Whether an arbitrator's award reinstating a correctional officer violates public policy and therefore should be overturned.

No. The arbitrator's decision does not contravene any strong and explicit public policy considerations found in constitutional, statutory, or common law. Therefore, the arbitrator's award cannot be overruled as violating public policy.

Petitioner Edward Kuhnel, a correctional officer employed by the Department of Correctional Services, was suspended from duty after flying a Nazi flag from the front porch of his home on the 55th anniversary of Hitler's declaration of war on the United States. He was charged with violating sections 2.1 and 2.7 of the employee manual, which dictate that an officer's personal conduct and affiliations must not discredit the Department. Pursuant to a collective bargaining agreement between the correctional officers' union and the State, the matter was turned over to an arbitrator to decide. The arbitrator concluded the Department had not met its burden of proof and that Petitioner was not guilty of the charges enumerated in the disciplinary order. The arbitrator reinstated Kuhnel with full back pay and benefits.

Petitioner commenced an article 75 proceeding to confirm the award while the Department cross-filed to have it overturned, asserting that it was both irrational and in violation of public policy. The supreme court granted the petition to confirm the award, and the Appellate Division, with two Justices dissenting, affirmed. On appeal, the Court of Appeals affirmed, and held that the award reinstating the officer should stand.

The Court observed that an arbitrator's determination is usually entitled to great deference. It noted, however, that such a determination could be overturned when it violates a strong public policy, is irrational, or clearly exceeds enumerated limitations on the arbitrator's authority under C.P.L.R. „ 7511(b)(1). The Court held that the public policy exception applies in any of three situations: if the arbitration agreement itself violates public policy; if the award intrudes upon another's area of authority; and if the award violates an explicit New York State law.

The Court concluded that it had no basis to overturn the arbitrator's award in the instant case as the decision was not contrary to public policy. There is neither statutory language nor any other evidence that public policy prohibits an officer found not guilty of charged conduct from being reinstated to his or her position. The Court stated that it cannot reverse the arbitrator's factual finding that Petitioner is not guilty of such conduct, even if it does not agree with such findings. The Court held that it is also unable to invade the province of the arbitrator and so cannot reweigh the concerns at issue in the case.