Aug 18, 2022 8 min read

Paul

As per our call today attached is the recent decision (August 8^th) issued by Judge Lucas in the law suit filed by Peters Creek Sanitary Authority and seven of its Board Members against Richard Lawson to have him removed for cause in creating a hostile work environment for PCSA employees.  I am a partner and labor and employment attorney with Vorys and work out of its Pittsburgh office I have been practicing law for over 40 years in SW Pennsylvania, and primarily in Washington County, and in my opinion this is a landmark case in Pennsylvania and stands for the proposition that Municipal Supervisors and Municipal appointees to Boards cannot harass municipal employees without consequences.  Mr. Lawson who served in the dual capacity as a Union Township supervisor and one of three Union Township appointees to the PCSA ten (10) member board, argued in the case he was immune from suit because there is no law that prohibits him from harassing Mr. Kovach, the Peters Creek Authority Manager or its employees and otherwise being a bully, unless he has engaged in discriminatory conduct.  He has confused “just cause” for removal under the Municipal Authorities Act in PA, with the requirements for discrimination under Title VII and the Pa Human Relations Act.

 

Here are some of the more important facts set forth in this 25 page opinion to assist with your review:

 

·         On April 15, 2021 Mr. Kovach, the PCSA Authority Manager,  filed an 8 page single space complaint against Mr. Lawson and Keven Daerr, (the husband of Heather Daerr, who is Union Township’s chairperson) alleging a hostile work environment, bullying, and harassment. 

·         The Complaint was filed by Mr. Kovach on his behalf and on behalf of all PCSA employees.

·         PCSA did a prompt investigation, and hired Corporate Security and Investigation (“CSI”), a private investigation firm, to investigate the complaint and make recommendations.

·         Lawson and Kevin Daerr voted to hire them at a special meeting of the PCSA Board, and agreed to cooperate fully with them in their investigation.  Thereafter, Lawson refused to be interviewed by CSI without an attorney and Kevin Daerr resigned from the PCSA Board, and refused to be interviewed at all.

·         During the special meeting and executive session called to discuss the Kovach complaint, Mr. Lawson threatened to sue Mr. Kovach and the Board Members if they sided with Mr. Kovach. He was counseled by the PCSA solicitor and the PCSA Board President not to make such threats because this could be viewed as retaliatory.

·          In June of 2021 CSI completed its investigation and recommended the removal of Lawson “to remedy the allegations of hostile working environment within the PCSA office.”

·         During the three (3)  trial before Judge Lucas, Mr. Kovach testified he has worked for PCSA since 2002.  The PCSA Board members testified he had an excellent reputation, and holds an undergraduate degree in Human Resource Management and a graduate degree in business administration.  He had received stellar reviews from the PCSA Board members who testified he was a valuable asset of the Authority. Board members also testified he would be difficult to replace and they observed Lawson harass him and others repeatedly at PCSA meetings.

·          Following the findings of CSI, Lawson was asked to resign and he refused.

·         Instead, he made good on his threat, and on July 28, 2021 Union Township passed Resolution 6 0f 2021 authorizing the filing of a frivolous lawsuit against PCSA, the individual PCSA Board members who voted to have Lawson removed and Mr. Kovach.  Judge Lucas in his decision finds this lawsuit and resolution to be retaliatory and pre-text.  Keep in mind, Heather Daerr, the spouse of Kevin Daerr, who was also charged with harassment and creating a hostile work environment also voted to approve the filing of this Complaint and did not recuse herself.

·         The Complaint was filed with information furnished by Lawson, and the Resolution authorizing the same was approve by Lawson and Heather Daerr, the wife of Kevin Daerr who resigned and refused to be interviewed by the CSI investigators.  The PCSA Board recommended his removal as well as Lawson, despite him having resigned. 

·         Lawson was also found to have engaged in harassment by filing multiple Right To Know request with the PCSA, despite having full access as a board member to all information.

·         Judge Lucas ruled that Lawson’s exercise of his rights as a Union Township Supervisor and Authority Board Member “are not unfettered.”

·         The PA Municipal Authority Act provides for the removal of a municipal board member “for cause.”  See 53 PA.C.S.A Section 5610(d).

·         Seven (7) out of the ten (10) PCSA Board members filed an action to have Lawson removed for cause.  The other three Board members, included Mr. Lawson, and 2 other Union Township appointees.

·         Judge Lucas ruled that “Here, testimony credibly demonstrated that the relationship history between Mr. Lawson and Mr. Kovach, shows a pattern of Mr. Lawson acting in a manner that is inimical and harmful to the interests of PCSA and its ratepayers.” (page 22)

·         Despite being warned not to retaliate against Mr. Kovach for his complaint, Mr. Lawson retaliated against him by acting in his capacity as a Union Township Supervisor and voting in favor of Resolution 6, of 2021and approving the Union Township civil Complaint filed in the Washington County Court of Common Pleas, that named Mr. Kovach as a defendant and attached Mr. Kovach’s hostile work environment complaint.

·         The Court held the actions of Mr. Lawson, “demonstrate a repetitive pattern of Mr. Lawson disregarding his PCSA hat and taking steps that were not calculated to serve the interests of PCSA and its ratepayers.” 

·         Citing from Com v Kirk, 340 Pa 346, 347, 17 A2d 195, 205 (Pa Supreme Court 1941) Judge Lucas held at page 25 of his decision: “A pubic office  is understood by all to be a public trust.  To honestly administer such trust the official in whose charge it is placed must give his undivided loyalty.”   With regard to PCSA and its ratepayers, Mr. Lawson has not done so.”