A Common Pleas Court Judge will issue rulings on objections to a harassment suit filed against Connoquenessing Township and Supervisor Ricky Kradle by three township employees after oral arguments were presented Thursday.

In their October 2024 suit, William Chuba, road superintendent; Timothy Manuel, an operator and truck driver; and Lucas Langer, a truck driver and laborer, claim that before Supervisor Angela Fleeger took office last January, Kradel told them he didn’t want to see them chasing her and instructed them to not make any sexual advances toward her, according to the suit.

They said Kradel has verbally abused, harassed, screamed, yelled at and made allegations toward them about taking breaks and using work uniforms, according to the suit.

In addition, the employees claim in the suit Kradel instructed them to violate safety polices. As examples, they said Kradel told them to work without a flagman, to work with one person in a vehicle for fallen trees, to ignore school buses and to have one person place road signs in an effort to avoid overtime pay.

A 2022 collective bargaining agreement covering the employees has a discrimination and harassment policy, but has no guidelines for reporting harassment, according to the suit.

The agreement has a grievance procedure, but it can’t be used because the agreement doesn’t cover the actions of a supervisor, according to the suit.

The suit alleges six counts of violations of township employee policies and procedures.

On Thursday, defense attorney Michael Belko argued in support of three preliminary objections he filed.

The first contends the employees’ suit is based on an alleged violation of the township employees handbook, which is nonbinding and subject to change by supervisors. Belko argued it is not a cause of action recognized under state law.

In the second objection, Belko argued the court lacks jurisdiction because the contract between the township and union employees contains a grievance procedure the employees should have used, but didn’t.

The third objection argues the sexual harassment claim in one of the alleged violations has to be pursued through the Pennsylvania Human Relations Commission.

The employees’ attorney, Deanna Istik, argued for dismissal of the objections.

Countering the first objection, Istik said the employee handbook is a policy adopted by the township supervisors in 2003 and is enforceable under the law.

In opposition to the second objection, she argued the contract does not apply to the supervisors because they are elected and their roles can’t be dictated through collective bargaining.

She said the third objection should be dismissed because the employees have the option to file complaints in court or through the PHRC, which is not an “exclusive remedy,” Istik said.

The suit seeks unspecified damages exceeding $35,000.