Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout98-1994 CivilWEST SHORE REGIONAL POLICE DEPARTMENT COMMISSION, Plaintiff VS. EMPLOYEES OF WEST SHORE REGIONAL POLICE DEPARTMENT, Defendant IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA 98-1994 CIVIL CIVIL ACTION - LAW IN RE: PETITION FOR REVIEW BEFORE HOFFER. P.J. AND HESS, J. OPINION AND ORDER In this case, the petitioner has sought review of the decision of an arbitration panel. Specifically, the petitioner excepts to an award which amended a police pension plan to allow police officers to retire at 54.5 percent of their monthly average compensation. There are no factual disputes in the case. The very narrow legal issue is whether or not so-called "Act 600," 53 P.S. 771, which limits pension benefits to up to 50 percent of an officer's monthly average compensation, should have controlled the outcome of the arbitration proceeding. Pending before the court, however, is also a petition filed by the respondent for judgment of non pros based on inactivity in this case. The petitioner initiated this action in 1998 and the matter has only recently been listed for argument. We address first the respondent's petition for judgment of non pros. The test for dismissal of a case on account of docket inactivity was set out in Jacobs v. Halloran_, 710 A.2d 1098 (Pa. 1998). The questions which must be addressed are: (1) Whether there has been a lack of due diligence on the part of the plaintiff in failing to proceed with reasonable promptitude; (2) whether the plaintiff has a compelling reason for the delay; and (3) whether the delay has caused 98-1994 CIVIL actual prejudice to the defendant. Here there has been delay with no apparent explanation. On the other hand, there has been no prejudice, whatsoever, to the respondent. In the intervening years, several police officers have retired and have begun receiving pensions at the higher rate. The petitioner acknowledges that the outcome of this litigation will not adversely affect their pension status. In the meantime, the remaining employees have suffered no prejudice in their ability to defend against the commission's appeal. Accordingly, we will deny the respondent's petition for a judgment of non pros and dispose of the matter on the merits. The Employees of the West Shore Regional Police Department (Police Association) is the recognized and exclusive bargaining unit representative for the purpose of collective bargaining with respect to the terms of employment, including wages, hours and conditions of employment. The West Shore Regional Police Commission (Commission) is a police commission formed by mutual agreement between the boroughs of Lemoyne and Wormleysburg, Cumberland County, Pennsylvania. In 1995, the Police Association entered into negotiations for a collective bargaining agreement to commence January 1, 1996, and run to December 31, 1998. In early 1996, negotiations concluded and an agreement was reached on all issues in dispute except for the improvements demanded by the Police Association with respect to their retirement pension. The Police Association had sought an increase in the monthly average compensation payments. On March 12, 1998, the neutral arbitrator, Kinard Lang, issued an award to the effect that "the Police Pension Plan shall be amended retroactively to January 1, 1996 to allow police officers to retire at fifty-four and a half- percent (54.5%) of monthly average compensation." (Award, p. 2) It is from this award that the Commission now appeals. The Police Association argues that Act 600's fifty percent limit is not applicable in the present case because, prior to May 10, 1996, regional police departments were not specifically 2 98-1994 CIVIL included in the Act. In support of its position, the Association cites Borough ofLewistown v. Pennsylvania Labor Relations Board, 735 A.2d 1240 (Pa. 1999). The Association relies on Lewistown for the proposition that regional police departments can be awarded pension plans beyond the limits of Act 600. The case, however, does not stand for that proposition. In Lewistown_, a regional police department and police association were unable to agree to terms on a new labor agreement. An arbitration panel had awarded a pension plan providing regional police department officers with a retirement benefit of seventy percent of their final average salary. Importantly, the arbitration panel's award was not appealed. Nonetheless, the borough, believing that the award was a violation of Act 600, refused to distribute pension funds in accordance with the arbitration award. The association filed an unfair labor practice action. In the end, the Supreme Court upheld the arbitrator' s award of seventy percent, not because it was lawful but because the borough had failed to appeal the award and therefore "waived its right to raise the legality of the arbitration award." Id. at 1246. The question, then, remains whether Act 600 applied to regional police departments prior to their specific inclusion in the May 10, 1996 amendment. The Association contends that vacating the arbitrator's award in the instant case would apply legislation to a contract in effect prior to its enactment and would be the equivalent of an ex post facto law in violation of the Pennsylvania and United States Constitutions. As noted in Lewistown, however, the municipalities forming regional police departments delegate to the regional police department the power to hire, discharge and discipline, and to fix salaries, wages and benefits. Id~. at 1244. We are satisfied that the forming municipalities should be viewed as joint employers for the 3 98-1994 CIVIL purposes of Act 111.~ In this case, the boroughs of Lemoyne and Wormleysburg are the joint employers of the West Shore Police Department. Acts 111 and 600 should be applied to them even though their police employees make up a regional department. In light of this conclusion, any constitutional question need not be addressed. ORDER AND NOW, this day of September, 2003, the petition of the West Shore Regional Police Department Commission for Review is GRANTED and the arbitration award of March 12, 1998, is VACATED with respect to a pension increase, and it is further directed that, from and after the date of this order, police officers may retire at no more than fifty percent (50%) of monthly average compensation pursuant to the terms of 53 P.S. 771. Nothing herein shall modify any benefits applicable to retirements prior to the date of this order. BY THE COURT, David J. Lanza, Esquire For the Plaintiff David B. Washington, Esquire For the Defendant :rlm Kevin A. Hess, J. ~ 43 P.S. 217.1, which confers upon policemen "employed by a political subdivision of this Commonwealth" the right to bargain collectively with their employers concerning the terms and conditions of their employment including pensions. 4 WEST SHORE REGIONAL POLICE DEPARTMENT COMMISSION, Plaintiff VS. EMPLOYEES OF WEST SHORE REGIONAL POLICE DEPARTMENT, Defendant AND NOW, this IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA 98-1994 CIVIL CIVIL ACTION - LAW IN RE: PETITION FOR REVIEW BEFORE HOFFER. P.J. AND HESS, J. ORDER day of September, 2003, the petition of the West Shore Regional Police Department Commission for Review is GRANTED and the arbitration award of March 12, 1998, is VACATED with respect to a pension increase, and it is further directed that, from and after the date of this order, police officers may retire at no more than fifty percent (50%) of monthly average compensation pursuant to the terms of 53 P.S. 771. Nothing herein shall modify any benefits applicable to retirements prior to the date of this order. BY THE COURT, David J. Lanza, Esquire For the Plaintiff David B. Washington, Esquire For the Defendant :rlm Kevin A. Hess, J.