Appeal from the Order of the Pennsylvania Labor Relations Board in case of Association of Pennsylvania State College and University Faculties v. State System of Higher Education, No. PERA-C-85-353-E.
Elliot A. Strokoff, with him, James L. Cowden, Handler, Gerber, Johnston, Strokoff & Cowden, for petitioner.
James L. Crawford, for respondent.
Judges MacPhail and Barry, and Senior Judge Kalish, sitting as a panel of three. Opinion by Judge Barry.
[ 110 Pa. Commw. Page 234]
The Association of Pennsylvania State College and University Faculties (APSCUF) the petitioner, appeals an order of the Pennsylvania Labor Relations Board (Board) which affirmed and made final a proposed decision and order of a hearing officer who held that the State System of Higher Education, Commonwealth of Pennsylvania, Edinboro University (SSHE) had not engaged in an unfair labor practice contrary to the provision of Section 1201(a)(1) and (8) of the Public Employe Relations Act, Act of July 23, 1970, P.L. 563, 43 P.S. §§ 1101.101-1101.2301. (PERA).
The APSCUF, a duly certified collective bargaining agent under the PERA, had filed a grievance pursuant to the collective bargaining agreement against the SSHE, an employer under the PERA, after the SSHE laid off Dr. Richard O. Davis, a faculty member represented by the APSCUF, on May 28, 1982. In the meantime, the Pennsylvania Unemployment Compensation Bureau determined that Dr. Davis was entitled to unemployment compensation benefits beginning on May 29, 1982.
On January 12, 1984, an arbitrator found in favor of Dr. Davis in connection with the grievance that had been filed. The award of the arbitrator read as follows:
On September 21, 1984, Jerry W. Boyle, Assistant Personnel Director at Edinboro University issued to Dr. Davis a memorandum discussing the retroactive
[ 110 Pa. Commw. Page 235]
pay award. According to this memorandum, Dr. Davis, after various deductions were made from his gross back wages and the refund given to him for funds which he had removed from his retirement account during his layoff period, was not entitled to any net back wages. One of the deductions made by the SSHE in its computation was for unemployment compensation benefits received by Dr. Davis during the period of May 29, 1982 to August 21, 1982, which constituted the summer weeks between the 1981-1982 and 1982-1983 academic years.
The APSCUF then filed a complaint with the Board alleging that the SSHE had committed an unfair labor practice under the PERA by failing to comply with the arbitrator's award when it deducted from Dr. Davis' back pay the amount of unemployment compensation benefits received by Dr. Davis during the period of May 29, 1982 to August 21, 1982. Thereafter the Board issued a Complaint and Notice of Hearing. When the case was not resolved through conciliation, a hearing was held before a hearing examiner. The hearing examiner issued a proposed decision and order finding that the SSHE had complied with the arbitrator's order. The APSCUF then filed exceptions to the hearing officer's recommendations. These were dismissed by the Board, which affirmed and made final the proposed decision and order of the hearing examiner. This appeal then followed.
Our scope of review in this matter is limited to determining whether or not the factual findings are supported by substantial evidence and whether the conclusions of law are reasonable, and not arbitrary, capricious or incorrect as a matter of law. Roderick v. Pennsylvania Labor Relations Board, 86 Pa. Commonwealth Ct. 278, 484 A.2d 841 ...