Matter of New York State Coalition of Pub. Employers v. New York State Dep't of Labor, 457 N.E.2d 785 (NY 1983). · Go Syfert
Search
Matter of New York State Coalition of Pub. Employers v. New York State Dep't of Labor, 457 N.E.2d 785 (NY 1983). Cases Citing This Book View Copy Cite
34 citation events (10 in the last 25 years) across 6 distinct courts.
Treatment trajectory · 1984 → 2026 · click a year to view as-of
1984 2005 2026
Top citers, strongest first. 6 distinct citers. How cited ↗
cited Cited as authority (rule) Matter of Vaughan v. New York State Dept. of Transp.
N.Y. App. Div. · 2024 · confidence medium
Empls. v New York State Dept. of Labor , 60 NY2d 789, 790-791 [1983]).
cited Cited as authority (rule) Plainview-Old Bethpage Congress of Teachers v. New York State Health Insurance Plan
N.Y. App. Div. · 2016 · confidence medium
Empls. v New York State Dept. of Labor, 60 NY2d 789, 791 [1983]; Matter of Central Gen.
cited Cited as authority (rule) Plainview-Old Bethpage Congress of Teachers v. New York State Health Insurance Plan
N.Y. App. Div. · 2016 · confidence medium
Empls. v New York State Dept. of Labor, 60 NY2d 789, 791 [1983]; Matter of Central Gen.
cited Cited as authority (rule) City of New York v. Commissioner of Labor
N.Y. Sup. Ct. · 2011 · confidence medium
Empls. v New York State Dept. of Labor, 60 NY2d 789, 791 [1983].) The WVPA is a statute enacted by the legislature.
discussed Cited as authority (rule) Abdil v. Martinez
N.Y. Sup. Ct. · 2002 · confidence medium
Empls. v New York State Dept, of Labor, supra at 791; People v Cull, supra at 126-128 .) While the Housing Authority has a broad legislative mandate to provide affordable housing to low income tenants and to promulgate rules and regulations to effectuate such mandate, by explicitly prescribing that the Housing Authority submit its rules and regulations to DHCR for approval, the Legislature intended DHCR to function as an oversight mechanism for those rules and regulations.
discussed Cited "see" Council for Owner Occupied Housing, Inc. v. Abrams
N.Y. Sup. Ct. · 1986 · signal: see · confidence high
Since petitioners seek to have this court pass upon the validity of the regulations themselves, this article 78 proceeding must be converted to an action for declaratory judgment (CPLR 103 [c]; see, Matter of New York State Coalition of Public Employers v New York State Dept. of Labor, 89 AD2d 283, 284 , n, affd 60 NY2d 789 ; see also, 92-07 Rest. v New York State Liq.
Retrieving the full opinion text from the archive…
In the Matter of New York State Coalition of Public Employers Et Al., Respondents-Appellants,
v.
New York State Department of Labor Et Al., Appellants-Respondents
New York Court of Appeals.
Oct 25, 1983.
457 N.E.2d 785
APPEARANCES OF COUNSEL, Robert Abrams, Attorney-General {John Q. Driscoll and Peter H. Schiff of counsel), for appellants-respondents., Henry F. Sobota for respondents-appellants.
Cooke and Judges Jasen, Jones, Wachtler, Meyer, Simons and Kaye Concur.
Cited by 25 opinions  |  Published

OPINION OF THE COURT

Memorandum.

The order of the Appellate Division should be affirmed, without costs.

Section 27-a (subd 4, par a) of the Labor Law directed the Industrial (now Labor) Commissioner to adopt by rule all safety and health standards promulgated under the United States Occupational Safety and Health Act (OSHA) which were in effect on December 27, 1980. Pursuant to this direction, the commissioner promulgated and published in the State Register a proposed rule which simply “incorporated by reference” all of the standards in 29 CFR parts 1910 and 1926. (12 NYCRR 800.3.)

[*791] In this article 78 proceeding respondents contend that such incorporation by reference violates section 8 of article IV of the New York Constitution, which provides: “No rule or regulation made by any state department * * * [or] officer * * * shall be effective until it is filed in the office of the department of state. The legislature shall provide for the speedy publication of such rules and regulations, by appropriate laws.” The Appellate Division and Special Term have held that this section forbids wholesale incorporation by reference of the OSHA regulations. We agree.

One of the purposes behind section 8 of article IV was to insure the existence of a common and definite place where the exact content of rules and regulations, including any changes, might be found. (People v Cull, 10 NY2d 123, 128.) Apart from contravening this purpose, the rule proposed by the commissioner violates the plain language of section 8, which requires all rules and regulations to be “filed in the office of the department of state” before they become effective. The OSHA regulations have not been filed.

Respondents also argue that the rule is void for vagueness because (1) it fails to specify which of the OSHA regulations were “standards” as opposed to record-keeping requirements; (2) it fails to specify which of the regulations were in effect on December 27, 1980; and (3) it adopts certain standards which are not applicable to the public sector. At such time as appellant complies with the requirement of filing and publishing the regulations, there will be no ambiguity concerning which standards are to apply in New York. Nor can we assume that appellant will choose to include regulations which have no applicability to the public sector. Consequently, it would be premature to pass on the argument that such inclusion would be void. Similarly, given our decision today, it would be pointless to pass on respondents’ contention that the procedure adopted by the commissioner deprived them of their rights under the State Administrative Procedure Act to comment on the proposed regulations.

Chief Judge Cooke and Judges Jasen, Jones, Wachtler, Meyer, Simons and Kaye concur.

[*792] Order affirmed, without costs, in a memorandum.