City of Bradford v. Teamsters Local No. 110
Pennsylvania Commonwealth Court
25 A.3d 408 (2011)

- Written by Miller Jozwiak, JD
Facts
James Taylor was a garbage collector for the City of Bradford (city) (plaintiff). As Taylor placed garbage into a truck, a purse spilled out a large sum of money. Taylor gave the purse to a supervisor but kept the money. The supervisor contacted the police, who determined that the purse had been reported stolen. Police officers questioned Taylor, who initially denied but ultimately admitted that he took the money. Taylor then returned the money to the police. The next day, the city issued a disciplinary report alleging that Taylor violated various city policies. After a hearing, the city concluded that Taylor committed the offenses and terminated his employment. The Teamsters Local Union No. 110 (union) (defendant) filed a grievance under the collective-bargaining agreement (CBA) between the city and the union. The parties went to arbitration. The arbitrator concluded that Taylor violated only one policy, which prohibited theft. But the CBA did not require termination for a first-time violation of that policy, and whether termination was appropriate depended on whether restitution was made. The arbitrator found that the city failed to consider mitigating circumstances, including Taylor’s positive work history, the isolated nature of the incident, and the fact that Taylor made restitution of the money. For these reasons, the arbitrator reduced the termination to a long-term suspension. The city appealed the arbitrator’s award to the courts. After several appeals and remands, the trial court ultimately refused to vacate the arbitration award.
Rule of Law
Issue
Holding and Reasoning (Leadbetter, J.)
Dissent (Leavitt, J.)
What to do next…
Here's why 832,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:
- Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 46,500 briefs, keyed to 994 casebooks. Top-notch customer support.
- The right amount of information, includes the facts, issues, rule of law, holding and reasoning, and any concurrences and dissents.
- Access in your classes, works on your mobile and tablet. Massive library of related video lessons and high quality multiple-choice questions.
- Easy to use, uniform format for every case brief. Written in plain English, not in legalese. Our briefs summarize and simplify; they don’t just repeat the court’s language.