Recent PERB Ruling: Union Stickers On School Property Not Protected By Taylor Law

A recent New York State Public Employment Relations Board (“PERB”) decision clarified the limits of union messaging on school property. The case centered on whether placing stickers supportive of a union in school hallways and other public areas of a school building constituted protected activity under Section 209-a.1 of the New York State Civil Service Law (more commonly referred to as the “Act” or the “Taylor Law”).

During contract negotiations between the school district and the union, and just prior to declaring impasse, union members began affixing “Union Strong” stickers in the hallways, and on walls, doors, lockers, and windows throughout school buildings for the purpose of demonstrating solidarity. Existing contract language permitted union communications on designated faculty lounge bulletin boards only. Despite the school district’s request to stop, the stickers continued to appear, prompting the school district to remove them.

The union filed an improper practice charge against the school district, arguing that removing the stickers interfered with protected union activity. The union likened the act of affixing the stickers to wearing union apparel. However, the administrative law judge (“ALJ”) disagreed, emphasizing that while unions have the right to communicate with members, access to employer property for that purpose is not unlimited. The right to use school property for union messaging is a mandatory subject of negotiations and subject to reasonable restrictions.

While it is well settled that labor organizations have the right to communication with its members “in the furtherance of its representational duties”, access to the public employer’s property is not an unlimited right. The ALJ held that employee organizations cannot claim a right to use school property for purposes beyond their representational duties and must respect the district’s authority over its property unless otherwise agreed to by the parties. Furthermore, unions are not permitted to choose their own methods for messaging by using district property without authorization.

The ALJ continued, “The Board’s holdings on public messaging is unequivocal: access to an employer’s property for the purpose of communications with the public is not a right under the Act.” Ultimately, the ALJ, dismissing the improper practice charge, held that because the union had alternative means of communication pursuant to the negotiated collective bargaining agreement (i.e., the bulletin boards in the faculty lounges) and the messaging was not within the union’s representational functions, the unauthorized placement of the stickers was not protected by the Taylor Law.

This ruling makes clear that while unions retain important communication rights, those rights do not extend to unauthorized use of school property for public messaging (e.g., demonstrating union solidarity). Employers may enforce reasonable restrictions, provided alternative channels for union communication exist.