PUBLIC EMPLOYMENT RELATIONS BOARD In the Matter of Factfindinq } ) Between ) REPORT ANO RECOMMENDATIONS ) TURLOCK JOINT UNION HIGH SCHOOL ) OF THE DISTRICT ) ) FACTFINDING PANEL And ) ) CASE NOS. S-R-4, S-M-637 TURLOCK AMERICAN FEDERATION OF ) and S-F-87 TEACHERS, LOCAL 2424, CFT, A,FL-CIO ) ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ > April 29, 1983 FACTFINDING PANEL JAMES BIEVER, President of TAFT, Local 2424, TAFT-appointed Factfinder RICHARD J .. CURRIER, Attorney at Law, District-appointed Factfinder KENNETH A. PEREA, Impartial Chairman HEARINGS HELO March 21, 22 and April 8, 1983 at: District Offices 1574 East Canal Drive Turlock, California 95381 APPEARANCES On behalf of TAFT: JAMES BIEVER, President Turlock American Federation of Teachers On behalf of the District: RICHARD J. CURRIER, Attorney at Law Littler, Mendelson, Fastiff & Tichy BACKGROUND The Turlock Joint Union High School District is located in central San Joaquin Valley, Stanislaus County. The area's economic base is primarily agricultural with some light industry. Public schools in Turlock (city population approximately 27,000) are operated by a common administration serving separate elementary and high school districts each with its own school board. The Turlock Elementary School District enrolls approximately 3,900 students in five schools while the Turlock Joint Union High School District enrolls approximately 2,150 studen~s in one comprehensive high school and one continuation high school. In addition to Turlock Elementary School District, the high school district also serves two adjoining elementary districts with a combined enrollment of approximately 1,000 students. The Turlock Joint Union High School District {hereafter referred to as the "District") and the Turlock American Federation of Teachers, Local 2424, CFT, lµ'L-CIO (hereafter designated as "TAFT") negotiated an agreement for the term September 12, 1980-June 30, 1982. The District and TAFT entered into negotiations on a successor agreement upon TAFT's presentation of its initial proposal to the District on June 1, 1982. Following a declaration of impasse and mediation efforts, the matter was referred to the Sacramento Regional Office of the Public Employment Relations Board (hereafter "PERB") as appropriate for factfinding. Upon his selection by the -1- parties, PERB appointed Kenneth A. Perea to be the neutral Chairman of a three-member Factfinding Panel. Richard J. Currier, attorney at law, of the law firm Littler, Mendelson, Fastiff & Tichy was appointed by the District as its Panel member. Mr. James Biever, President of TAFT was appointed by TAFT as its Panel member. The Panel held a hearing in Turlock on March 21and 22, 1983. A confidential draft of the Panel's report was issued by the Chairman to the Panel members on April 1, 1983 and an executive session of the Panel was held in Turlock on April 8, 1983. It was agreed that the final report of the Panel would be issued on April I 1983. CRITERIA The Factfinding Panel is required, pursuant to Government Code section 3548.2, to consider, weigh and be guided by the following criteria in arriving at its findings and recommendations: (1) State and federal laws that are applicable to the employer. (2) Stipulations of the parties _. (3) The interests and welfare of the public and the financial ability of the public school employee­ employer. (4) Comparison of the wages, hours, and conditions of employment of the employees involved in the factfinding proceeding with the wages, hours, and conditions of employment of other employees performing similar services and with other employees generally in public school employment in comparable communities. -2- (5) The consumer price index for goods and services, commonly known as the cost of living. (6) The overall compensation presently received by the employees, including direct wage compensation, vacations, holidays, and other excused time, insurance and pensions, medical and hospitalization benefits; the continuity and stability of employment; and all other benefits received. (7) Such other facts, not confined to those specified in paragraphs (1) to (6) , incluaive, which are normally or traditionally_ taken into consideration in making such findings and recommendations. The Factfinding Panel has considered all of the above factors in arriving at its findings and recommendations placing particular emphasis on criteria 3, 4, S, and 6. ISSUES AT IMPASSE Prior to factfinding, the parties reached agreement on all matters other than the following issues: (1) Effective date of Agreement; (2) Salaries and Benefits; (3) Oistri~t Rights Provision; (4) Evaluation Procedure; (5) Safety Conditions; (6) Employment Less Than Full Time; (7) Personal Necessity Leave; (8) Leaves of Absence--TAFT Leave; (9) Grievance Procedure; and (10} Working Conditions. During the course of the factfinding proceedings, however, TAFT suggested and the District agreed to accept the -3- language of Education Code section 44664 as a compromise regarding Issue 4, Evaluation Procedure. Each of the remaining issues at impasse is addressed in this report. At the hearing the Panel listened to the parties' arguments and accepted into the record exhibits o-1 through D-10 on behalf of the District and exhibits F-1 through F-14 on behalf of TAFT. The parties' presentations were followed by rebuttal arguments. The Panel is of the opinion that little purpose would be served by setting forth in detail the respective positions of each of the parties on each issue in this report since the parties are well advised of each other's proposals. In making this report and recommendations, the Panel has fully and carefully studied the. evidence presented and has discussed the matter at length in executive session. ISSUE 1 Effective Date of the Agreement The parties have historically negotiated agreements with a beginning date in September. Moreover,· the District' s presentation and argument was made on the premise that salaries and fringe benefits would be effective Sept~'llber 1, 1982. Finally, while regrettable that the i mpasse has persisted so late in the school year, many circumstances beyond the parties' control, including the summer recess, a change in the District's superintendent, and a decertification election, have contributed to the prolonged negotiations during school year 1982-1983. -4- ISSUE 2 Salaries and Fringe Benefits The District has offered a non-retroactive 3 percent across the board increase not including step and column increases. The Federation recommends a 13.9 percent increase retroactive to September 1, 1982. A. Comparability Based Upon Salary Schedule and Fringe Benefit Data (Criterion No. 4) The parties' disagreement regarding which school districts are comparable per~ists. The parties agree, however, that Modesto, Tracy, Merced, Manteca, and Lincoln School Districts should be used for comparison purposes. The Chairman further concludes that Davis, Ceres, Yuba City, Woo~land, and Chico may be examined as comparable , medium-size districts located in the agricultural Sacramento and San Joaquin Valleys. The District's suggestion to use Madera, Vacaville, Tulare, and Sanger, however, is less persuasive since inadequate information was available at the time of the proceedings from which an up-to-date comparison could be made. Likewise, TAFT's assertion to compare Oakdale, Stockton, and Lodi are equally unhelpful for similar reasons. 1. Appendix A. As shown on Appendix A, the District's offer of 3 percent effective on the date of contract ratification is lower than the average percentage negotiated in the 10 other districts compared. 2. Appendix B. Appendix B demonstrates that the present average salary of teachers ($24,576 according to the District) -s- is slightly higher than the average teacher salary of the 10 -.. districts compared. TAFT argues, however, that the correct average salary figure for Turlock is $23, 355 and that D.istrict' s average teacher salary is reflective of the large number of teachers at or near the top of the present salary schedule. 3. Appendix c. Appendix C compares the salaries of teachers in the 10 districts at selected steps and columns. Appendix C reveals that while salaries are higher than average at the BA+30 Step 1 level, they fall below the average in the higher columns and particularly at the maximum. B. Cost of Living (Criterion No. 5) Historically, the parties have used the Bureau of Labor Statistics' Oakland-San Francisco June to June figures in their contract negotiations. The Chairman recommends that the June to June figures continue to be used but that the more appropriate statistics for "Cities in the West with Population under 75,000 11 be used. Figures released by the Bureau of Labor Statistics reveal the following increases in the Consumer Price Index: l. Consumer Price Index For All Urban Consumers . (CPI-U) For the period June l981-June· l982 for "Cities in the West with Population under 75,000," the increase in the Consumer Price Index was 8.8 percent. 2. Consumer Price Index For Urban Wage Earners and Clerical Workers (CPI-W) For the same period, June 1981-June 1982 for "Cities in the West with Population under 75,000," the increase in the Consumer Price Index was 8.9 percent. -6- c. Overall Compensation Presently Received by Teachers (Criterion No. 6) Appendix B shows that the average salary actually paid to and received by teachers in the District is slightly higher than (using the District's figure) or comparable to (using TAFT's figure) the average salary being received by teachers in other school districts. D. District's Ability to Pay (Criterion No. 3) The Chairman agrees with the District's position that the approximate $241,000 remaining in the Fire Fund should be used to fund one-time costs. The Chairman suggests, however, that it is appropriate to use the Fire Fund to meet the projected 1 percent shortfall in state revenue limit (shortfall to District would accordingly equal $38,994). To increase salaries from money in the Fire Fund, however, would build a salary schedule out of one-time money without assurance of an adequate revenue base from which to continue its support and leave the District without sufficient funds to meet contingencies and cash flow problems.