Landlord Can Eliminate Elevator Operator

LVT Number: 10511

(Decision submitted by Peter Schwartz of the Manhattan law firm of Fromme Fromme & Schwartz, attorneys for the landlord.) Landlord applied to the DHCR for permission to eliminate elevator attendants at the building. Landlord asked to substitute the elevator operator service at 56 hours per week with additional porter service at 16 hours per week. The DRA ruled against landlord, denying its application. Landlord appealed. In its PAR, landlord offered to install a security camera in the elevator and monitor it at the doorman station in addition to the proposed porter service.

(Decision submitted by Peter Schwartz of the Manhattan law firm of Fromme Fromme & Schwartz, attorneys for the landlord.) Landlord applied to the DHCR for permission to eliminate elevator attendants at the building. Landlord asked to substitute the elevator operator service at 56 hours per week with additional porter service at 16 hours per week. The DRA ruled against landlord, denying its application. Landlord appealed. In its PAR, landlord offered to install a security camera in the elevator and monitor it at the doorman station in addition to the proposed porter service. The DHCR ruled for landlord. Landlord could eliminate the elevator operators if it supplied the substitute services of security camera, monitoring, and additional porter service.

44 E. 67th St. Condominium: DHCR Adm. Rev. Dckt. No. IK420027RO (12/15/95) [5-page document]

Downloads

IK420027RO.pdf331.44 KB