Americans for Fair Treatment, Inc. v. Phila. Fed'n of Teachers

150 A.3d 528

AMERICANS FOR FAIR TREATMENT, INC., Appellant

v.PHILADELPHIA FEDERATION OF TEACHERS, Local 3, AFL–CIO; The School District of Philadelphia; and School Reform Commission

No. 1618 C.D. 2015

Commonwealth Court of Pennsylvania.

Argued October 17, 2016

Decided November 21, 2016

Reargument Denied January 17, 2017

David R. Osborne, Harrisburg, and Karin M. Sweigart, Aston, for appellant.

Ronak R. Chokshi, Philadelphia, for appellees School Reform Commission and The School District of Philadelphia.

Ralph J. Teti, Philadelphia, for appellee Philadelphia Federation of Teachers, Local 3, AFL–CIO.

BEFORE: HONORABLE RENÉE COHN JUBELIRER, Judge, HONORABLE JOSEPH M. COSGROVE, Judge, HONORABLE JAMES GARDNER COLINS, Senior Judge

OPINION BY SENIOR JUDGE JAMES GARDNER COLINS

This matter is an appeal filed by Americans for Fair Treatment, Inc. (Plaintiff) from orders of the Court of Common Pleas of Philadelphia County (trial court) dismissing Plaintiff's amended complaint for declaratory judgment and injunctive relief (Amended Complaint) for lack of standing. For the reasons set forth below, we affirm.

On February 25, 2015, Plaintiff filed a complaint against Philadelphia Federation of Teachers, Local 3, AFL–CIO (Union) and the School District of Philadelphia (School District) challenging the union leave of absence provision in the 2010 collective bargaining agreement between the Union and the School District (the 2010 CBA). Both defendants filed preliminary objections to the complaint. On May 22, 2015, Plaintiff, in response to the preliminary objections, filed the Amended Complaint at issue here, a six-count complaint that added the School Reform Commission (SRC) as a defendant and sought a declaratory judgment that the union leave of absence provision in the 2010 CBA is invalid, an injunction barring the School District and SRC (collectively, School District) and the Union from continuing to implement that provision of the 2010 CBA and a declaratory judgment that a union leave provision in the Public School Employees' Retirement Code (PSERC)¹ is unconstitutional under the Pennsylvania Constitution to the extent that it authorizes the union leave provided by the 2010 CBA.

According to the Amended Complaint, Plaintiff is an Oklahoma nonprofit corporation with "members throughout the country" that "facilitate[s] and support[s] litigation to enforce and expand human and civil rights of employees who have suffered public sector union abuse," and its "membership includes public sector union members and nonmembers, as well as supporters of public employees." (Amended Complaint ¶ 1, Reproduced Record (R.R.) at 14a–15a.) The Amended Complaint alleges that "Plaintiff's membership rolls include Philadelphia teachers with less accrued seniority than many of the teachers who have left the classroom to perform union work on school time," and that "Plaintiff's membership rolls also include Philadelphia taxpayers whose taxes fund Philadelphia schools." (Id. ¶¶ 7–8, R.R. at 16a.) The Amended Complaint does not identify any member who is a Philadelphia teacher or taxpayer and does not allege any facts concerning the positions that its Philadelphia teacher members hold, the schools where they teach or the subjects or positions for which they are certificated. The Amended Complaint also does not allege what School District seniority its Philadelphia teacher members have other than asserting that they have less seniority than many teachers on union leave.

The Amended Complaint seeks to declare invalid and enjoin Article III, Section B of the 2010 CBA, which provides:

1. Employees who are elected or appointed to full time positions with the Federation or any organization with which it is affiliated will, upon proper application, be granted leaves of absence for the purpose of accepting those positions. Authorized Federation leaves shall be requested in writing by the President of the Federation only. Employees granted such leaves of absence shall retain all insurance and other benefits and shall continue to accrue seniority as though they were in regular service. Annually, the President of the Federation shall inform the School District of the salary to be paid to each employee on approved leave with the Federation. The School District shall adjust each employee's salary accordingly. Upon return to service they shall be placed in the assignment which they left with all accrued benefits and increments that they would have earned had they been in regular service.

2. Employees on such leaves of absence shall be permitted to pay both their and the School District's regular contributions to all plans requiring such contributions.

(Amended Complaint ¶¶ 20–27, Prayer for Relief & Ex. A, R.R. at 18a–20a, 31a, 49a.) Article III, Section B of the 2010 CBA permits up to 35 teachers and 26 other bargaining unit employees to take this union leave to hold full time positions with the Union. (Id. ¶ 27 & Ex. A ¶ 5, R.R. at 19a–20a, 49a–50a.) In addition, Article XIII, Section F of the 2010 CBA permits up to 10 teachers or other members of the Union to take union leave to hold full time positions with the Union's Health and Welfare Fund. (Id. ¶ 20 n.4 & Ex. A, R.R. at 18a, 89a.) Plaintiff alleges that at least 19 School District employees are on union leave and that "many" of the teachers on union leave have been on union leave for over 15 years. (Id. ¶¶ 7, 26, R.R. at 16a, 19a.) The information from the School District on which Plaintiff bases these allegations lists all of the employees on union leave as having been employed by the School District for more than 10 years. (Id. Ex. C, R.R. at 258a–259a.)

The 2010 CBA provided that it was to be in effect from September 1, 2009 to August 31, 2012. (Amended Complaint ¶ 14 & Ex. A, R.R. at 17a, 34a, 36a.) The Union and School District extended the 2010 CBA for an additional year, to August 31, 2013. (Id. ¶ 15, R.R. at 17a; CBA Extension Agreement, R.R. at 415a–416aa.) The Amended Complaint alleges that the 2010 CBA expired on August 31, 2013, but that the Union and School District have continued to adhere to its terms because no successor agreement has been reached. (Amended Complaint ¶ 16, R.R. at 18a.) In October 2014, the School District attempted to cancel the 2010 CBA. (Id. ¶ 17, R.R. at 18a.) That cancelation was enjoined as beyond the SRC's powers and on August 15, 2016, the Pennsylvania Supreme Court upheld the injunction. See Philadelphia Federation of Teachers, AFT, Local 3, AFL–CIO v. School District of Philadelphia , 144 A.3d 1281 (Pa. 2016).

The Amended Complaint also seeks a declaration that Section 8102 of the PSERC is unconstitutional to the extent that it authorizes union leave. (Amended Complaint ¶¶ 84–97, R.R. at 29a–30a.) The PSERC provides that school employees receive credit in calculating their retirement benefits for periods that they are on "approved leave of absence," if retirement contributions are made for the leave of absence periods. 24 Pa. C.S. § 8302(b). Section 8102 provides that union leave constitutes "approved leave of absence" for which school employees receive retirement credit if the union leave satisfies the following conditions:

"Leave for service with a collective bargaining organization." Paid leave granted to an active member by an employer for purposes of working full time for or serving full time as an officer of a Statewide employee organization or a local collective bargaining representative under the act of July 23, 1970 (P.L. 563, No. 195), known as the Public Employe Relations Act: Provided, That greater than one-half of the members of the employee organization are active members of the system; that the employer shall fully compensate the member, including, but not limited to, salary, wages, pension and retirement contributions and benefits, other benefits and seniority, as if he were in full-time active service; and that the employee organization shall fully reimburse the employer for such salary, wages, pension and retirement contributions and benefits and other benefits and seniority.

24 Pa. C.S. § 8102 (emphasis added).

The 2010 CBA provides only that the Union "shall inform the School District of the salary to be paid to each employee on approved leave" and that the "School District shall adjust each employee's salary accordingly" and does not expressly require the Union to reimburse the School District. In the past, the School District has paid the salaries of the teachers on union leave and the Union has fully reimbursed the School District for all salary and benefits for teachers on union leave in accordance with Section 8102's requirements for pension credit. Kirsch v. Public School Employees' Retirement Board , 603 Pa. 439, 985 A.2d 671, 672–73 (2009). Plaintiff does not allege that the Union has failed to fully reimburse the School District for all salary and benefit payments for those on union leave under the 2010 CBA. (School District Preliminary Objections ¶ 4, R.R. at 340a; Plaintiff's Answer to School District Preliminary Objections ¶ 4, R.R. at 607a.) Under the PSERC, only the salary to which employees on union leave would be entitled in their school positions can be included in calculating retirement benefits even if the employees are paid a higher salary while on union leave. Kirsch , 985 A.2d at 675–78.

The Union and School District filed preliminary objections to the Amended Complaint seeking dismissal both on the grounds that Plaintiff lacks standing and on the grounds that the individual counts of the Amended Complaint were legally insufficient. On July 22, 2015, the trial court issued orders sustaining defendants' preliminary objections to Plaintiff's standing. On August 17, 2015, Plaintiff timely appealed the orders sustaining defendants' preliminary objections to this Court.² In its Pa. R.A.P. 1925(b) statement of errors complained of on appeal, Plaintiff contended only that the allegations of the Amended Complaint were sufficient to support...