Pennsylvania Virtual Charter School
National Labor Relations Board
364 N.L.R.B. No. 87, 364 N.L.R.B. 1118 (2016)
- Written by Tammy Boggs, JD
Facts
Under Pennsylvania state law, a charter school could be established by private individuals who formed a nonprofit corporation. Charter schools were subject to oversight by the state department of education, which could revoke or fail to renew a school’s charter. The Pennsylvania Virtual Charter School (PVCS) (defendant) was privately founded by several individuals, who named themselves the “founding board.” The founding board incorporated PVCS as a nonprofit corporation, obtained the school district’s approval of the PVCS charter, and gained renewal of the charter. PVCS was operated by a six-member board of trustees, consisting of private individuals, and the board appointed and removed its own members. PVCS was mostly funded by the school districts where the students resided. A labor union (plaintiff) petitioned the National Labor Relations Board (the board) to represent a unit of teachers and academic support staff at PVCS. PVCS opposed the petition, arguing that the school was a political subdivision of Pennsylvania, exempt from the National Labor Relations Act. The regional director found that PVCS was not a political subdivision. The board reviewed the matter.
Rule of Law
Issue
Holding and Reasoning (No information provided)
What to do next…
Here's why 820,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:
- Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 46,300 briefs, keyed to 989 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.