPPROPRIATE SEXU-
 AL RELATIONSHIP OR CONTACT WITH AN INCARCERATED PERSON OR  PERSON  UNDER
 COMMUNITY SUPERVISION.
   2.  ACTS  OF  MISCONDUCT.  NOTWITHSTANDING ANY OTHER PROVISION OF LAW,
 WHEN AN EMPLOYEE IS ALLEGED TO HAVE COMMITTED AN ACT OF SERIOUS  MISCON-
 DUCT  THEN THE DISCIPLINARY PROCESS THAT MAY BE APPLIED TO SUCH EMPLOYEE
 SHALL NOT BE GOVERNED BY  ANY  COLLECTIVE  BARGAINING  AGREEMENT  OR  BY
 SECTION  SEVENTY-FIVE  OF THE CIVIL SERVICE LAW BUT SHALL BE GOVERNED BY
 THE PROVISIONS OF THIS SECTION.
   3. DISCIPLINARY ACTION. A PERSON HOLDING A POSITION  AS  DESCRIBED  IN
 PARAGRAPH  (A), (B) OR (C) OF THIS SUBDIVISION SHALL NOT BE REMOVED FROM
 THEIR POSITION  OR  OTHERWISE  SUBJECTED  TO  ANY  DISCIPLINARY  PENALTY
 AUTHORIZED PURSUANT TO THIS SECTION; PROVIDED, HOWEVER, THAT SUCH PERSON
 MAY  BE REMOVED OR OTHERWISE SUBJECTED TO A DISCIPLINARY PENALTY AUTHOR-
 IZED PURSUANT TO THIS SECTION FOR SERIOUS  MISCONDUCT  AFTER  A  HEARING
 
  EXPLANATION--Matter in ITALICS (underscored) is new; matter in brackets
                       [ ] is old law to be omitted.
                                                            LBD04463-01-5
 S. 1671                             2

 
 UPON  STATED  CHARGES  PURSUANT  TO THIS SECTION. THIS SUBDIVISION SHALL
 APPLY TO:
   (A)  A  PERSON  HOLDING  A  POSITION  BY  PERMANENT APPOINTMENT IN THE
 COMPETITIVE CLASS OF THE CLASSIFIED CIVIL SERVICE; OR
   (B) A PERSON HOLDING A POSITION BY PERMANENT APPOINTMENT OR EMPLOYMENT
 IN THE CLASSIFIED SERVICE OF THE STATE, WHO WAS HONORABLY DISCHARGED  OR
 RELEASED  UNDER  HONORABLE  CIRCUMSTANCES  FROM  THE ARMED FORCES OF THE
 UNITED STATES, INCLUDING (I) HAVING A QUALIFYING CONDITION AS DEFINED IN
 SECTION ONE OF THE VETERANS' SERVICES LAW,  AND  RECEIVING  A  DISCHARGE
 OTHER  THAN BAD CONDUCT OR DISHONORABLE FROM SUCH SERVICE, OR (II) BEING
 A DISCHARGED LGBT VETERAN, AS DEFINED IN SECTION ONE  OF  THE  VETERANS'
 SERVICES  LAW,  AND  RECEIVING  A  DISCHARGE OTHER THAN BAD CONDUCT   OR
 DISHONORABLE  FROM SUCH  SERVICE, HAVING SERVED THEREIN AS  SUCH  MEMBER
 IN  TIME  OF  WAR AS DEFINED IN SECTION EIGHTY-FIVE OF THE CIVIL SERVICE
 LAW, OR WHO IS AN EXEMPT VOLUNTEER FIREFIGHTER AS DEFINED IN THE GENERAL
 MUNICIPAL LAW, EXCEPT WHEN SUCH PERSON HOLDS  THE  POSITION  OF  PRIVATE
 SECRETARY, CASHIER OR DEPUTY OF ANY OFFICIAL OR DEPARTMENT; OR
   (C)  AN EMPLOYEE HOLDING A POSITION IN THE NON-COMPETITIVE CLASS OTHER
 THAN A POSITION DESIGNATED IN THE  RULES  OF  THE  STATE  CIVIL  SERVICE
 COMMISSION  AS  CONFIDENTIAL  OR  REQUIRING THE PERFORMANCE OF FUNCTIONS
 INFLUENCING POLICY, WHO SINCE SUCH EMPLOYEE'S LAST  ENTRY  INTO  SERVICE
 HAS  COMPLETED AT LEAST FIVE YEARS OF CONTINUOUS SERVICE IN THE NON-COM-
 PETITIVE CLASS IN A POSITION OR POSITIONS NOT SO DESIGNATED IN THE RULES
 AS CONFIDENTIAL OR REQUIRING THE PERFORMANCE  OF  FUNCTIONS  INFLUENCING
 POLICY.
   4. PROCEDURE. AN EMPLOYEE HOLDING A POSITION AS DESCRIBED IN PARAGRAPH
 (A),  (B) OR (C) OF SUBDIVISION THREE OF THIS SECTION WHO AT THE TIME OF
 QUESTIONING APPEARS TO BE A POTENTIAL SUBJECT OF DISCIPLINARY ACTION FOR
 AN ACT OR ACTS OF SERIOUS MISCONDUCT SHALL HAVE RIGHT TO  REPRESENTATION
 BY  SUCH  EMPLOYEE'S CERTIFIED OR RECOGNIZED EMPLOYEE ORGANIZATION UNDER
 ARTICLE FOURTEEN OF THE CIVIL SERVICE  LAW  AND  SHALL  BE  NOTIFIED  IN
 ADVANCE,  IN  WRITING,  OF SUCH RIGHT. AN EMPLOYEE HOLDING A POSITION AS
 DESCRIBED IN PARAGRAPH (A), (B) OR (C)  OF  SUBDIVISION  THREE  OF  THIS
 SECTION WHO IS DESIGNATED MANAGERIAL OR CONFIDENTIAL UNDER ARTICLE FOUR-
 TEEN  OF  THE CIVIL SERVICE LAW, SHALL HAVE, AT THE TIME OF QUESTIONING,
 WHERE IT APPEARS THAT SUCH EMPLOYEE IS A POTENTIAL SUBJECT OF  DISCIPLI-
 NARY  ACTION FOR AN ACT OF SERIOUS MISCONDUCT, A RIGHT TO REPRESENTATION
 AND SHALL BE NOTIFIED IN ADVANCE, IN WRITING, OF SUCH RIGHT.  IF  REPRE-
 SENTATION IS REQUESTED, A REASONABLE PERIOD OF TIME SHALL BE AFFORDED TO
 OBTAIN  SUCH  REPRESENTATION. IF THE EMPLOYEE IS UNABLE TO OBTAIN REPRE-
 SENTATION WITHIN A REASONABLE PERIOD OF TIME, THEN  THE  DEPARTMENT  MAY
 PROCEED  WITH  QUESTIONING THE EMPLOYEE. A HEARING OFFICER APPOINTED FOR
 THE PURPOSES OF THIS SECTION SHALL DETERMINE IF 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  SUCH QUESTIONING, AS WELL AS ANY EVIDENCE OR
 INFORMATION OBTAINED AS A RESULT OF SUCH QUESTIONING SHALL BE  EXCLUDED.
 A  PERSON  AGAINST WHOM REMOVAL OR OTHER DISCIPLINARY ACTION IS PROPOSED
 SHALL BE PROVIDED WRITTEN NOTICE AND SHALL BE FURNISHED A  COPY  OF  THE
 CHARGE  OR CHARGES PROFFERED AGAINST SUCH PERSON AND SHALL BE ALLOWED AT
 LEAST EIGHT DAYS FOR ANSWERING SUCH CHARGES IN WRITING. THE HEARING UPON
 SUCH CHARGES SHALL BE HELD BY A HEARING OFFICER, SELECTED BY THE COMMIS-
 SIONER OR THE COMMISSIONER'S DESIGNEE.  THE  HEARING  OFFICER  SHALL  BE
 VESTED  WITH  ALL THE POWERS OF THE COMMISSIONER AND SHALL MAKE A RECORD
 OF SUCH HEARING, WHICH SHALL, ALONG WITH SUCH OFFICER'S  RECOMMENDATION,
 BE  REFERRED TO THE COMMISSIONER FOR REVIEW AND FINAL DETERMINATION. THE
 S. 1671                             3
 
 HEARING OFFICER SHALL, UPON THE REQUEST OF  THE  EMPLOYEE  AGAINST  WHOM
 CHARGES  ARE  PROFFERED, PERMIT SUCH EMPLOYEE TO BE REPRESENTED BY COUN-
 SEL, OR BY A REPRESENTATIVE OF A RECOGNIZED OR CERTIFIED EMPLOYEE ORGAN-
 IZATION,  AND  SHALL ALLOW THEM TO SUMMON WITNESSES ON THEIR BEHALF. THE
 BURDEN OF PROVING SERIOUS  MISCONDUCT  SHALL  BE  UPON  THE  DEPARTMENT.
 COMPLIANCE WITH TECHNICAL RULES OF EVIDENCE SHALL NOT BE REQUIRED.
   5. SUSPENSION PENDING DETERMINATION OF CHARGES; PENALTIES. (A) PENDING
 THE  HEARING  AND  DETERMINATION  OF  CHARGES OF SERIOUS MISCONDUCT, THE
 EMPLOYEE AGAINST WHOM SUCH CHARGES HAVE BEEN PROFFERED MAY BE  SUSPENDED
 WITHOUT  PAY.  IF THE EMPLOYEE IS FOUND GUILTY OF A CHARGE OR CHARGES OF
 SERIOUS MISCONDUCT, THE RECOMMENDED PENALTY OR PUNISHMENT MAY CONSIST OF
 ANY COMBINATION OF THE FOLLOWING:
   (I) A LETTER OF REPRIMAND;
   (II) REMOVAL FROM WORK LOCATION AND TRANSFER;
   (III) A FINE TO BE DEDUCTED FROM THE SALARY OR WAGES OF SUCH EMPLOYEE;
   (IV) PROBATION FOR A SPECIFIED PERIOD, PROVIDED ANY FURTHER  VIOLATION
 CAN LEAD TO TERMINATION;
   (V) SUSPENSION WITHOUT PAY;
   (VI) DEMOTION IN GRADE AND TITLE; OR
   (VII)  DISMISSAL  FROM THE SERVICE AND LOSS OF ACCUMULATED LEAVE CRED-
 ITS.
   (B) PROVIDED, HOWEVER, THAT THE TIME DURING THE PENDENCY OF THE  HEAR-
 ING, IN WHICH AN EMPLOYEE IS SUSPENDED WITHOUT PAY, MAY BE CONSIDERED AS
 PART OF THE PENALTY.  THE FINAL DETERMINATION OF THE COMMISSIONER ON THE
 RECOMMENDATION  FROM  THE HEARING OFFICER SHALL BE MADE WITHIN TEN BUSI-
 NESS DAYS OF RECEIPT OF SUCH RECOMMENDATION. IF THE EMPLOYEE IS  ACQUIT-
 TED  OF  ALL  CHARGES, SUCH EMPLOYEE SHALL BE RESTORED TO THEIR POSITION
 WITH FULL PAY FOR THE PERIOD OF SUSPENSION LESS THE AMOUNT OF ANY  UNEM-
 PLOYMENT INSURANCE BENEFITS THAT MAY HAVE BEEN RECEIVED. IF SUCH EMPLOY-
 EE IS FOUND GUILTY OF ONE OR MORE OF THE CHARGES, A COPY OF THE CHARGES,
 THE  EMPLOYEE'S  WRITTEN  ANSWER,  A  TRANSCRIPT OF THE HEARING, AND THE
 FINAL DETERMINATION OF THE COMMISSIONER SHALL BE FILED IN THE BUREAU  OF
 LABOR  RELATIONS  AND THE EMPLOYEE'S PERSONNEL FILE. A COPY OF THE TRAN-
 SCRIPT OF THE HEARING SHALL, UPON REQUEST OF THE AFFECTED  EMPLOYEE,  BE
 FURNISHED TO SUCH EMPLOYEE WITHOUT CHARGE.
   6.  APPEAL.  WHEN AN EMPLOYEE BELIEVES THEY ARE AGGRIEVED BY A PENALTY
 OF FINE, PROBATION,  SUSPENSION,  DEMOTION  OR  DISMISSAL  FROM  SERVICE
 IMPOSED  PURSUANT TO THIS SECTION, SUCH EMPLOYEE MAY MAKE AN APPLICATION
 TO THE APPROPRIATE COURT IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE  PROVISIONS  OF  ARTICLE
 SEVENTY-EIGHT OF THE CIVIL PRACTICE LAW AND RULES.
   7.  TERMINATION.  NOTWITHSTANDING  ANY  OTHER  PROVISION  OF  LAW, THE
 COMMISSIONER,  IN  THE  COMMISSIONER'S  DISCRETION,  MAY  TERMINATE  THE
 EMPLOYMENT  OF  ANY  EMPLOYEE  WHO  IS CONVICTED OF A CRIME WHENEVER THE
 COMMISSIONER DETERMINES THAT THE CONTINUED  EMPLOYMENT  OF  SUCH  PERSON
 WOULD NOT BE IN THE BEST INTEREST OF THE DEPARTMENT. NOTWITHSTANDING THE
 FOREGOING,  NO  EMPLOYEE  SHALL  BE  TERMINATED PURSUANT TO THIS SECTION
 UNLESS SUCH EMPLOYEE SHALL FIRST HAVE  BEEN  FURNISHED  WITH  A  WRITTEN
 STATEMENT OF THE REASONS FOR SUCH DETERMINATION AND AFFORDED AN OPPORTU-
 NITY  BY  THE  COMMISSIONER,  OR THE COMMISSIONER'S DESIGNEE, TO MAKE AN
 EXPLANATION AND TO SUBMIT FACTS IN OPPOSITION THERETO.
   § 2. Paragraph (h) of subdivision 4 of section 50 of the civil service
 law, as added by chapter 790 of the laws of 1958, is amended and  a  new
 paragraph (i) is added to read as follows:
   (h) who has been dismissed from private employments because of habitu-
 ally poor performance[.]; OR
 S. 1671                             4
 
   (I)  WHO  HAS BEEN DISCIPLINED FOR AN ACT OF SERIOUS MISCONDUCT AS SET
 FORTH IN SUBDIVISION ONE OF SECTION TWELVE OF THE CORRECTION LAW.
   § 3. Subdivision 1 of section 61 of the civil service law, as added by
 chapter 790 of the laws of 1958, is amended to read as follows:
   1. Appointment  or  promotion  from  eligible  lists.  Appointment  or
 promotion from an eligible list to a position in the  competitive  class
 shall  be made by the selection of one of the three persons certified by
 the appropriate civil service commission as  standing  highest  on  such
 eligible  list  who are willing to accept such appointment or promotion;
 provided, however, that the state or a municipal commission may provide,
 by rule, that where it is necessary to break ties among eligibles having
 the same final examination ratings in order to determine  their  respec-
 tive  standings  on  the  eligible list, appointment or promotion may be
 made by the selection of any eligible whose final examination rating  is
 equal  to or higher than the final examination rating of the third high-
 est standing eligible willing to accept such appointment  or  promotion;
 PROVIDED  FURTHER, HOWEVER, THAT AN INDIVIDUAL'S NAME SHALL BE SUSPENDED
 FROM THE ELIGIBLE LIST PENDING THE OUTCOME OF THE REVIEW OF  THE  APPLI-
 CANT'S  QUALIFICATIONS  PURSUANT TO SUBDIVISION FOUR OF SECTION FIFTY OF
 THIS ARTICLE. Appointments and promotions shall be made from the  eligi-
 ble list most nearly appropriate for the position to be filled.
   § 4. Subdivision 1 of section 112 of the correction law, as amended by
 chapter 322 of the laws of 2021, is amended to read as follows:
   1.  The  commissioner [of corrections and community supervision] shall
 have the superintendence, management and  control  of  the  correctional
 facilities  in  the  department  and  of  the  incarcerated  individuals
 confined therein, and of all matters relating to the government,  disci-
 pline,  policing, contracts and fiscal concerns thereof. [He or she] THE
 COMMISSIONER shall have the power and it  shall  be  [his  or  her]  THE
 COMMISSIONER'S  duty  to  inquire  into  all matters connected with said
 correctional facilities.  [He or she] THE COMMISSIONER shall  make  such
 rules  and regulations, not in conflict with the statutes of this state,
 for the government of the officers and other employees of the department
 assigned to said facilities, and in regard to the duties to be performed
 by them, and for the government  and  discipline  of  each  correctional
 facility,  as  [he  or  she] THE COMMISSIONER may deem proper, and shall
 cause such rules and regulations to be recorded by the superintendent of
 the facility, and a copy  thereof  to  be  furnished  to  each  employee
 assigned to the facility. [He or she] WITH DUE CONSIDERATION FOR OVERALL
 SAFETY AND SECURITY, THE COMMISSIONER SHALL ALSO HAVE THE POWER TO PLACE
 REASONABLE  LIMITS  OR  RESTRICTIONS  ON THE ITEMS AN EMPLOYEE MAY BRING
 INTO A  CORRECTIONAL  FACILITY  OR  COMMUNITY  SUPERVISION  OFFICE  WHEN
 REPORTING  FOR  DUTY, THAT CAN POSE A THREAT OR BE USED AS A WEAPON. THE
 COMMISSIONER shall also prescribe a system of accounts and records to be
 kept at each correctional facility, which system shall be uniform at all
 of said facilities, and [he or she] THE  COMMISSIONER  shall  also  make
 rules  and  regulations  for  a record of photographs and other means of
 identifying each incarcerated individual received into said  facilities.
 [He  or  she]  THE COMMISSIONER shall appoint and remove, subject to the
 civil service law, subordinate  officers  and  other  employees  of  the
 department who are assigned to correctional facilities.
   §  5.  This  act shall take effect on the thirtieth day after it shall
 have become a law; provided, however, that section one of this act shall
 take effect upon the expiration of  the  current  collective  bargaining
 agreement   that   governs  impacted  employees  of  the  department  of
 corrections and community supervision; provided further,  however,  that
 S. 1671                             5
 
 the  commissioner  of corrections and community supervision shall notify
 the legislative bill drafting commission  upon  the  expiration  of  the
 current  collective bargaining agreement that governs impacted employees
 of the department of corrections and community supervision in order that
 the  commission  may maintain an accurate and timely effective data base
 of the official text of the laws of the state of New York in furtherance
 of effectuating the provisions of section 44 of the legislative law  and
 section 70-b of the public officers law; provided further, however, that
 notwithstanding  any  other provision of law to the contrary, once these
 provisions take effect they cannot be abrogated,  amended,  enhanced  or
 modified in any way by future collective bargaining.

Comments

Open Legislation is a forum for New York State legislation. All comments are subject to review and community moderation is encouraged.

Comments deemed off-topic, commercial, campaign-related, self-promotional; or that contain profanity, hate or toxic speech; or that link to sites outside of the nysenate.gov domain are not permitted, and will not be published. Attempts to intimidate and silence contributors or deliberately deceive the public, including excessive or extraneous posting/posts, or coordinated activity, are prohibited and may result in the temporary or permanent banning of the user. Comment moderation is generally performed Monday through Friday. By contributing or voting you agree to the Terms of Participation and verify you are over 13.

Create an account. An account allows you to sign petitions with a single click, officially support or oppose key legislation, and follow issues, committees, and bills that matter to you. When you create an account, you agree to this platform's terms of participation.

Senate Bill S1671

Share this bill

Sponsored By

Julia Salazar