DECISIONS

In Expedited Fact Finding

between

KENT SCHOOL DISTRICT #415

and

KENT EDUCATION ASSOCIATION

 

In Expedited Fact Finding
between	REPORT WITH
KENT SCHOOL DISTRICT #415
and	RECOMMENDATIONS
KENT EDUCATION ASSOCIATION

This report contains two parts: the first part sets forth an account of the fact finding proceedings; the second part, the fact finder's recommendations.

On August II, 1980, the Public Employment Relations Commission (PERC) appointed the fact finder who met with the chief negotiators of the parties on August 12 and August 13 to discuss the eighteen (18) items at issue. At the invitation of the fact finder, the parties submitted their respective proposals and the rationale for these proposals. On August 20, 1980, the parties presented fact and argument at an open formal hearing in the Kent Commons. From August 20, 1980, to August 25, 1980, the fact finder studied the materials, and on August 26, 1980, he-met again with the chief negotiators to review the status of the eighteen issues. On August 27, August 28, and August 29 the fact finder prepared this report for the parties and for PERC.

I am most grateful to the parties for their many courtesies, for their spirit of cooperation, and, in particular, for their cogent, incisive and literate Briefs which made it possible for me to find my way through a maze of proposals, counter proposals, fact, and argument. I issue these recommendations with high respect for the chief negotiators who, although they argued incisively, earnestly, and forthrightly for their respecitve principals, discussed prickly issues in good faith, with a cordial spirit, and without hostility.

I have written only SUMMARY RECOMMENDATIONS, without the supporting rationale, to give the parties time to consider them before school opens on September 2, 1980. The rationale can be found in the parties' Briefs.

Two criteria which ultimately determined my recommendations guided me in my search for the "attainable bargain," the purpose of fact finding. The first criterion, "ability to pay," or more accurately "inability to pay," convinced me that, given fiscal pressures and constraints, the District offered the Association as much as it could possibly offer. The second criterion, that the Association should not expect to get in fact finding what it could not get at the bargaining table, convinced me that the Association could not get any more than I recommended.

These two criteria, the District's "inability to pay" (first criterion) and the Association's "attainable maximum" (second criterion) clothed in fact and argument, led to the following recommendations.

RECOMMENDATIONS

To expedite proceedings, I have applied the following general principle to a very few items: if the item is not specified in the recommendations below, I hereby recommend the existing language for that item.

Issue No. 1:     Distribution of Agreement (Article II, Section 4)

Recommendation:       that the parties adopt the language of the Association.

Issue No. 2:     No Strike/No Lockout (Article III, Section 10)

Recommendation:       that the District's no strike language be included in the 1980-81 Agreement.

Issue No. 3:     Maintenance of Standards (Article III, Section 11)

Recommendation:       that the Agreement contain no Maintenance of Standards language.

Issue No. 4:     Just Cause (Article IV, Section 2)

Recommendation:       that Article IV, Section 2 contain the following three paragraphs:

No teacher shall be disciplined or reprimanded without just and sufficient cause. If a teacher objects to any disciplinary action, the teacher may use the grievance procedure including binding arbitration. The specific grounds forming the basis for disciplinary action will be made available to the teacher in writing.

This section and the grievance procedure, including binding arbitration, will not apply to matters regulated by law including teacher proficiency (except for procedural matters covered under Article VIII, Evaluation), non-renewal of contract for continuing or provisional employee, discharge, or adverse effects of contract.

Any complaint not called to the attention of the teacher may not be used as the basis for disciplinary action or adverse evaluation against the teacher. Any written record made of a complaint against a teacher must be called to the attention of the teacher within ten (10) working days of the time the record was made.

Issue No. 5:     Employment Contracts (Article IV, Section 6)

Recommendations:     (a) that the length of individual contracts be the same as in the existing agreement except that (1) new teachers have the same length of contract as experienced teachers; and (2) that psychologists may request a 193 day contract instead of a 203 day contract;

(b) that the parties adjust the contractual number of days for Industrial Arts teachers.

Issue No. 6:     Salaries (Article VI, Section 1 and Section 2)

Recommendation:       that the District increase the base pay of the bargaining unit by 11%.

Issue No. 7:     Coaches' Salaries (Article VI, Section 6)

Recommendations:     (a) that the parties accept the District's proposal, and

(b) that they accept the Association's night/turnout provision.

Issue No. 8:     Extra Curricular/Extra-Duty Pay (Article VI, Section 7)

Recommendations:     that the parties retain the District's language on all ten items except (a) for No. 4 - that the parties set the hourly rate at $11 per hour for extra duty; (b) For No. 10 that the parties accept the Association's proposal.

Issue: No. 9:    Insurance Benefits (Article VI, Section 12)

Recommendations:     (a) that the District increase insurance benefits to $110 per month;

(b) that the parties adopt the District's language with the proviso that the District grandfather those part-time employees who have received full benefits.

Issue No. 10:   Work Day (Article VII, Section 1)

Recommendations:     (a) that the parties retain the existing contract minimum of 7½ hours as the defined work day;

(b) that the District and the Association work out preparation time language for primary teachers based on the early dismissal of primary students;

(c) that the parties retain the existing language on faculty meetings and on the assignment of extra duties.

Issue No. 11:   Work Load (Article VII, Section 2)

Recommendations:     (a) that the existing language in items No. 1 through No. 5 be retained;

(b)that the following paragraph be added to the existing contract after item 5: "Should the elementary teacher-pupil ratios within the classroom become six (6) students above the District average, as established above, the number shall be reduced to five or less students within three weeks (21 calendar days);

(c) that the following language be added to Section 6a:

...at the secondary level and three (3) times a year at the elementary level.

(d) that the language in 6(b) be changed from "four (4) days" to "four (4) work days."

(e) that the last sentence of the District's proposal, viz., "If it becomes necessary to implement Article VII, Section 8 of this Agreement, it is understood that this section is not applicable" be inserted at the end of paragraph 5.

Issue No. 12:   School Facilities (Article VII, Section 3)

Recommendation:       that the parties retain the existing language.

Issue No. 13:   School Calendar (Article VII, Section 9)

Recommendations:     (a) that the parties develop a 183 day calendar;

(b) that the parties adopt the Association's Spring vacation schedule;

(c) that in the event of a school cancellation by the District, the parties shall reopen negotiations on the calendar to establish make-up days.

Issue No. 14:   Special Education (Article VII, Section 10)

Recommendation:       that the Agreement not include any language on Special Education.

Issue No. 15:   Evaluation System (Article VIII, Section 1)

Recommendations:     (a) that there be only two categories: "satisfactory" and "unsatisfactory";

(b) that the District give a minimum of six weeks for notification of "unsatisfactory" performance;

(c) that the evaluation be non-grievable.

Issue No. 16:   Evaluative Criteria (Article VIII, Section 3)

Recommendations:     (a) that the parties delete sub-section 7.0;

(b) that the parties relocate sub-section 7.1 within criteria No. 5;

(c) that the parties relocate sub-section 7.2 within criteria No. 6;

(d) that the parties apply this criteria to sub-section 6.0 in all other job categories;

(e) that the parties develop criteria for occupational and physical therapists no later than January 1, 1981;

(f) that the evaluative criteria conform to the evaluation system, i.e., "satisfactory" and "unsatisfactory.

Issue No. 17:   Supplemental Evaluation (Article X, Section 1)

Recommendations:     (a) that only those staff members whose performance has been rated "unsatisfactory" be evaluated;

(b) that the parties accept sub-section 3.0 of the District's proposal;

(c) that there be only two categories: "satisfactory" and "unsatisfactory."

Issue No. 18:   Duration of the Agreement

Recommendations:     (a) that the parties enter into a two year Agreement;

(b) that the 1981-82 contract contain a reopener only for salaries, benefits, and calendar.

[SIGNED]

Date: August 29, 1980                                                Charles S. LaCugna
Seattle, Washington                                                    Fact Finder