Legal Opinion
Fraternal Order of Police v. City of Philadelphia
Commonwealth Court of Pennsylvania
Decided December 7, 1993No. 1294 and 1373 C.D. 1993PublishedCited by 8 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
SILVESTRE Senior Judge.
The Fraternal Order of Police, Lodge No. 5 (FOP) and the City of Philadelphia (City) were parties to a collective bargaining agreement which was to expire on June 30, 1992. In December of 1991, the parties commenced negotiations toward a collective bargaining agreement to become effective on July 1, 1992. The parties reached an impasse in negotiations and they requested arbitration pursuant to Act 111. 1
Pursuant to Section 4(b) of Act 111, 43 P.S. § 217.4(b), City appointed H. Thomas Felix (Felix) and FOP appointed Richard Markowitz (Markowitz) as their respective…
2Cases cited15 opinions
- Washington Arbitration CaseSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1969
- Tp. of Moon v. POL. OFFICE. OF TP. OF MOONSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1985
- In Re Appeal of Upper Providence Police Delaware County Lodge 27Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1987
- Kemp v. QuallsSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1984
- Ebald v. PhiladelphiaSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1957
10 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by8 opinions
- Daddona v. ThindCommonwealth Court of Pennsylvania · 2006
- Crystal Forest Associates, LP v. Buckingham Township SupervisorsCommonwealth Court of Pennsylvania · 2005
- McKenzie v. Westinghouse Electric Corp.Commonwealth Court of Pennsylvania · 1996
- City of Philadelphia v. Fraternal Order of Police Lodge No. 5Commonwealth Court of Pennsylvania · 1996
- Upper Merion Township v. Upper Merion Township Police OfficersCommonwealth Court of Pennsylvania · 2006
3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.