Bill eliminating stalking, harassment loophole dies

A BILL to eliminate a little-known carve-out in state law that allows a person in a labor dispute to stalk, harass or threaten another person in the dispute is expected to die Monday when the House concludes voting this session.

The House is not planning to vote on a Senate-amended version of House Bill 1154 during its final voting day.

State Rep. Ron Miller, R-York, who sponsored the bill, and others have had concerns about the Senate-amended bill. Yesterday, he said it's "unfortunate" that the bill will die. "There should not be a loophole in the law. There should not be an exemption."

Earlier this week, last-ditch efforts to eliminate the loophole were taken up by state senators, who proposed amendments to another House bill to address the issue. But in the flurry of late-night politicking Wednesday night, no amendment was added to the other House bill. The Senate concluded its voting Thursday.

The bill gained prominence after the February federal indictment of 10 members of the local Ironworkers union, who were accused of violent acts against builders.

One of the union's former leaders, Edward Sweeney, had been charged last year in a separate case with harassing a Post Brothers Apartments executive. But partly because of the loophole in the law, he was acquitted of the charges.

Under the state crime code, stalking, harassment and threatening to use a weapon of mass destruction are exempt from prosecution if they occur during a labor dispute or during "any constitutionally protected activity."

Miller's bill removed these exemptions under the three crimes. It passed the House in March.

But the Senate passed an amended bill in April. It put an exemption back in for stalking and harassment, saying the offenses shall not apply to conduct protected by federal law or the U.S. or state constitutions.

What that means is highly debatable, depending on who is asked.

But Erik Arneson, spokesman for Senate Majority Leader Dominic Pileggi, R-Delaware, contended the amended bill clarified the law and had wide support.

Frank Sirianni, president of the Building and Construction Trades Council, a pro-union group, backed the Senate-amended bill. The problem with HB 1154 before it was amended, he said, was "it would inhibit ambulatory picketing, which is a federally protected activity."

For example, he said, it would have inhibited a union worker who wanted to lawfully "move from place to place" to talk to a nonunion person at another site.

Some pro-business groups, however, like Miller, were concerned that the Senate-amended bill could potentially allow for stalking and harassment.

"It could be a Trojan horse, meaning that the bill could be interpreted as something different," said David Taylor, executive director of the Pennsylvania Manufacturers' Association.

"We want to eliminate the carve-out," he said. "We believe the law should be applied the same to everybody."

Source: Philly.com