Board rejects JCTA's appeal

The Indiana Education Employment Relations Board has ruled in favor of Jay Schools in its contract dispute with the Jay Classroom Teachers Association.
But it’s still possible the issue could end up in court.
The IEERB on Friday affirmed fact-finder James Hoehne’s conclusion that the school corporation’s “last best offer” was superior to the JCTA’s. The board’s ruling came after oral arguments Jan. 2 connected to JCTA’s appeal of Hoehne’s recommendation.
Hoehne had concluded after a November public hearing that JCTA’s last best offer could put the school corporation in a deficit financing situation, which is prohibited by state law.
In its appeal, JCTA disputed that claim, argued the use of budget numbers other than those certified by the Indiana Department of Education was improper and said aspects of Jay Schools’ last best offer were illegal, particularly because it did not include a salary schedule.
IEERB rejected those arguments.
“The DOE certification is an estimate that can vary significantly from what the school corporation will actually receive,” the board’s ruling said. “In this case, the estimated difference is nearly $400,000.”
As to the salary schedule, the board agreed with Hoehne that traditional salary schedules for teachers in Indiana are undergoing dramatic change.
“The association claims that salary schedule must be a traditional salary schedule in chart form,” the board’s ruling said. “However … the legislature has clearly intended to redefine ‘salary schedule’ or ‘salary scale.’”
JCTA’s appeal had asked the IEERB to reconsider its decisions on this issue in an earlier contract dispute, but that was firmly rejected.
“We decline to do so,” the ruling said.
“Not only is there nothing in the statute that requires a compensation model to be in chart form, but requiring such a format would be contrary to legislative intent.”
The board noted that both final contract offers provided for teacher raises and the same benefits.
The difference between the two was $312,000 in salary plus associated costs.
“The financial impact to the school weighs heavily in the school’s favor, and the public interest factor also weighs in the school’s favor,” the board’s ruling said. “These factors are the two primary considerations. … Additionally, the school’s (last best offer) is more consistent with past agreements and is consistent with comparables.”
In adopting the school corporation’s last best offer, the board struck one portion that affected the bargaining status of assistant coaches.[[In-content Ad]]