JCTA appeals decisions

The contract dispute between the Jay Classroom Teachers Association and Jay Schools is not over.
It’s just moved to a new phase.
And it’s increasingly likely the matter will end up in court before it’s resolved.
Indianapolis attorney Eric Hylton has filed an appeal with the Indiana Education Employment Relations Board in the wake of a fact-finder’s recommendation in favor of the school corporation’s last best offer.
Fact-finder James Hoehne issued his recommendation on Nov. 11. Hylton filed the appeal via email on Dec. 11.
Hoehne had agreed with the school corporation’s contention that JCTA’s last best offer would result in deficit financing since school finances have been declining. But the JCTA’s attorney argues Hoehne’s recommended order is not only unclear but is in violation of Indiana law.
“What is not apparent is exactly what portions of (the Jay Schools last best offer) were chosen as the contract terms the parties,” Hylton wrote.
It is not clear what Hoehne means when he chooses the Jay Schools offer while excluding provisions involving contract language on new hires, the removal of assistant coaches from the bargaining unit, job sharing, and a memorandum on when wages would be paid, Hylton wrote.
“Since the (Jay Schools last best offer) contains many provisions in violation of Indiana law, its entire LBO must be rejected,” Hylton argued.
One key issue is the fact that the Jay Schools offer does not include a salary schedule, and the definition of what constitutes a salary schedule is in question.
In an earlier ruling on a contract dispute involving Carmel Clay Schools, Hylton wrote, the IEERB “has taken it upon itself to come up with a new definition of what is a ‘salary schedule.’”
In doing so, Hylton said, the IEERB was in error, which could indicate a future challenge in court.
Hoehne, a LaPorte-based labor attorney, decided a “scattergram” of salaries provided by Jay Schools was sufficient to meet the requirements of the law. He also noted the legal framework for teacher contract negotiations has been undergoing nearly constant change by the Indiana General Assembly over the past few years.
“The collective bargaining requirements and regulations for contracts under the jurisdiction of IEERB have been and are changing drastically and quickly,” the fact-finder wrote in his November recommended order, adding that traditional salary schedules will soon be “a thing of the past”
“The day of line item salary schedules reflecting a number of teachers at any given level is coming to an end,” Hoehne wrote lasts month.
The JCTA disagrees.
The JCTA appeal also disputes that its last best offer would lead to deficit financing by Jay Schools.
“Indiana law requires (the fact-finder to use the Indiana Department of Education’s certification of the budget) as the amount to determine whether deficit financing occurred,” wrote Hylton. The fact-finder “should not be allowed to lower the deficit financing threshold based on estimates from (Jay Schools) that it believes it will receive less money. … Allowing this practice will make the deficit financing amount a moving target.”
Because only a handful of contract disputes have gone through the new process with the IEERB, both school corporations and the Indiana State Teachers Association are watching the board’s decisions closely in search of precedents that could have statewide impact.[[In-content Ad]]