Court says decision on SEPTA and HRC to be reconsidered

The Pennsylvania Supreme Court has ordered Commonwealth Court to reconsider a decision that denied the authority of the Philadelphia Commission on Human Relations over SEPTA.

SEPTA had argued that it was a state agency and therefore not subject to the jurisdiction of the commission or the provisions of the Philadelphia Fair Practices Ordinance.

The court battle grew out of seven discrimination complaints filed against SEPTA by customers and employees between 2007 and 2009. Previously, SEPTA complied with rulings by the commission, its executive director, Rue Landau, said Wednesday.

A divided high court ruled this week that the lower court needed to reexamine its denial of the commission's authority and sent the dispute back to Commonwealth Court, which ruled in 2011 in SEPTA's favor on the jurisdiction dispute.

"We are very excited about this decision," Landau said. "SEPTA is a huge employer and a huge public accommodation in Philadelphia. . . . We needed a ruling that we have jurisdiction for justice to be truly served here."

But the Supreme Court decision does not settle the individual cases that prompted the legal battle.

Those complaints, some nearly a decade old, cannot be investigated by the commission until after Commonwealth Court issues its ruling in response.

The seven complaints ranged from charges of sexual harassment by SEPTA workers to complaints from bus riders about SEPTA's gender-specific stickers on transit passes. One of the seven complainants, a customer who claimed discrimination based on a disability, died during the long legal battle, Landau said.

Three of the complainants, claiming discrimination based on sex, age, or disability, decided to take their complaints to federal or state courts.

SEPTA spokeswoman Jerri Williams said the Supreme Court decision did not mean that the commission "can exercise jurisdiction over SEPTA. Instead, four of the seven justices determined that the Commonwealth Court should apply the standard from" an earlier case "to determine if the commission can exercise any jurisdiction over SEPTA."

"SEPTA believes that the Commonwealth Court can find without any further argument or evidence that the commission does not have any jurisdiction over SEPTA," Williams said.

Justice Seamus P. McCaffery wrote the majority opinion, joined by Justices Max Baer, Debra M. Todd, and Correale F. Stevens. Chief Justice Ronald D. Castille wrote a concurring and dissenting opinion, as did Justice J. Michael Eakin. Justice Thomas G. Saylor dissented.