Arbitrator Orders State to Pay Back Remote Worker
Public sector employers face higher burdens of proof when enforcing time-tracking policies for distributed workforces.
Updated on Oct. 26, 2026 in Remote Work
Live Poll
Should local government agencies have more authority to monitor the off-duty activities of remote employees?
In February 2026, an arbitrator ordered the New York State Office of Information Technology Services to restore back pay and benefits to a former employee. The ruling follows the November 2025 dismissal of criminal charges against the worker, who had been accused of time theft while working remotely.
Why it matters
The dispute highlights the ongoing operational challenges state agencies face when documenting and auditing productivity for remote employees. It underscores the difficulty of enforcing time-and-attendance compliance when roles lack clear, objective metrics for off-site task completion.
The employee had reported daily shifts spanning from 7 a.m. to midnight starting in 2020. The state previously alleged that the worker collected $8,290 in compensation for hours that could not be verified due to concurrent volunteer activities.
The players
Michael Genevick
A former employee of the New York State Office of Information Technology Services.
New York State Office of Information Technology Services
The agency responsible for providing centralized information technology services for state government operations.
Thomas R. Rinaldo
The arbitrator who issued the February 2026 ruling regarding the back pay dispute.
The details
The state suspended the worker in May 2025 after an anonymous tip triggered an investigation into reported 17-hour workdays. While the state argued these hours were falsified to cover outside volunteer duties, the arbitrator concluded the state failed to demonstrate that these volunteer commitments impeded the employee from performing his assigned work duties.
Timeline
June 2020: The employee began reporting shifts from 7 a.m. to midnight.
May 2025: The employee was suspended and charged with six felonies.
November 19, 2025: The criminal case against the employee was dismissed.
February 2026: An arbitrator issued a ruling favoring the employee.
August 2026: A filing noted the employee has not yet been reinstated.
Market Landscape
This case tests the limits of the New York State Public Employee Federation labor contract arbitration procedures. It highlights the friction between internal disciplinary actions and the binding nature of independent arbitration in public employment disputes.
Operators must ensure that remote work policies include rigorous, verifiable performance metrics rather than relying solely on time logs. When managing disciplinary actions, employers should document specific work-product failures to prevent successful arbitration challenges.
The takeaway
Management must bridge the gap between time-based reporting and output-based performance management to minimize labor dispute risks. Employers should consult with legal counsel to ensure that evidence of time theft meets the high burden of proof required for successful arbitration defense.
Further reading
For broader context on managing distributed workforces, read more in our Remote Work section.
Source note: This article includes information reported by Times Union.
Live Poll
Should local government agencies have more authority to monitor the off-duty activities of remote employees?
