90 Pa. Commw. 356 | Pa. Commw. Ct. | 1985
Opinion by
The Municipality of Penn Hills (Municipality) appeals an Allegheny County Common Pleas Court order denying its petition to vacate or modify an arbitration award issued under the Act of June 24,1968 (Act 111).
In an earlier collective bargaining agreement, the Municipality and the Municipality of Penn Hills Police (Police) agreed upon a grievance process which would culminate in binding arbitration. Both parties, however, were obliged to agree to .submit grievances to an arbitrator. When an impasse resulted in the current negotiation on a ne.w collective bargaining agreement, the Municipality and the Police entered into binding arbitration to resolve their remaining disputes,
In this appeal, the Municipality contends that the panel of arbitrators exceeded its authority under Act 111 by ordering the inclusion of compulsory binding arbitration in the labor-management contract. We are ashed to determine whether grievance procedures are a proper subject of Act 111 arbitration.
We recently resolved this precise question in Township of Moon v. Police Officers of the Township of Moon, 83 Pa. Commonwealth Ct. 14, 477 A.2d 29 (1984). That case also concerned an Act 111 arbitration award replacing an existing grievance procedure with a compulsory binding arbitration system. In light of our Supreme Court’s decision in Chirico v. Board of Supervisors of Newtown Township, 504 Pa. 71, 470 A.2d 470 (1983),
In Township of Moon the dispute concerned the very nature of the grievance mechanism. The award
We affirm the common pleas court’s denial of the Municipality’s petition to vacate or modify the arbitrators’ award.
Order
The order of the Allegheny County Common Pleas Court, No. GD 83-6549 dated January 12, 1984, is affirmed.
P.L. 237, as amended, 43 P.S. §§217.1 — 217.10. Act Ill’s coverage is limited to policemen and firemen employed by the Commonwealth or its political subdivisions. Section 1 of Act 111, 43 P.S. §217.1.
Section 4 of Act 111, 43 P.S. §217.4, mandates binding arbitration when the parties reach an impasse in the collective bargaining process.
Chirico field that arbitration was the sole permissible method for resolving grievances within Act Ill’s framework. Id. at 79, 470 A.2d at 475. We indicated in Township of Moon that Chirico had eroded the reliability of Allegheny County Firefighters v. County of Allegheny, 7 Pa. Commonwealth Ct. 81, 299 A.2d 60 (1973), and its progeny, which held that grievance procedures were not a proper subject of Act 111 arbitration.