Section 1620 Pennsylvania County Code Interpretation
In County of Lehigh v. Pennsylvania Labor Relations Board, 507 Pa. 270, 277, 489 A.2d 1325, 1329 (1985), the Supreme Court stated that the proviso in Section 1620 of the County Code "does not limit the permissible subject of bargaining to purely financial terms."
A reviewing court must specifically analyze each of the disputed provisions to decide which, if any, infringe upon the independence of the judiciary, and it must uphold those provisions that do not. See Pennsylvania Labor Relations Board v. American Federation of State, County & Municipal Employees, Dist. Council 84, 515 Pa. 23, 526 A.2d 769 (1987) (analyzing provisions for sick leave and funeral leave, pay for jury duty and shift differential and holding that all were permissible areas of bargaining but that sick and funeral leave provisions appeared to impact on court's supervisory authority and thus required prior consultation).
Judges may refuse to agree to a particular proposal but may not refuse to bargain over a mandatory subject of bargaining. Lancaster County v. Pennsylvania Labor Relations Board, 761 A.2d 1250 (Pa. Cmwlth. 2000) (affirming order that county committed unfair labor practice when it refused to submit to arbitration issues regarding union proposal that the president judge stated would interfere with the right to hire, fire and direct court personnel).