Hearing Examiner Finds Borough Council President’s Heated Pension Dispute Did Not Interfere With Grievance Filing

Written on 06/12/2026
LRIS

On November 12, 2024, Bruce Mar­kovich, the Lansford Borough Council President in Pennsylvania, approached Sergeant Shawn Nunemacher, the FOP Schuylkill-Carbon Lodge 13 represen­tative, as he entered the Borough office. Markovich began speaking first, point­ing his finger but remaining outwardly calm. Within minutes, the two men were yelling at each other, standing within a foot of each other’s faces, with Nunemacher leaning forward, visibly enraged and gesturing wildly.

The dispute centered on a pension shortfall. The Borough had failed to amend its pension ordinance to include overtime in retirement calculations — a contractual obligation under the par­ties’ collective bargaining agreement. Nunemacher had filed a Step 1 grievance on October 28, 2024, which received no response. He arrived at the Borough office that November morning to file a Step 2 grievance.

According to Markovich, he had no idea any grievance existed. He testified that he approached Nunemacher solely to discuss a separate issue; the police pension was underfunded because the prior Borough Secretary had deducted 2.8% from officers’ pay instead of 3.5%. An audit report had just confirmed the shortfall. Markovich wanted to arrange a labor-management meeting.

Nunemacher testified that Markov­ich immediately said: “We need to talk about this grievance, I am suggesting you take this back,” then warned the officers would “owe [them] a lot of mon­ey.” Markovich denied mentioning any grievance, testifying that Nunemacher “just lost it” after Markovich said the Borough had “every right to recover that money.”

The Borough office’s security video contained no audio. However, it clearly showed Nunemacher becoming esca­lated first — yelling, leaning forward, gesturing wildly — while Markovich attempted to walk away with his hand up in resignation. Markovich then returned to within a foot of Nunemacher, and both men yelled. Two office employees, sitting just feet away, testified they heard raised voices but could not recall the substance of the argument.

The FOP charged the Borough with violating Section 6(1)(a) of the Penn­sylvania Labor Relations Act, alleging Markovich’s confrontation interfered with Nunemacher’s protected griev­ance-filing activity.

The Hearing Examiner found that the FOP failed to sustain its burden.

The Examiner credited Markov­ich’s testimony that he was unaware of the Step 1 grievance and unaware that Nunemacher had come to file a Step 2 grievance. Both sides agreed the argu­ment pertained to taking money back from officers because of the pension shortfall — not to amending the ordi­nance to include overtime. The Borough had already begun the amendment pro­cess, and Markovich had no reason to ar­gue about that issue. Because Markovich did not know Nunemacher was engaged in protected activity, his conduct could not have been intended to interfere with it. The Examiner dismissed the charge.

Fraternal Order of Police Schuylkill-Carbon Lodge No. 13 v. Lans­ford Borough, 57 PPER ¶ 44, (Proposed Decision and Order, 2025).