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

Transfer, Elvaluation Provisions Can Be Taken to Arbitration

Three Lakes ruling is victory for teachers in QEO fight

Contract provisions regarding job transfers and teacher evaluations are cost-neutral and can be taken to arbitration, a court has ruled.

Although the ruling applies specifically to provisions proposed in Three Lakes contract negotiations, it is significant in helping define what items teachers can take to arbitration under the Qualified Economic Offer law, said WEAC Legal Counsel Tony Sheehan.

Oneida County Circuit Judge Robert E. Kinney overturned a ruling by the Wisconsin Employment Relations Commission. The WERC had determined in a split decision that the disputed proposals constituted "economic issues" and that teachers therefore could not unilaterally take them to arbitration.

Under the QEO law, a school board can impose an economic package on teachers as long as it meets certain requirements. Teachers then can only take non-economic issues to arbitration. The QEO law defines "economic issue" as "any issue that creates a new or increased financial liability."

Kinney ruled that the disputed transfer and evaluation proposals in Three Lakes have not "been shown to have such economic impact."

"Because the record here does not disclose that either proposal is other than cost-neutral, the decision of the Commission is reversed, the proposals are found to be non-economic and the parties may proceed to interest arbitration," he ruled.

Under the disputed contract proposals made by Three Lakes teachers:

  • The school board would be required to hire an existing teacher who applies in writing for a vacancy over a new employee. The applicant with the most seniority would be hired first. Currently, the board is only required to consider existing teachers for vacancies and to give "first consideration" to the teacher with the most seniority.
  • The school board could not give an adverse evaluation to a regular education teacher receiving students with special needs if the district fails to provide the teacher with necessary training, materials or other instructional needs.

Posted December 11, 1997

 

Education News