Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout90-520 ConfidentialSTATE ETHICS COMMISSION 308 FINANCE BUILDING P.O. BOX 11470 HARRISBURG, PA 17108 -1470 TELEPHONE (717) 783 -1610 ADVICE OF COUNSEL March 7, 1990 90 -520 Re: Conflict, Public Official, School Director, Education Association, Collective Bargaining Agreement. This responds to your letter of January 16, 1990, in which you requested a confidential advice from the State Ethics Commission. Issue: Whether the Public Official and Employee Ethics Law imposes any prohibition or restrictions upon a school director from participating or voting in a collective bargaining process when the school director is associated with a law firm which has provided legal advice to the PSEA on matters not related to the collective bargaining process. Facts: On December 21, 1983 you were duly appointed as a member of the Board of School Directors of the A District for a two year term. Thereafter, you were nominated by both the Democratic and Republican parties and elected in the November, 1985 and November, 1989 General Elections. During your ten years with the Board of School Directors you served two years in the office of President, two years in the office of Vice - President as well as in other capacities such as Chairman of the Board's Personnel Committee for the calendar year 1986. During that time the Board negotiated a five year collective bargaining agreement for its professional employees, the B Association which is affiliated with the National Education Association (NBA) and the Pennsylvania State Education Association (PSEA). During that period the Board entered into a collective bargaining agreements with non - professional employees represented by other local PSEA affiliates. The collective bargaining agreement has been subject to state -wide publicity and has resulted in the representatives of the Board and the SVEA and PSEA appearing as members of school cooperation teams in conjunction with the Department of Labor and Industry at various locations throughout the Commonwealth to make presentations on the resolution of collective bargaining issues Page 2 by and between school districts and associations representing their professional and non - professional employees. You are a 1981 graduate of C Law School. Upon graduation you served a clerkship with D, US Circuit Judge for the E Circuit. Thereafter you became associated with the F Law Firm (Firm) and you have continued that affiliation to the present date. Effective January 1, 1989 you became a share holder in the Firm and concentrated your practice on representing management interests and employment matters. To facilitate its practice of law in other states, certain shareholders in the Firm are also partners in the Pennsylvania General Partnership known as G Firm. You are a general partner in G Firm which maintains various offices in Pennsylvania. The lawyers and other personnel in these offices provide legal and other services to clients. On or about April 1989, the Firm began providing services to PSEA. PSEA's legal representation on a statewide basis is the responsibility of its Chief Counsel who supervises PSEA's legal department in Harrisburg as well as the attorneys in the field offices in the Commonwealth. On occasion the services of outside counsel are utilized. Neither the Chief Counsel nor any of the staff of PSEA are affiliated with the Firm. Generally PSEA retains the services of H Attorney to provide legal services to PSEA in the western region of the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania who also provides such services on behalf of B Association. H Attorney is not associated or affiliated with the Firm and has provided legal services to PSEA for at least the last five years. The services provided by the Firm to PSEA consist of governmental relation services involved in presenting the position of PSEA on issues other than collective bargaining process under the Pennsylvania Public Employee Relations Act to the General Assembly and to other governmental bodies. In addition the Firm has on occasion provided legal advice to PSEA on a limited case by case basis on matters not related to the collective bargaining process. You have not at any time personally provided services, consultation or counseling to the PSEA or any of its affiliates through the Firm or independently and have not been involved in any of the representations outlined above. You have provided legal advice to various public school districts in your legal practice. A District retains the services of a solicitor who is in no way affiliated with the Firm. In addition, A District has for approximately five years retained the services of a special labor counsel, J Attorney, to advise on labor and employment matters including negotiations with PSEA and B Association. J Attorney is in no way affiliated with the Firm. Your compensation as a shareholder in the Firm and as a partner in the partnership is determined on a formula basis at the beginning of each calendar year and is not directly related to the income or receipt of any fees or compensation from Page 3 any client or clients of the Firm. After referencing Section 1801 of the Pennsylvania Public Employee Relations Act, 43 P.S. §1801(a), you note that current collective bargaining agreement between A District and B Association will expire on June 30, 1991. There appears to be a likelihood that the parties will soon choose to voluntarily enter into early negotiations for a successor agreement. In addition the collective agreement for support personnel will also expire this year. In light of the fact that you played a role as Chairman of the Personnel Committee during the negotiations of the prior five year labor agreement, you are desirous of participating and voting in the forthcoming collective bargaining process. You believe that you may do so in light of the presented facts. After referencing the preamble to the Ethics Act, you seek an advisory opinion regarding your possible participation or voting in the collective bargaining /grievance process with the affiliates of the PSEA. Discussion: As a School Board Director, you are a public official as that term is defined under the Ethics Law and hence are subject to the provisions of that law. Section 3(a) of the Ethics Law provides: Section 3. Restricted Activities. (a) No public official or public employee shall engage in conduct that constitutes a conflict of interest. The following terms are defined in the Ethics Law: Section 2. Definitions. "Conflict or conflict of interest." Use by a public official or public employee of the authority of his office or employment or any confidential information received through his holding public office or employment for the private pecuniary benefit of himself, a member of his immediate family or a business with which he or a member of his immediate family is associated. "Conflict" or "conflict of interest" does not include an action having a de minimis economic impact or which affects to the same degree a class consisting of the general public or a subclass consisting of an industry, occupation or other group which includes the public official or public employee, a member or his immediate family or a business with Page 4 which he or a member of his immediate family is associated. "Authority of office or employment." The actual power provided by law, the exercise of which is necessary to the performance of duties and responsibilities unique to a particular public office or position of public employment. "Business with which he is associated." Any business in which the person or a member of the person's immediate family is a director, officer, owner, employee or has a financial interest. Section 3(b) and 3(c) of the Ethics Law provide in part that no person shall offer to a public official /employee anything of monetary value and no public official /employee shall solicit or accept any thing of monetary value based upon the understanding that the vote, official action, or judgement of the public official /employee would be influenced thereby. Reference is made to these provisions of the law not to imply that there has or will be any transgression thereof but merely to provide a complete response to the question presented. In applying the above provisions of the Ethics Law and definitions to the instant matter, Section 3(a) of the Ethics Law would restrict you from voting or participating as to any private pecuniary benefit for yourself or business with which you are associated. Although you are associated with the partnership and Firm, and those business entities have provided certain services to the PSEA, it does not appear, and it is expressly assumed, that the Firm does not provide any services to A District or the B Association. In this regard you have stated that A District retains a solicitor who is not affiliated with the Firm. Under these circumstances and based upon those assumptions, you would not be precluded from participating or voting as to the collective bargaining /grievance process because your actions on the Board would not inure to your benefit or the Firm. Under the Ethics Law, a public official /employee is not precluded from having outside business interests provided those business interests do not impact upon the governmental body with which the public official /employee is associated. Pancoe, Opinion 89 -011. In this case, based upon the assumption that the Firm or partnership does not represent A District or the B Association, Section 3(a) of the Ethics Law would not preclude you from participating or voting. Page 5 Lastly, the propriety of the proposed conduct has only been addressed under the Ethics Law; the applicability of any other statute, code, ordinance, regulation or other code of conduct other than the Ethics Act has not been considered in that they do not involve an interpretation of the Ethics Law. Specifically not addressed in this advice is the applicability of the Pennsylvania Public Employee Relations Act. Conclusion: A school board member is a public official subject to the provisions of the Ethics Law. Section 3(a) would not restrict a school board member from participating or voting in a collective bargaining /grievance process if the law firm with which he is associated neither represents the school district nor the association. Lastly, the propriety of the proposed conduct has only been addressed under the Ethics Law. Pursuant to Section 7(9)(ii), this Advice is a complete defense in any enforcement proceeding initiated by the Commission, and evidence of good faith conduct in any other civil or criminal proceeding, providing the requestor has disclosed truthfully all the material facts and committed the acts complained of in reliance on the Advice given. This letter is a public record and will be made available as such. Finally, if you disagree with this Advice or if you have any reason to challenge same, you may request that the full Commission review this Advice. A personal appearance before the Commission will be scheduled and a formal Opinion from the Commission will be issued. Any such appeal must be in writing and must be received at the Commission within 15 days of the date of this Advice pursuant to 51 Pa. Code S2.12. Sincerely, Vincent Dopko, Chief Counsel