35 A.3d 822
Pa. Commw. Ct.2011Background
- CBA covered 2004–2006; negotiations for successor CBA began; impasse declared May 2, 2006 under Act 111.
- Arbitration panel selected for hearings in Oct 2006, but canceled as tentative 2007–2012 CBA agreement emerged; Union ratified Oct 17, 2006, City announced agreement and later believed final terms were memorialized.
- City and Union disagreed over finality; December 2006 City actions included approving and executing a successor CBA, while Union refused to sign; City unilaterally implemented terms effective Jan 1, 2007.
- Because impasse recurred, an arbitration panel again heard the matter in 2007; City argued lack of arbitrability; Panel later issued Award Sept 2009 finding no binding contract and thus panel jurisdiction.
- Trial court vacated the Award in December 2010, holding an enforceable 2007–2012 CBA existed and Panel lacked jurisdiction; Union appealed; Commonwealth Court reversed and remanded for remaining issues.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether the Panel had jurisdiction to arbitrate the dispute | Union: Panel had jurisdiction; no binding contract existed. | City: A binding 2007–2012 CBA existed, precluding arbitration. | Panel's jurisdiction determination entitled to deference; vacatur improper. |
| Whether the trial court appropriately applied narrow certiorari review | Union: defer to arbitral findings on jurisdiction. | City: court may review arbitrability de novo. | Court should defer to Panel's arbitral-fact findings; vacatur reversed. |
Key Cases Cited
- Town of McCandless v. McCandless Police Officers Association, 587 Pa. 525 (Pa. 2006) (defers to arbitral jurisdiction determinations in narrow certiorari context)
- Pennsylvania State Police v. Pennsylvania State Troopers' Association (Betancourt), 540 Pa. 66 (Pa. 1995) (defines narrow certiorari review scope)
- Pennsylvania State Police v. Pennsylvania State Troopers' Association, 840 A.2d 1059 (Pa.Cmwlth.2004) (panel's factual determinations afforded deference when within arbitral scope)