Being Hung out to Dry: The Pennsylvania Board of Funeral Directors

Federal Judge John Jones III has teed off (again) on the Pennsylvania Board of Funeral Directors. Awarding attorneys fees of more than a million dollars and issuing a permanent injunction against the State Board, Judge Jones rebuked Board members for their failure to show initiative towards a legislative fix to a Truman era problem. And, the situation for the State Board is about to get worse. Judge Jones will also preside over Rabbi Wasserman’s lawsuit against the State Board. The Rabbi made a very compelling case to the Tablet, and will likely find a friendly ear in Judge Jones. If these recent events are considered in the context of Ernie Heffner’s comments, one would have to wonder if the State Board is being hung out to dry by a trade association that has long endorsed the State’s enforcement of a protectionist law.

Contrary to the Judge’s perception, industry boards are better suited to applying existing law than re-writing it. The purpose for having an industry board is so that the members can provide experience and balance when applying the law to alleged violations. But if the law is broken, board members are dependent on attorneys for advice on how it should be fixed, and what to do until the law is changed. As Mr. Heffner points out, PFDA attorneys mounted a strong defense of the Pennsylvania law. The NFDA also provided support for certain provisions of the law. The Board’s legal team followed the course set by the industry attorneys. As a consequence, the State of Pennsylvania will now have to foot the bill for more than a million dollars in attorneys’ fees, with the possibility of more to come.

Pennsylvania represents a failure in legal leadership. But too often, an association defines the role of its general counsel in ways that encourage loyalty to its board (or to crucial members) at the expense of its membership, or worse yet, at the expense of the industry. Such was the case in Illinois when the general counsel approved years’ of board decisions that culminated in the near collapse of the master preneed trust.

If Pennsylvania is to find legislative solutions, it needs to be the collaborative effort of the State Board’s attorneys, industry attorneys, and the PFDA’s attorneys. Missouri should take heed from the Pennsylvania situation. For the better part of 2 years, the staff for the Missouri State Board of Embalmers and Funeral Directors has advised that the law is broken with regard to insurance assignments. The staff continues to pressure the Board to take action. The industry is opposed to the staff’s position on insurance assignments, and the MFDEA has recommended that funeral directors contact board members about their feelings. What the board members need is legal advice from the association and other industry attorneys. If the law isn’t broken, explain why. If the law is broken, but not to the extent the staff asserts, then recommend a fix.
 

Pennsylvania: knocking down fences

Heritage is the term that the death care industry uses to describe the relationship each funeral home or cemetery attempts to forge with the community through years of service. Heritage reflects a commitment to the community, and through that commitment, the operator can expect the community’s business.

Initially, the vast majority of funeral directors fought preneed because the upstart operator used pricing strategies to undermine the heritage of the established competitor. Accordingly, the early preneed laws were intended to choke off preneed. But now, the vast majority of funeral homes offer some form of preneed, and preneed laws are slowly changing to reflect that.

Funeral directors also perceive the business practices of the national companies as a threat to their heritage. The larger the funeral operator, the more access it has to economies of scale, investment capital, and resources for advertising and administration. For sixty years, Pennsylvania funeral homes have been subject to a law that was intended to give the ‘little guy’ a level playing field. As reported by the Philly.com, a Federal court has found many provisions of the Pennsylvania Funeral Directors Law unconstitutional.

The Pennsylvania Funeral Directors Association expressed “surprise” over the decision, and encouraged the State Board of Funeral Directors to appeal the decision. The Association is being somewhat disingenuous with its membership, the public and the State Board. The ruling’s issues had been the subject of years of litigation, and the Court’s frustration with the State Board to heed warnings to change the law bubble out in a footnote on page 154 of the ruling. While the State Board takes the brunt of the Court’s rebuke, we anticipate the Association’s influence has played a pivotal role in the Board’s response to the litigation.