Ummm, yeah, that's generally frowned upon. The employer terminated the harasser, but the case went to arbitration under the CBA pursuant to the Pennsylvania Public Employe Relations Act (PERA, and yes there is only one "E" at the end of employe).
The arbitrator believed the accuser, and found that the harasser engaged in "lewd, lascivious, and extraordinarily perverse" conduct. Astonishingly, the arbitrator then found that the employer did not have "just cause" as required by the CBA because the harasser essentially ceased his perverse conduct after receiving a verbal warning. The award reinstated the employee and awarded him back pay.
The Pennsylvania Supreme Court was having none of that. Noting clear public policy against sexual harassment in the workplace (like Title VII and the PHRA), the Court held:
The absurd award here makes a mockery of the dominant public policy against sexual harassment in the workplace, by rendering public employers powerless to take appropriate actions to vindicate a strong public policy. Such an irrational award undermines clear and dominant public policy.Tell us how you really feel? Needless to say, the Court vacated the arbitration award.
HT: Eric Meyer via The Employer Handbook.