Springfield Township School District Collective Bargaining Agreement

McKeesport Area School District, 585 A.2d to 546.   Like the agreement in the McKeesport Area School District, the CBA here does not define the “just cause”;  So it was in the province of the arbitrator to make sense of that sentence, which is exactly what the arbitrator did here.   Since KBA has not defined “reasonably” under the “rules of conduct,” the arbitrator is also free to make sense of this notion. In the Upper St. Clair School District, a school bus driver left the bus while transporting a bus driver and engaged in a physical altercation with an angry motorist.   The school district fired the driver by accusing him of deliberately abandoning the students to interfere in the physical altercation.   The locomotive drivers` union mourned the dismissal.   The Adjudicator found that the driver`s behaviour was at most negligent as a result of intentional driving and changed the release to a 90-day suspension.   The school district appealed the arbitrator`s decision to the Court of Common Pleas, which upheld the arbitrator`s decision.   The school district appealed to the court, essentially arguing that the arbitrator had exceeded his powers by converting the termination to a 90-day suspension.

  In rejecting this argument and concluding that the arbitrator had not exceeded his jurisdiction, the court found that “the arbitrator finds that there is no just grounds for dismissal and that the collective agreement does not prohibit the adjudicator from changing the sentence of a district, so the arbitrator may change the discipline accordingly.”  Upper St. Clair School District, 649 A.2d at 472-73.   Just as in the Upper St. School District, so here the arbitrator found that the case is not for the end of Mr. Mack and as the CBA did not prohibit an arbitrator from changing the penalty, the arbitrator was free to do so as he did.   The arbitrator`s finding that Mr. Mack`s actions were not “just a cause” and the arbitrator`s amendment of the sanction were not inconsistent with the CBA, so the arbitrator`s award could be rationally deducted from the CBA. Randolph Mack was the supervisor of a school in the Springfield Township School District(District).   On June 7, 1995, the District terminated Mr. Mack`s hiring as a director.   The resignation triggered this case.

 The limitation of the review of an arbitral award by an appel giving court in the context of an appeal arbitration proceeding such as this is the “essential test” and the corresponding investigation is whether the arbitration award can be inferred in any way from the collective agreement with respect to the agreement, its language, its context and all other indications of the parties` intent.   Leechburg Area School District v. Dale, 492 Pa. 515, 424 A.2d 1309 (1981). Indeed, the essential test requires that an arbitral award be upheld if it can be rationally deducted from the collective agreement, taking into account the language, context and other indications of the parties` intent.  Pennsylvania State Education Association v. Appalachia Intermediate Unit 08, 505 Pa. 1, 5, 476 A.2d 360, 362 (1984).   In light of the CBA`s silence on what constitutes “reasonable” and “just cause” rules of conduct, we must conclude that the arbitrator`s determination of adequacy and just cause and the resulting award of arbitration in this case could be rationally deducted from the CBA. Accordingly, we agree with the association that the court found an error in finding that the arbitrator`s award does not infer its essence from the CBA. An important part of deciding on a new career is taking into account the benefits you can enjoy of a job.

17. December 2020 by
Leave a comment