Allegheny Intermediate Unit 3 Education Ass'n v. North Hills School District

624 A.2d 802, 155 Pa. Commw. 211, 1993 Pa. Commw. LEXIS 252
CourtCommonwealth Court of Pennsylvania
DecidedApril 22, 1993
DocketNos. 2015 and 2016 C.D. 1992
StatusPublished
Cited by9 cases

This text of 624 A.2d 802 (Allegheny Intermediate Unit 3 Education Ass'n v. North Hills School District) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Commonwealth Court of Pennsylvania primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Allegheny Intermediate Unit 3 Education Ass'n v. North Hills School District, 624 A.2d 802, 155 Pa. Commw. 211, 1993 Pa. Commw. LEXIS 252 (Pa. Ct. App. 1993).

Opinion

FRIEDMAN, Judge.

North Allegheny School District and North Hills School District (School Districts) have filed a consolidated appeal from an order issued by the Court of Common Pleas of Allegheny County in a declaratory judgment action requiring the School Districts to offer certain teaching vacancies to suspended teacher members of the Allegheny Intermediate Unit # 3 Education Association (Association).

The sole issue before us is whether the trial court properly interpreted § 1113(b.l) of the Transfer of Entities Act (Act) of the Public School Code of 1949.1 The Act provides in pertinent part:

Section 1113. Transferred programs and classes.

(a) When a program or class is transferred as a unit from one or more school entities to another school entity or entities, professional employes who were assigned to the class or program immediately prior to the transfer and are classified as teachers as defined in section 1141(1) and are suspended as a result of the transfer and who are properly certificated shall be offered employment in the program or class by the receiving entity or entities when services of a professional employe are needed to sustain the program or class transferred, as long as there is no suspended professional employe in the receiving entity who is properly certificated to fill the position in the transferred class or program.
(b) Transferred professional employes shall be credited by the receiving entity only for their sick leave accumulated in the sending entity and also for their years of service in the sending entity, the latter for purposes of sabbatical leave eligibility and placement in the salary schedule: Provided, however, That such employes shall not utilize the sabbatical leave until they have taught in the receiving entity for a period of three (3) years. Such employes shall transfer [214]*214their accrued seniority in the area of certification required for the transferred program or class only.
(b.l) Professional employes who are classified as teachers and who are not transferred with the classes to which they are assigned or who have received a formal notice of suspension shall form a pool of employes within the school entity. No new professional employe who is classified as a teacher shall be employed by a school entity assuming program responsibility for transferred students while there is:
(1) a properly certificated professional employe who is classified as a teacher suspended in the receiving entity; or
(2) if no person is qualified under clause (1), a properly certificated member of the school entity pool who is willing to accept employment with the school entity assuming program responsibility for transferred students. Members of the pool shall have the right to refuse employment offers from such school entity and remain in the pool. Refusal to accept work under this subsection shall not be grounds for denial of unemployment compensation under sections 401 and 402 of the act of December 5, 1936 (2nd Sp.Sess., 1937 P.L. 2897, No. 1), known as the “Unemployment Compensation Law.”

The parties stipulate as to all relevant facts. For the 1992-1993 school year, each of the School Districts took over certain special education classes which were previously contracted out to another school entity, namely the Allegheny Intermediate Unit (AIU).2 The North Allegheny School District took over [215]*21523 learning support, speech, life skills support and hearing impaired classes. The North Hills School District took over two emotional support classes. As a result of these transfers, and pursuant to the requirements of § 1113(a) of the Act, all 25 AIU teachers who taught these classes were suspended and then re-hired by the corresponding School District to teach the transferred classes.

Following their decisions to take over the above-described special education classes, both School Districts declared certain special education teaching vacancies which the parties stipulate are unrelated to the special education classes transferred in from the AIU.3

As noted above, the appellant School Districts re-hired every one of the twenty-five teachers who were suspended as a result of the classes transferred. However, at the time the appellant School Districts declared the additional vacancies which were unrelated to the transferred classes, there was a pool of AIU teacher members who had been suspended when their classes were transferred to other school districts.

The Association, a labor organization for AIU employees, filed declaratory judgment actions against the appellant School Districts,4 seeking a determination that subsection (b.l) of the Act requires receiving school districts to fill all teaching vacancies "with properly certified suspended sending entity teachers from the pool, regardless of whether the vacancies [216]*216are related to a class or program transfer. The trial court agreed and ordered the School Districts to offer the teaching vacancies5 to members of the AIU pool in order of seniority.6

On appeal,7 the School Districts contend that the trial court erred in its interpretation of subsection (b.l). They argue that because the legislature entitled § 1113 “Transferred programs and classes,”8 school districts should only have to hire from the pool when the vacancy is related to the program or classes transferred.

The Association, on the other hand, argues that the plain meaning of subsection (b.l) requires that any vacancy created in a receiving school district, whether related or unrelated to the transfer, must be filled by a properly-certified pool member willing to accept the position, assuming the school district has no suspended, certified teacher of its own to recall. We agree.

We are unpersuaded by the School Districts’ argument relating to the title of the statute. Although the title of a statute may be considered in the construction of that statute, it is not controlling. 1 Pa.C.S. § 1924. Furthermore, the title, “Transferred programs and classes,” does not require that subsection (b.l) applies only when the vacancies are related to the programs or classes transferred to the receiving entity. To the contrary, we find that the trial court’s interpretation of subsection (b.l) is in perfect alignment with the title. Subsection (b.l) functions to place certain hiring obligations on [217]*217school entities who have received transferred programs and classes.

Unlike § 1113(a), subsection (b.l) does not limit its applicability to instances where the teachers are suspended “as a result of the transfer” and are needed “to sustain the program or class transferred.” By omitting these qualifications in subsection (b.l), the legislature indicated that it did not intend to limit the employment obligation of the receiving entity to positions related to the program or class transferred. Section 1921(b) of The Statutory Construction Act of 19729 requires that “[w]hen the words of a statute are clear and free from ambiguity, the letter of it is not to be disregarded under the pretext of pursuing its spirit.” We find that the words of subsection (b.l) are clear and free from ambiguity.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Related

CWC v. Penn-Trafford, Apl of: CWC
Supreme Court of Pennsylvania, 2016
J. Cook v. Chambersburg Area S.D. and Shippensburg Area S.D.
97 A.3d 419 (Commonwealth Court of Pennsylvania, 2014)
Corbett v. Scranton School District
704 A.2d 709 (Commonwealth Court of Pennsylvania, 1997)
Robinson v. County of Snyder
664 A.2d 652 (Commonwealth Court of Pennsylvania, 1995)
Allegheny Intermediate Unit 3 Education Ass'n v. Bethel Park School District
654 A.2d 192 (Commonwealth Court of Pennsylvania, 1995)
Luzerne Intermediate Unit 18 Education Ass'n v. Pittston Area School District
650 A.2d 1112 (Commonwealth Court of Pennsylvania, 1994)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
624 A.2d 802, 155 Pa. Commw. 211, 1993 Pa. Commw. LEXIS 252, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/allegheny-intermediate-unit-3-education-assn-v-north-hills-school-pacommwct-1993.