## Facts

- Pennsylvania’s Public Employee Relations Act (PERA) permits public-school teachers to strike, but allows injunctions only when the strike creates a “clear and present danger or threat” to public health, safety, or welfare.
- The Public School Code requires public schools to provide at least 180 days of pupil instruction each school year.
- On September 10, 1984, after four days of instruction, teachers represented by the Jersey Shore Education Association went on strike against the Jersey Shore Area School District.
- On October 8, 1984, the District sought injunctive relief to compel teachers to return to work; the trial court held a hearing on October 10 and ordered teachers back effective October 11.
- After a further hearing on October 23, the trial court refused to dissolve the injunction.
- The District presented evidence that continued striking threatened the ability to complete 180 instructional days, risked loss of state subsidies, and caused student and family harms (lost instruction, loss of school meals, and child-care problems).
- The Commonwealth Court affirmed the injunction based on threatened loss of state subsidies.
- The Pennsylvania Supreme Court heard the appeal despite mootness because the issue was capable of repetition yet apt to elude review.

## Issues

1. How should courts reconcile PERA’s protection of teacher strikes (injunction only for a “clear and present danger” to public welfare) with the Public School Code’s mandate of 180 instructional days?
2. Whether a teacher strike may be enjoined when, given the remaining school calendar, its continuation would prevent the district from meeting the 180-day requirement.

## Decision

- The Pennsylvania Supreme Court affirmed the injunction.
- The Court held that when the continuation of a teacher strike, considering the remaining time in the school year, would prevent completion of 180 instructional days, the PERA “clear and present danger” standard is satisfied.
- The Court rejected limiting the analysis to the district’s threatened loss of state subsidies and treated the educational welfare of students, reflected in the 180-day mandate, as the central public-welfare concern.

## Legal Principles

- PERA protects the right of teachers to strike; injunctive relief is permitted only upon a “clear and present danger” to public health, safety, or welfare.
- The Public School Code’s 180-day instruction requirement expresses a legislative judgment about the minimum educational program owed to students.
- A teacher strike creates a legally sufficient “clear and present danger” to public welfare when its duration and timing make compliance with the 180-day requirement impossible or realistically unattainable within the school year.
- In assessing public welfare in this setting, courts focus primarily on harm to students and the public interest in education; financial impacts (including subsidy loss) may be relevant but are not the sole basis.
- Moot teacher-strike injunction disputes may still be reviewed when they present important issues capable of repetition yet likely to evade review due to timing.

## Conclusion

The court upheld an injunction ending a teacher strike because the strike’s continuation threatened completion of the statutorily required 180 instructional days, which constitutes a clear and present danger to public welfare under PERA, measured principally by harm to students’ educational interests rather than only fiscal consequences.


Jersey Shore Area Sch. Dist. v. Jersey Shore Educ. Ass’n, 548 A.2d 1202 (Pa. 1988)