skip to main navigation skip to demographic navigationskip to welcome messageskip to quicklinksskip to features
  • Continue Your Membership
  • WEAC Member Benefits

Court Ruling Makes QEO Law 'Even Worse'

A Wisconsin Supreme Court ruling involving the Qualified Economic Offer law will harm the quality of education in schools, and it takes away yet another teacher right, according to WEAC President Stan Johnson.

“Prep time is an essential element of teaching. Telling teachers they should find time on their own to prepare for classes is misguided and shows a lack of understanding of the profession.”
--------
Stan Johnson

The court Thursday (February 28, 2002) decided that the Dodgeland School District can unilaterally eliminate preparation time language from the teachers’ contract and have a QEO.
On a 4-3 vote, justices interpretation that a Wisconsin Employment Relations Commission decision that teacher prep time is not a “fringe benefit” was as reasonable as the union’s, and therefore the court would defer to it.

The court also upheld the WERC’s conclusions that the union’s proposal to pay teachers if they were denied prep time was an economic issue and cannot be arbitrated.

“This ruling makes a bad law even worse,” Johnson said. “The QEO law unfairly singles out teachers for what amounts to a salary cap. The Supreme Court is now saying preparation time is not an important element of teaching.”

Johnson said the decision is especially troubling because it shows how the QEO law can be twisted to cause economic and professional harm to members.

“The court took away one more right from teachers,” Johnson said. “School districts can now eliminate a major benefit without meaningful bargaining. This will have a serious impact on teacher morale and the quality of education in our schools.”

Johnson said the ruling in effect tells teachers not to bargain for educational quality issues, because districts can take them away.

“Prep time is an essential element of teaching,” Johnson said. “Telling teachers they should find time on their own to prepare for classes is misguided and shows a lack of understanding of the profession.”

Justice William Bablitch, writing a dissent on behalf of three justices, challenged the majority’s conclusions.

He argued that the WERC added provisions to the QEO law to create a “win-win” situation for employers and was an unreasonable interpretation of the law.

“Administrative agencies are making the QEO as restrictive as possible,” he said. “The Supreme Court is now backing their decisions without considering the merits of the case. This ruling tells teachers not to care about kids - just care about money.”

Resource page on the Qualified Economic Offer law

Posted March 1, 2002

Collective bargaining news archives