84 A.3d 343
Pa. Commw. Ct.2014Background
- FOP Lodge No. 5 (the union) and the City of Philadelphia (the City) went to Act 111 interest arbitration after failing to agree on a successor CBA for 2009–2014; the Panel issued a 2009 Award including Section 14 (48‑hour court‑notice penalty) and Section 22 (Panel retains jurisdiction to resolve implementation disputes).
- After the City issued a General Message interpreting implementation of Section 14 (defining when 48‑hour clock starts, duplicate notices, continuances, etc.), the FOP filed grievances and asked the Panel for a hearing under Section 22 to resolve implementation issues.
- The Panel held a June 15, 2010 hearing and, over the FOP arbitrator’s objection, issued a 2011 Award clarifying Section 14 and prescribing notice delivery procedures (allowing telephonic voicemail and e‑mail notice, requiring officers to designate contact info, and making failure to designate a basis to forfeit overtime premium and subject to discipline).
- The FOP petitioned the trial court to vacate the 2011 Award; the trial court denied the petition. The FOP appealed to this Court.
- The majority affirmed, holding (1) the June 15, 2010 proceeding was an interest‑arbitration implementation hearing (not grievance arbitration); (2) narrow certiorari review applied; and (3) the Panel did not exceed its powers by adopting notice‑delivery rules as part of implementing the 2009 Award.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument (FOP) | Defendant's Argument (City/Panel) | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether the June 15, 2010 proceeding was interest arbitration (implementation) vs. grievance arbitration | FOP: The Panel acted as a grievance arbitrator and thus lacked authority to rewrite notice procedures | City/Panel: The 2009 Award retained jurisdiction to resolve implementation; FOP invoked Section 22 and treated matter as implementation | Held: Proceeding was interest‑arbitration implementation; FOP’s conduct and invocation of Section 22 confirm that classification |
| Proper standard/scope of review | FOP: Trial court should not have applied narrow certiorari or should have applied broader scrutiny | City/Panel: Narrow certiorari applies to Act 111 awards; review limited to jurisdiction, regularity, excess of powers, constitutional deprivation | Held: Narrow certiorari applies; inquiry limited to whether Panel exceeded its powers (no regularity/constitutional challenge) |
| Whether the Panel exceeded its powers by changing long‑standing notice distribution practices (Paragraph 4) | FOP: Panel impermissibly rewrote non‑bargained, decades‑old notice practices and imposed disciplinary consequences; change was not placed in dispute | City/Panel: Notice method is intrinsic to implementing Section 14 (when notice occurs affects overtime liability); Panel retained jurisdiction to clarify implementation and could adopt reasonable delivery methods (phone, voicemail, e‑mail) | Held: Panel did not exceed its powers; changes related to implementation of a bargainable term (Section 14) and were within arbitrators’ authority |
Key Cases Cited
- Town of McCandless v. McCandless Police Officers Ass’n, 901 A.2d 991 (Pa. 2006) (distinguishes interest arbitration from grievance arbitration)
- City of Philadelphia v. International Ass'n of Firefighters, Local 22, 999 A.2d 555 (Pa. 2010) (scope of narrow certiorari and when an award exceeds arbitrators’ powers)
- Dep’t of Corr. v. Pennsylvania State Corr. Officers Ass’n, 12 A.3d 346 (Pa. 2011) (arbitrator exceeds power by mandating illegal acts or actions unrelated to bargainable terms)
- Moon Twp. v. Police Officers of Moon Twp., 498 A.2d 1311 (Pa. 1985) (interest arbitration panels may award terms and conditions the parties could voluntarily agree to)
- Fraternal Order of Police, Flood City Lodge No. 86 v. City of Johnstown, 39 A.3d 1010 (Pa. Cmwlth. 2012) (describing narrow certiorari review for Act 111 awards)
- West Pottsgrove Twp. v. West Pottsgrove Police Officers’ Ass’n, 791 A.2d 452 (Pa. Cmwlth. 2002) (permitting limited retention of jurisdiction for implementation/reopener purposes)