Searching over 5,500,000 cases.


searching
Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.

JOINT BARGAINING COMMITTEE PENNSYLVANIA SOCIAL SERVICES UNION ET AL. v. COMMONWEALTH PENNSYLVANIA (08/13/82)

decided: August 13, 1982.

JOINT BARGAINING COMMITTEE OF THE PENNSYLVANIA SOCIAL SERVICES UNION ET AL., PETITIONERS
v.
COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA, PENNSYLVANIA LABOR RELATIONS BOARD, RESPONDENT. COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA, INTERVENOR



Appeal from the Order of the Pennsylvania Labor Relations Board in case of Pennsylvania Labor Relations Board v. Commonwealth of Pennsylvania, No. PERA-C-3157-C.

COUNSEL

Bruce M. Ludwig, Stephen A. Sheller & Associates, for petitioner.

Anthony C. Busillo, II, with him James L. Crawford, for respondent.

Robert J. Schwartz, Assistant Attorney General, with him John D. Raup, Chief Counsel, and Thomas H. Lane, Morgan, Lewis & Bockius, for intervenor.

President Judge Crumlish and Judges Rogers, Blatt, MacPhail and Doyle. Opinion by Judge Doyle. Judge Mencer did not participate in the decision in this case.

Author: Doyle

[ 68 Pa. Commw. Page 308]

Before this Court is an appeal by the Joint Bargaining Committee of the Pennsylvania Social Services

[ 68 Pa. Commw. Page 309]

Union and Pennsylvania Employment Security Employees' Association, Affiliates of Service Employees International Union, AFL-CIO (Union) from a final order of the Pennsylvania Labor Relations Board (PLRB) holding that the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania has not committed an unfair labor practice in violation of Sections 1201(a)(1) and (5) of the Public Employe Relations Act (PERA)*fn1 by refusing to engage in good faith collective bargaining with the Union with regard to the workload of caseworkers of the Department of Public Welfare (Department). We affirm the decision of the PLRB.

The initial unfair labor practices charge in this matter was filed with the PLRB by the Union*fn2 on February 22, 1973. A hearing was held and on January 4, 1974, the PLRB issued a decision holding that employee caseload*fn3 was a matter of inherent managerial policy, the refusal to bargain over which was not an unfair labor practice pursuant to Section 702 of the

[ 68 Pa. Commw. Page 310]

PERA,*fn4 as opposed to which it would be were this deemed a subject for which collective bargaining was mandatory under Section 701 of the PERA.*fn5 The PLRB's decision was appealed to this Court and, in Pennsylvania Social Services Union v. Pennsylvania Labor Relations Board, 15 Pa. Commonwealth Ct. 441, 325 A.2d 659 (1974), we affirmed the PLRB's holding. The Pennsylvania Supreme Court, however, in Pennsylvania Social Services Union v. Pennsylvania Labor Relations Board, (No. 68 May Term 1975, filed October 7, 1977), a per curiam decision, vacated the decisions of the PLRB and this Court and remanded the case to the PLRB for further proceedings in light of the Supreme Court's decision in Pennsylvania Labor Relations Board v. State College Area School District, 461 Pa. 494, 337 A.2d 262 (1975).

On January 5, 1978, the Supreme Court denied an application for reargument and reconsideration filed

[ 68 Pa. Commw. Page 311]

    by the PLRB and the PLRB then conducted an additional hearing on April 5, 1978. The PLRB, on August 6, 1979, issued a Nisi Decision and Order wherein it found workload to be a subject for mandatory collective bargaining and the Commonwealth's refusal to negotiate regarding the same to be an unfair labor practice pursuant to Sections 1201(a)(1) and (5) of the PERA. Exceptions were filed to this decision by the Commonwealth and, following oral argument, the PLRB issued a Final Order on February 5, 1981. This ...


Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.