New York Consolidated Laws

N.Y. Civil Service Law § 200 (2026)

Statement of policy

✓ current as of May 2026

Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section NY-LEGnysenate.gov Justiaon Justia CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar

§ 200. Statement of policy. The legislature of the state of New York
declares that it is the public policy of the state and the purpose of
this act to promote harmonious and cooperative relationships between
government and its employees and to protect the public by assuring, at
all times, the orderly and uninterrupted operations and functions of
government.  These policies are best effectuated by (a) granting to
public employees the right of organization and representation, (b)
requiring the state, local governments and other political subdivisions
to negotiate with, and enter into written agreements with employee
organizations representing public employees which have been certified or
recognized, (c) encouraging such public employers and such employee
organizations to agree upon procedures for resolving disputes, (d)
creating a public employment relations board to assist in resolving
disputes between public employees and public employers, and (e)
continuing the prohibition against strikes by public employees and
providing remedies for violations of such prohibition.

Notes of Decisions

Cited in 97 cases (7 in the last 5 years), 1970–2026 · leading case: Kent v. Lefkowitz, 54 N.E.3d 1149 (NY 2016).

Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment

Kent v. Lefkowitz, 54 N.E.3d 1149 (NY 2016). “This case is governed by the Taylor Law (Civil Service Law § 200 et seq.), which, in matters within its purview, imposes a “strong and sweeping” obligation (Matter of Board of Educ.”

Bd. of Educ. v. Ambach, 517 N.E.2d 509 (NY 1987). · cites it 2× “” (Civil Service Law § 200.) This policy is "best effectuated” by "encouraging such public employers and such employee organizations to agree upon procedures for resolving disputes”.”

Mayor of New York v. Council of New York, 874 N.E.2d 706 (NY 2007). · cites it 4× “In general, labor relations in the public sector in New York State are governed by the Taylor Law, Civil Service Law § 200 et seq. But the Taylor Law contains a local option provision, Civil Service Law § 212, which permits local governments to enact their own counterparts to…”

Rosen v. Pub. Emp. Relations Bd., 526 N.E.2d 25 (NY 1988). · cites it 2× “, 44 NY2d 336 , 342; Civil Service Law § 200). Manifestly, the Legislature sought to exclude from a statutory scheme regulating public employment certain rights and advantages conferred upon those in the private sector (see, e.”

Lippman v. Pub. Emp. Relations Bd., 161 L.R.R.M. (BNA) 3084 (N.Y. App. Div. 1999). · cites it 3× “1 Under Civil Service Law § 201 (7) (a), employees who are designated “managerial or confidential” are excluded from the definition of “public employees” and, as such, are generally not covered by the myriad of rights and protections afforded to public employees under the Taylor…”

Margiotta v. Kaye, 283 F. Supp. 2d 857 (E.D.N.Y 2003). · cites it 3× “” N.Y. Civil Service Law § 200 . Under the Taylor Law, public employees are barred from engaging in strikes.”

Stettine v. Cnty. of Suffolk, 488 N.E.2d 75 (NY 1985). · cites it 4× “Surely public employee labor unions have many attributes that remove them from the general understanding of voluntary nonprofit associations because, unlike most nonprofit associations, they are authorized and regulated by statute (Civil Service Law § 200 et seq .), they enjoy…”

Donohue v. Mangano, 886 F. Supp. 2d 126 (E.D.N.Y 2012). “In the three consolidated actions, the Plaintiffs are public employee organizations within the meaning of Section 201 of the Public Employees’ Fair Employment Act, Civil Service Law § 200 et seq. (the “Taylor Law”), as well as officers from these organizations.”

In Re the Arbitration Between Johnson City Prof'l Firefighters Local 921 & Vill. of Johnson City, 958 N.E.2d 899 (NY 2011). · cites it 2× “This result, I believe, is contrary to the spirit and purpose of the Taylor Law ( see Civil Service Law § 200) and, therefore, violates public policy.”

Palladino v. CNY Centro, Inc., 12 N.E.3d 436 (NY 2014). “Public employees in New York may bring an improper practice charge before the New York State Public Employment Relations Board pursuant to the Taylor Law (Civil Service Law § 200 et seq.)- Civil Service Law § 209-a (2) (c) provides that it shall be an improper practice for an…”

Ass'n of Surrogates & Supreme Court Reporters v. State, 79 N.Y.2d 39 (NY 1992). “v State of New York, 78 NY2d 143, 153 , supra [citing Civil Service Law § 200]). Thus, the statute denies employees the right to strike, balances that loss with a continuation of benefits provision binding on the employer after the existing contract expires, and mandates that…”

Perrenod v. Liberty Bd. of Educ. for the Liberty Cent. Sch. Dist., 223 A.D.2d 870 (N.Y. App. Div. 1996). · cites it 4× “Thereafter, Supreme Court, upon review of the merits, concluded (1) that the contract provisions were in accordance with the Taylor Law (see, Civil Service Law § 200 et seq.), (2) that payments for unused sick days were reasonable considerations in return for the services…”

Show all 97 citing cases →

Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.