Opinion

Rylke v. Portage Area School District

  • 473 Pa. 481
  • 375 A.2d 692
  • 94 L.R.R.M. (BNA) 3136
  • 1977 Pa. LEXIS 747
Court
Supreme Court of Pennsylvania
Filed
Feb 28, 1977
Status
Published
Author
Pomeroy
On the bench
Jones, Eagen, O'Brien, Roberts, Pomeroy, Nix, Manderino
Cited by
25 cases
Authority
More cited than 9.6%

Although 43 P.S. § 1101.702 provides that public employers are not required to bargain over matters of “inherent managerial policy,” such terms do not encompass an employee’s suspension

How later courts described this case

  • Although 43 P.S. § 1101.702 provides that public employers are not required to bargain over matters of “inherent managerial policy,” such terms do not encompass an employee’s suspension

Written by the judges who cited it.

Distinguished

  • Distinguished by Ridley School District v. Ridley Education Ass'n, 84 Pa. Commw. 117 (1984)

    The School District argues, however, that Rylke is inapposite because of changes made in the School Code after the decision in Rylke and prior to the signing of the present collective bargaining agreement.
    Commonwealth Court of PennsylvaniaJul 19, 1984Read it

The opinion

POMEROY, Justice,

dissenting.

I must respectfully dissent. The Court’s decision today, holding that a school district may agree to submit to binding arbitration the propriety of suspending a professional employee, relies heavily upon this Court’s prior decisions in Board of Education v. Philadelphia Federation of Teachers, Local No. 3, 464 Pa. 92 , 346 A.2d 35 (1975), and Pennsylvania Labor Relations Board v. State College Area School District, 461 Pa. 494 , 337 A.2d 262 (1975). In the former case I dissented and in the latter I disagreed with a portion of the opinion relied upon in the instant case. I continue to adhere to the views I expressed in those cases. 1

In my opinion, the majority continues to perpetuate an unwarranted distortion of the plain language of section 703 of the Public Employe Relations Act, Act of July 23, 1970, P.L. 563, No. 195, 43 P.S. § 1101.101 et seq. (Supp. *493 1976) , when it repeats that part'of the State College opinion holding that “items bargainable under section 701 are only excluded under section 703 where other applicable statutory provisions explictly and definitively prohibit the public employer from making an agreement as to that specific term or condition of employment.” Opinion of the Court, ante at 696, quoting State College, supra 461 Pa. at 510 , 337 A.2d at 270 . I am also of the view that today’s holding sanctions, as did the holding in Philadelphia Federation of Teachers, an impermissible surrender of a school board’s prerogatives under the School Code. See sections 1124 & 1125 of the School Code, Act of March 10, 1949, P.L. 30, art. XI, §§ 1124 & 1125, as amended, 24 P.S. §§ 11-1124 & 11-1125 (Supp.1976-1977) . Accordingly, for the reasons set forth in my separate opinions in Philadelphia Federation of Teachers and State College, see note 1, supra, I dissent.

This is a copy of a public record, reproduced as it was published. It is not legal advice, and it may not be the version a court would rely on. Check the official source before you cite it.

A word about cookies

We need a few to keep you signed in and the library working. The rest help us see which pages people use and where they get stuck. They stay off unless you say yes.