## Facts

- Two public-school teachers, members of a teachers’ union, participated in picketing during collective-bargaining negotiations with their school district.
- Teachers had picketed for an extended period on a public street in front of a middle school.
- On a rainy morning, the teachers displayed picket signs from their cars parked along the street in front of the school during student drop-off.
- The district alleged the cars were positioned so parents could not use the curbside drop-off area, causing traffic congestion and requiring students to exit vehicles in the middle of the street.
- The district brought disciplinary charges; after separate arbitration hearings, each teacher was found guilty of misconduct and fined.
- The teachers sought to vacate the arbitration awards, claiming the discipline violated the First Amendment.

## Issues

1. Whether the teachers’ union picketing by displaying signs from parked cars during school drop-off was speech on a matter of public concern under the First Amendment.
2. Whether, under the Pickering public-employee speech test, the district’s interests in student safety and effective school operations outweighed the teachers’ interest in engaging in the demonstration in the manner chosen.
3. Whether the arbitration awards imposing fines violated public policy by infringing First Amendment rights.

## Decision

- The court held the demonstration was protected expressive activity addressing a matter of public concern.
- Applying Pickering balancing, the court concluded the district’s interests in safeguarding students and maintaining orderly, efficient school operations outweighed the teachers’ interest in conducting the demonstration in a manner that created congestion and a safety risk during drop-off.
- The court reversed the intermediate appellate court and reinstated the arbitration awards, thereby upholding the misconduct findings and fines.

## Legal Principles

- Public employees retain First Amendment protection when speaking as citizens on matters of public concern, including union-related picketing.
- Under Pickering, protected speech may still be subject to employer discipline if the government employer’s interests (including safety and operational efficiency) outweigh the employee’s interest in the speech as carried out.
- The government employer may respond to the manner of employee expression, not merely its content, when the manner reasonably creates safety risks or disrupts operations, even without proof of actual injury.

## Conclusion

The court upheld teacher discipline arising from union picketing because, although the activity involved protected speech on a public issue, the specific method of demonstrating during student drop-off posed a safety risk and disrupted school operations, making the fines constitutionally permissible under Pickering.


Santer v. Bd. of Educ. of E. Meadow Union Free Sch. Dist., 23 N.Y.3d 251, 990 N.Y.S.2d 442 (N.Y. 2014)