Am. Fed'n of State v. Marshall, CIVIL ACTION NO. 18-723

AMERICAN FEDERATION OF STATE, COUNTY AND MUNICIPAL EMPLOYEES, LOCAL 2187, Plaintiff, v. JACQUELINE MARSHALL, Defendant.

CIVIL ACTION NO. 18-723

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA

April 16, 2021

OPINION

Slomsky, J.

I. INTRODUCTION

The American Federation of State, County, and Municipal Employees ("AFSCME") is an international labor organization with several local affiliates throughout the country. In Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, one of AFSCME's affiliates is Local 2187, which is subordinate to AFSCME. All Local 2187 members must abide by the Local's Constitution and the AFSCME Constitution, the latter of which contains procedures for hearing and resolving charges filed against members for wrongdoing.

In 2014, members of Local 2187 submitted charges to the AFSCME Judicial Panel alleging, inter alia, that then-President Defendant Jacqueline Marshall violated the two Constitutions by overpaying her own salary. A hearing was held and Defendant was found in violation of both Constitutions, was removed as President, and was ordered to reimburse Local 2187 for the overpayment. When she did not reimburse Local 2187, members filed new charges against her in 2016 for failing to reimburse the Local and for violating the AFSCME Constitution by remaining on the payroll after her removal as President. Defendant was again found in violation and was ordered to reimburse Local 2187 for her salary overpayment plus the amount paid to her when she improperly remained on the payroll.

Before the Court for disposition is Plaintiff Local 2187's Motion for Judgment on the Pleadings. (Doc. No. 9.) In the Motion, Plaintiff argues it is entitled to judgment in its favor and against pro se Defendant Marshall on the claims alleged in the two-Count Complaint: (1) breach of contract under Section 301 of the Labor Management Relations Act of 1947, codified in 29 U.S.C. § 185; and (2) breach of contract under Pennsylvania law. On both Counts, Plaintiff asks the Court to compel Defendant to make the restitution payments as ordered by the AFSCME Judicial Panel. Defendant has not filed a Response to the Motion.

For reasons stated infra, Plaintiff's Motion for Judgment on the Pleadings (Doc. No. 9) will be denied.

II. BACKGROUND¹

A. The AFSCME Constitution

Plaintiff Local 2187 is a subordinate body of the AFSCME international labor organization. (See Doc. Nos. 1 ¶¶ 1-2; 6 at 2 ¶¶ 1-2.) As a subordinate body, Local 2187 and its members are "contractually and legally bound by the provisions of the AFSCME Constitution."² (Doc. No. 1 ¶ 7; see also Doc. Nos. 6 at 2 ¶ 7; 1-4 at 71, 114.)

The AFSCME Constitution imposes a number of requirements upon subordinate bodies and their members. For example, it requires that: (1) each local have its own constitution, (2) all local members "promise to abide by the Constitution of the [AFSCME] and Local Union[,]" and (3) all elected officials "promise and pledge [they] will perform faithfully and with honor the duties of the office" they assume. (Doc. No. 1 ¶¶ 9-11; see also Doc. Nos. 6 at 3 ¶¶ 9-11; 1-4 at 89, 137.) Members have several rights under the AFSCME Constitution, one being the right to "file charges against any individual for actions taken while a member of the [AFSCME] or while a staff employee of [AFSCME] or a subordinate body." (Doc. No. 1-4 at 114.)

Article X of the AFSCME Constitution establishes procedures for hearing and resolving charges filed against a member. (See id.) Among the allowable charges set forth in Article X that a member can file against another member are the following:

A. Violation of any provision of [the AFSCME] Constitution or of any officially adopted and approved constitution of a subordinate body to which the member being accused is subject.

B. Misappropriation, embezzlement, or improper or illegal use of union funds.

. . .

F. Refusal or deliberate failure to carry out legally authorized decisions of the International Convention, the International President, the International Executive Board, the Judicial Panel, or of the convention or executive board of a subordinate body of which the accused is a part.

(Id. at 114-15.) Charges filed against an individual member are heard by the charged parties' local union trial body. (See id. at 116; Doc. Nos. 1 ¶¶ 15-16; 6 at 3 ¶¶ 15-16.) Charges filed against an executive board member, however, are heard by either "a single trial officer or a three-membertrial body" of the AFSCME Judicial Panel. (Ids.)

Similar to formal judicial trials, "[c]harged parties are guaranteed enumerated rights" in Judicial Panel trials, including "the right to personal notice of the charges, the right to counsel at the proceeding, the right to present witnesses, the right to confront the accuser, the right to the presumption of innocence, and the right to refuse to testify." (Doc. No. 1 ¶ 17; see also Doc. No. 1-4 at 119-120.) The Judicial Panel may impose a variety of penalties should it find the charged party guilty, and the charged party may "appeal the decision to the full panel of the Judicial Panel" as well as "seek a final appeal of a decision by the full panel" by appealing to the AFSCME International Convention. (Doc. No. 1 ¶¶ 19-21; see also Doc. No. 1-4 at 120-121, 130.)

B. Defendant's Presidency of Local 2187

In the winter of 2012, Defendant was elected President of Local 2187 and officially assumed this role in March 2013. (See Doc. No. 6 at 3-4 ¶¶ 28-29.) As President, Defendant was the "full-time administrative and executive officer" of Local 2187 who was "contractually and legally bound by the AFSCME and Local Constitutions in her capacity as the elected chief executive officer of [Local 2187]." (Doc. No. 1 ¶¶ 25, 29; see also Doc. No. 1-5 at 4.) She "receive[d] compensation and expenses as established by the [Local 2187] executive board." (Doc. No. 1 ¶ 25; see also Doc. No. 1-5 at 4.)

According to Local 2187's Personnel Practices Code Sections 4.01 and 4.015, Defendant's salary as President was to be paid at Executive Pay ("EP") Level 26, and "[a]ny step determination and annual anniversary adjustments [were to] be made in accordance with applicable Civil Service regulations . . . ." (Doc. No. 1-6 at 3.) Civil Service regulation 6.081 states that "[t]he minimum rate of pay for a class shall be paid upon appointment to the class[.]" (Id. at 4.) In other words, upon initial appointment to a salaried position, salary is set at Step 1 of the designated EP Level—the "minimum rate of pay." When Defendant became President, however, she "was placed onEP 26, Step 5, instead of being placed as required by the Personnel Practice Code" at EP 26, Step 1. (Id.)

1. The First AFSCME Judicial Panel

In August 2014, six members of Local 2187 submitted charges against Defendant and others³ to the AFSCME Judicial Panel. (See Doc. Nos. 1 ¶¶ 14, 30; 6 at 3-4 ¶¶ 14, 30.) In the charges, the members alleged, inter alia, that Defendant violated the AFSCME and the Local Constitutions by overpaying her own salary. (See Doc. Nos. 1 ¶¶ 31; 6 at 4 ¶ 31.)

A 3-day trial was held on December 9, 2014, April 15, 2015, and April 23, 2015. (See Doc. No. 1 ¶ 34.) Presiding Judicial Panel Member Steve Preble ("Preble") issued his decision on July 6, 2015, finding Defendant "was paid a salary as President greater than she was entitled under the Local Constitution and the rules adopted by the local executive board for calculating a Local officer's salary." (Id. ¶¶ 36-37; see also Doc. No. 1-6 at 12.) Preble also found that the overpayment "extended to [Defendant's] buyout of vacation and sick leave[,]" and concluded that "her overpayment in salary violated Article X, Sections 2.B and 2.F of the AFSCME Constitution⁴ and Article VII, Section 6 of the Local Constitution."⁵ (Doc. No. 1 ¶¶ 39-40; see also Doc. No. 1-6 at 15-16.)

"For her violations of the AFSCME and Local Constitutions, Preble ordered [Defendant] to reimburse [Plaintiff] for the salary overpayment . . . occurring during her entire tenure asPresident of [Local 2187]" which totaled $41,588.57. (Doc. No. 1 ¶¶ 48, 55.) Additionally, "Preble immediately removed [Defendant] as President of [Local 2187], suspended her right to hold or seek any elected position at any level of AFSCME for a period of four (4) years after the issuance of his decision, and ordered her expulsion from AFSCME if she did not make her restitution payment within sixty (60) days." (Id. ¶ 49.)

Defendant appealed Preble's decision to the full AFSCME Judicial Panel, and on October 30, 2015 the full Panel affirmed the decision. (See id. ¶¶ 50, 52; Doc. Nos. 1-8 at 2-3; 6 at 5 ¶¶ 50, 52.) On the same day,⁶ Defendant emailed Local 2187's Administrators "requesting that Local 2187 enter into an appropriate repayment agreement" with her. (Doc. No. 6 at 22.) In the email, Defendant "acknowledge[d] an overpayment for the period March 23, 2013 through June 30, 2014," but indicated she was "appealing . . . Preble's decision that overpayment continued beyond that date." (Id.) While it is not clear whether Defendant was referring to an appeal of the Preble decision or a final appeal of the full Judicial Panel decision, Defendant did not seek a final appeal of the full Judicial Panel decision. (See Doc. Nos. 1 ¶ 53; 6 at 5 ¶ 53.)

2. The Second AFSCME Judicial Panel

On December 9, 2015, a Local 2187 Administrator emailed Defendant a repayment schedule, with restitution to be paid in monthly installments over a 48-month period starting in January 2016. (See Doc. Nos. 1 ¶ 55; 6 at 5 ¶¶ 54-55; see also Doc. No. 6 at 19.) Defendant replied to the email and stated that "[w]hile [she is] aware of the procedure, [she] find[s] the demand to be a hardship that would impact [her] family greatly." (Doc. No. 6 at 19.) Nevertheless, she "look[ed] forward to a reasonable and realist discourse regarding a resolution." (Id.)

Although Defendant discussed repayment plans with a Local 2187 Administrator, she did not make any payments. As a result, in March 2016...