Appeal from the Order of the Court of Common Pleas of Lackawanna County in case of County of Lackawanna and Service Employees' International Union, AFL-CIO, and Service Employees' International Union, AFL-CIO, Local 406, No. 3 September Term, 1976.
Sheldon Rosenberg, with him Jacob Nogi, Robert Ufberg, James J. Ligi, and Nogi, O'Malley & Harris, for appellant.
Robert D. Mariani, with him Joseph P. Coviello, and Dunn, Byrne & Coviello, for appellees.
President Judge Bowman and Judges Crumlish, Jr., Wilkinson, Jr., Rogers and Blatt. Opinion by Judge Crumlish, Jr.
[ 35 Pa. Commw. Page 532]
The County of Lackawanna (Employer/Appellant) appeals an order of the Court of Common Pleas affirming an Arbitrator's decision finding that Employer violated provisions of a collective bargaining agreement (Agreement) with the Service Employees' International Union, AFL-CIO, Local No. 406 (Union), and ordering reinstatement of the employees terminated in violation thereof.
On January 1, 1975, pursuant to the provisions of the Pennsylvania Public Employe Relations Act, Act of July 23, 1970, P.L. 563, as amended, 43 P.S. § 1101.101 et seq. (Act 195), Employer entered into the Agreement with the Union providing for wages, hours, working conditions, layoffs, etc., terminating December 31, 1976.
[ 35 Pa. Commw. Page 533]
Because of strained economic conditions, Employer notified certain county employees of an accelerated terminal date, to wit: December 31, 1975.
Union filed a grievance in behalf of the affected employees, alleging that Employer had misinterpreted Article IX of the Agreement and violated Article XI.*fn1
The grievance was processed in accordance with the Agreement and an arbitrator was selected to hear and decide whether the layoffs were proper.*fn2
The Arbitrator found that the employees were wrongfully terminated and ordered reinstatement with back pay and benefits retroactive to the termination date.*fn3
Employer, in its appeal to the court below, contended that the Arbitration Act of 1927 (Act of 1927),*fn4 not Act 195, dictates the parameters of the Arbitrator's procedural and remedial powers. It is Employer's position that the provisions of the ...