Philadelphia Newspapers v. Newspaper Guild of Greater Philadelphia, Local 10

An editorial cartoonist was employed by Philadelphia Newspapers, Inc. (newspaper) (plaintiff) and was represented by the Newspaper Guild of Greater Philadelphia, Local 10 (guild) (defendant). After the cartoonist published his estranged wife’s phone number in a cartoon, the newspaper terminated his employment. The newspaper and the guild were parties to a collective-bargaining agreement (CBA), which provided that employees could be terminated only for good and reasonable cause. The guild challenged the cartoonist’s termination, and the parties submitted the matter to arbitration. The arbitrator determined that the termination had not been supported by cause and ordered the cartoonist’s reinstatement to “his former, or substantially equivalent position.” The arbitrator also claimed to retain jurisdiction for 60 days to enforce the decision. The newspaper offered the cartoonist an advertising-artist position, but the guild claimed that the position did not comply with the arbitrator’s award. The guild sought to have the arbitrator clarify whether the newspaper had complied with the award, to which the newspaper objected. The arbitrator issued an order, which found that the advertising-artist position did not comply with the original award. The newspaper then sued to vacate the arbitrator’s order interpreting the original award, arguing that the arbitrator lacked the authority to clarify the original award. The parties cross-moved for summary judgment.