Appeal from the Order of the Court of Common Pleas of Philadelphia County in the case of Philadelphia Association of School Administrators v. Board of Education of the School District of Philadelphia, et al., No. 2866 September Term, 1981.
Barry B. Wohlman, with him Ruth J. Hudson, for appellant.
Vincent J. Salandria, Assistant General Counsel, with him Eugene F. Brazil, General Counsel, for appellees.
Judges, Craig, Doyle and Blatt, sitting as a panel of three. Opinion by Judge Blatt.
[ 80 Pa. Commw. Page 243]
This case comes here on appeal from the Court of Common Pleas of Philadelphia County which ordered that the appellants, the Philadelphia Association of School Administrators (Administrators), were not properly demoted pursuant to Section 1151 of the Code*fn1 and also denied the Administrators' request for a preliminary and/or a permanent injunction.
On September 8, 1981, the Philadelphia Federation of Teachers (PFT) instituted a strike against the appellees, the School District of Philadelphia (School District). The strike involved picketing at administrative office sites as well as at schools within the school district. Pursuant to powers vested in him by the enactment of the Educational Supplement to the Philadelphia Home Rule Charter,*fn2 the Superintendent of the school district, Michael P. Marcase (Superintendent) directed approximately 300 Administrators to report to teach at various Senior Centers and/or Special Education Centers. This was done in an effort to resume the education of senior students and students in need of special education. The Superintendent's directive, which was embodied in a letter, mandated that the Administrators commence teaching and continue for the duration of the PFT strike. It further noted that any Administrator who refused to follow
[ 80 Pa. Commw. Page 244]
this order did so at the risk of demotion, suspension, or discharge. All of the Administrators who were ordered to teach, however, had been previously certified by the Department of Education to teach secondary school subjects and/or to provide special education. The Administrators, upon resuming the teaching duties as directed, encountered isolated instances of resistance from other PFT teachers who were striking and picketing. After being denied the relief requested in the court of common pleas, they filed the instant appeal.
The Administrators claim that the Superintendent's mandate, which temporarily reassigned them to teaching positions, was inconsistent with the laws of the Commonwealth and, therefore, not within the powers delegated to him by the Educational Supplement to the Philadelphia Home Rule Charter.*fn3 Specifically, they contend that the temporary reassignment amounted to a demotion in violation of the procedures established by Section 1151 of the Code,*fn4 which provides in pertinent part as follows:
[T]here shall be no demotion of any professional employe either in salary or in type of position, except as otherwise provided in this act, without the consent of the employe, or, if such consent is not received, then such demotion shall be subject to the right to a hearing before the board of school directors and an appeal in
[ 80 Pa. Commw. Page 245]
the same manner as hereinbefore provided in the case of the dismissal ...