Appeals from the Order of the Court of Common Pleas of Clarion County in the case of Clarion County v. Pennsylvania Labor Relations Board, No. 703-1979.
Anthony C. Busillo, III, with him James L. Crawford, for appellant, Pennsylvania Labor Relations Board.
Alex E. Echard, for Appellee, Clarion County.
Jonathan K. Walters, with him Theodore H. Lieverman and Alaine S. Williams, Kirschner, Walters & Willig, for intervenor-appellant.
President Judge Crumlish, Jr. and Judges Mencer, Rogers, Blatt and Williams, Jr. Opinion by President Judge Crumlish, Jr. Judge Palladino did not participate in the decision in this case.
[ 65 Pa. Commw. Page 160]
The Pennsylvania Labor Relations Board (PLRB) appeals a Clarion County Common Pleas Court decision which reversed the PLRB's finding that Clarion County had committed unfair labor practices under the Public Employe Relations Act (PERA).*fn1 We reverse.
The American Federation of State, County and Municipal Employees, AFL-CIO of Franklin County (AFSCME), is the exclusive representative of the Clarion County prison guards. When Clarion County, the public employer, and AFSCME reached an impasse in the collective bargaining process, the impasse was submitted to a panel of arbitrators. The panel issued its arbitration award which was then submitted to the Clarion County Salary Board*fn2 for implementation. The Board failed to implement the total agreement, deleting or altering some of the provisions of the award.
AFSCME filed a charge of unfair labor practices alleging that Clarion County had failed to implement
[ 65 Pa. Commw. Page 161]
the award pursuant to Section 805 of PERA.*fn3 Section 805 reads:
Notwithstanding any other provisions of this act where representatives of units of guards at prisons or mental hospitals or units of employes directly involved with and necessary to the functioning of the courts of this Commonwealth have reached an impasse in collective bargaining and mediation as required in section 801 of this article has not resolved the dispute, the impasse shall be submitted to a panel of arbitrators whose decision shall be final and binding upon both parties with the proviso that the decisions of the arbitrators which would require legislative enactment to be effective shall be considered advisory only. (Emphasis added.)
Under Section 1620 of the County Code,*fn4 the Salary Board simply has the authority to "fix" salaries. Clarion County asserts, however, that because its Salary Board is composed of three County Commissioners and the County Treasurer, the action of the Salary Board was a "legislative enactment" which made the proviso of Section 805 operative and made the ...