Legislature(2003 - 2004)
03/17/2003 01:45 PM Senate HES
| Audio | Topic |
|---|
* first hearing in first committee of referral
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
SB 95-72-HOUR NOTICE OF TEACHER STRIKE
CHAIR FRED DYSON announced SB 95 to be up for consideration.
SENATOR LYDA GREEN, sponsor of SB 95, said that some people have
a hard time during the period between the time a strike is
noticed and the time it begins. SB 95 would require public
school employees to provide a school district with written
notice of an impending strike 72 hours prior to any labor
action. Current labor regulations allow public school employees
to strike without prior warning to the school district or the
community. Without a provision mandating proper notice, student
safety is severely compromised. Seventy-two hours would give
parents sufficient time to make alternative arrangements for
their children if schools are actually going to be closed. The
primary purpose of SB 95 is to allow time for a school district
to make the best decisions and inform students, parents, and the
community of that decision.
CHAIR DYSON asked how much notice is required now. Senator Green
said she would try to find that information.
MR. BRUCE JOHNSON, Association of Alaska School Boards (AASB),
said the board supported SB 95. Student safety is the primary
reason that working families need some advance notice to make
arrangements for their children. However, he said the AASB needs
clarification of what the 72-hour notice actually includes. For
instance, does it mean school employees have to strike within
that time or do they give notice and then strike one week out.
SENATOR GREEN pointed out that language on page 2, line 26,
says, "If advisory arbitration fails, a strike may not begin
until at least 72-hours after notice of the strike." She noted
however, that a strike is not mandatory.
MR. JOHNSON responded that is one interpretation, but it could
also mean that a strike can't begin before 72 hours, but could
also begin 200 hours after the notification has been given.
SENATOR GREEN asked if "advisory arbitration" has a definition.
MR. JOHNSON replied that advisory arbitration is one of the
steps that must be taken before any action towards a work
stoppage can occur.
MR. PETE FULLER, Southeast Regional Manager, Alaska Public
Employees Association, said the Public Employee Relations Act
already provides for a relatively complicated and somewhat
detailed procedure as the collective bargaining process reaches
culmination. There is also a process whereby the parties are
permitted to voluntarily participate in advisory arbitration,
which might bring about a binding result to those negotiations.
He said it seems to him that imposing, particularly a one-sided,
notice period for the union begins to unbalance the process and
might stimulate unnecessary saber rattling and posturing. He
stated, "At least if there's going to be notice, there ought to
be notice imposed on both parties rather than having a no-notice
lockout and a requirement of notice for strike action."
MR. FULLER said he had been in Alaska for only two years and
hadn't heard of any school district strikes; employees had been
able to negotiate settlements. He thought this rule might bring
too much structure and imbalance to the negotiating process when
it's at its most delicate point.
CHAIR DYSON asked if by school district strike he meant a walk
out.
MR. FULLER replied no, he meant a strike is an action instigated
by employees.
CHAIR DYSON said Senator Green's primary interest is not to
imbalance the bargaining process, but to protect kids and to
give families time to adapt to a situation. He asked Mr. Fuller
if federal law already contains a requirement for adequate
notification.
MR. FULLER replied that he wasn't aware of a notification
requirement in federal law, but federal laws require
notification of a strike that takes place in a health care
facility. He thought that when a strike approaches, the parties
would be mutually concerned about the children and take that
into consideration. He added:
If the legislature feels the need to insure against
the wayward party that wouldn't do that, then we would
like to see that protection balanced so that the
protection doesn't create an unfair advantage to one
party or the other in the bargaining process.
SENATOR GREEN said this is not meant to be a bargaining issue.
She expressed concern that children have shown up at school in
the winter and no one is there.
CHAIR DYSON said he knows that making the public uncomfortable
or angry helps your bargaining position.
MS. BARBARA HUFF-TUCKNESS, Director, Legislative and
Governmental Affairs, Local 959, opposed SB 95. She actually
negotiates collective bargaining agreements within the Anchorage
School District and believes this bill is a direct assault on
the collective bargaining process. If passed, SB 95 would have a
significant impact on both parties' positions at a bargaining
table. If the parties reach a deadlock or impasse, advisory
arbitration takes place prior to any strike vote. Both parties
look at the advisory opinion and sometime it is another
opportunity to bring the parties together and other times it
lays the groundwork on where the parties are as they go through
the negotiations. There is the ability to declare impasse or
deadlock even after the advisory opinion if the parties have not
reached any conclusion to the process. At that time, they have
the right as representatives of their employees to make notice.
Once it reaches the advisory opinion, often something makes the
headlines in the newspaper. She added that she makes an effort
to educate her people prior to a strike and said:
If you've never been at the table, it is somewhat
difficult to find that level playing field, but in
this day and age with the employers' right to hire
striker replacements, when you're attempting to define
how much notice an employee has to get, where it ties
in - and as the Senator asked earlier - my intent is
not to impact the process....
She gave an example of a 1999 bus driver strike that the
teamsters were involved in. She gave public notice with written
paid ads in the newspaper prior to taking official strike
action. Since 1999, she has negotiated three collective
bargaining agreements that have been successful and she hadn't
heard if any strikes since then. She encouraged the legislature
to let negotiations take place at the table and not attempt to
legislate that process.
CHAIR DYSON asked her if she was saying the 72-hour notice
should be part of negotiated bargaining.
MS. TUCKNESS replied yes and that was her suggestion when the
bill was introduced in 1999 as well. She offered another
alternative:
If there was such a public concern about employees
within the school districts going out on strike
instead of requiring them to go out and strike, why
not make it mandatory that they can't strike and give
them binding arbitration instead?
SENATOR GREEN asked if she would support binding arbitration.
MS. TUCKNESS said she mentioned it as an alternative.
Additionally, she was concerned that language on page 2, line
20, (b) was very limiting and restrictive and could potentially
create an inherent conflict with a selected arbitrator.
SENATOR GREEN said that language is currently in statute, but it
had been moved from page 1, line 10 to a new section on page 2,
line 11 and might look a little different. The only actual new
language is in the underlined sections on page 1 and section 2
on page 2.
MS. TUCKNESS concluded that Teamsters Local 959 is very
concerned about the bill and hopes that it doesn't move out of
committee.
MR. CARL ROSE, Association of Alaska School Boards, said this
issue was resolved in the early '90s when the discussion was
about binding arbitration. The legislature placed school
employees in classification A3, which provided them with the
right to strike. He thought school districts understand the
economic and political pressure that's brought to bear by a
strike and the bill simply is asking that school employees not
compromise student safety. That is the extent of their concern.
CHAIR DYSON asked if it is impractical to include an agreement
on the amount of hours of pre-notification per day as part of
the contracts.
MR. ROSE replied that he didn't think it is impractical and it
could be a negotiating point unless it conflicts with law.
CHAIR DYSON thanked everyone for their comments and closed the
discussion on SB 95.
| Document Name | Date/Time | Subjects |
|---|