Legislature(2003 - 2004)
04/28/2003 05:23 PM House EDU
| Audio | Topic |
|---|
* first hearing in first committee of referral
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
ALASKA STATE LEGISLATURE
HOUSE SPECIAL COMMITTEE ON EDUCATION
April 28, 2003
5:23 p.m.
MEMBERS PRESENT
Representative Carl Gatto, Chair
Representative Paul Seaton, Vice Chair
Representative Dan Ogg
Representative Peggy Wilson
Representative Kelly Wolf
Representative Les Gara
MEMBERS ABSENT
Representative Mary Kapsner
COMMITTEE CALENDAR
SENATE BILL NO. 95
"An Act relating to strikes by employees of a municipal school
district, a regional educational attendance area, or a state
boarding school, and requiring notice of at least 72 hours of a
strike by those employees."
- MOVED SB 95 OUT OF COMMITTEE
PREVIOUS ACTION
BILL: SB 95
SHORT TITLE:72-HOUR NOTICE OF TEACHER STRIKE
SPONSOR(S): SENATOR(S) GREEN
Jrn-Date Jrn-Page Action
03/03/03 0317 (S) READ THE FIRST TIME -
REFERRALS
03/03/03 0317 (S) HES, L&C
03/17/03 (S) HES AT 1:30 PM BUTROVICH 205
03/17/03 (S) Heard & Held
03/17/03 (S) MINUTE(HES)
03/24/03 (S) HES AT 5:00 PM FAHRENKAMP 203
03/24/03 (S) Moved Out of Committee --
Time and Location Change --
03/24/03 (S) MINUTE(HES)
03/26/03 0590 (S) HES RPT 3DP 2NR
03/26/03 0590 (S) NR: DYSON, WILKEN;
03/26/03 0590 (S) DP: GUESS, GREEN, DAVIS
03/26/03 0590 (S) FN1: ZERO(LWF)
04/03/03 (S) L&C AT 1:30 PM BELTZ 211
04/03/03 (S) Heard & Held
04/03/03 (S) MINUTE(L&C)
04/08/03 (S) L&C AT 2:00 PM BELTZ 211
04/08/03 (S) Moved Out of Committee --
Time Change --
MINUTE(L&C)
04/09/03 0762 (S) L&C RPT 4DP 1NR
04/09/03 0762 (S) DP: BUNDE, FRENCH, SEEKINS,
STEVENS G;
04/09/03 0762 (S) NR: DAVIS
04/09/03 0762 (S) FN1: ZERO(LWF)
04/15/03 0860 (S) RULES TO CALENDAR 4/15/2003
04/15/03 0860 (S) READ THE SECOND TIME
04/15/03 0860 (S) ADVANCED TO THIRD READING
4/16 CALENDAR
04/16/03 0877 (S) READ THE THIRD TIME SB 95
04/16/03 0877 (S) PASSED Y17 N2 E1
04/16/03 0877 (S) ELLIS NOTICE OF
RECONSIDERATION
04/17/03 0895 (S) RECONSIDERATION NOT TAKEN UP
04/17/03 0895 (S) TRANSMITTED TO (H)
04/17/03 0895 (S) VERSION: SB 95
04/22/03 1045 (H) READ THE FIRST TIME -
REFERRALS
04/22/03 1045 (H) EDU, L&C
04/22/03 1059 (H) CROSS SPONSOR(S): GATTO
04/28/03 (H) EDU AT 5:15 PM CAPITOL 124
WITNESS REGISTER
SENATOR LYDA GREEN
Alaska State Legislature
Juneau, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: As sponsor of SB 95, testified on SB 95 and
answered questions from the committee.
KIM FLOYD, Public Information Officer
Matanuska-Susitna School District
Palmer, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Testified in support of SB 95.
PAULA HARRISON, Director
Human Resources and Labor Relations
Matanuska-Susitna School District
Palmer, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Testified in support of SB 95.
JACQUELINE TUPOU, Staff
to Senator Lyda Green
Alaska State Legislature
Juneau, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Testified in support of SB 95 and answered
questions from the members.
ACTION NARRATIVE
TAPE 03-21, SIDE A
Number 0001
CHAIR CARL GATTO called the House Special Committee on Education
meeting to order at 5:23 p.m. Representatives Gatto, Seaton,
Wilson, Ogg, and Wolf were present at the call to order.
Representative Gara arrived as the meeting was in progress.
SB 95-72-HOUR NOTICE OF TEACHER STRIKE
[Contains discussion pertaining to HB 128, the companion bill]
Number 0040
CHAIR GATTO announced that the only bill before the committee
today would be SENATE BILL NO. 95, "An Act relating to strikes
by employees of a municipal school district, a regional
educational attendance area, or a state boarding school, and
requiring notice of at least 72 hours of a strike by those
employees."
CHAIR GATTO [who had sponsored HB 128, the companion bill in the
House] told the committee that SB 95 is a bill concerning
student safety and is sponsored by Senator Lyda Green. Chair
Gatto said it is his goal to get the bill through the committee
today. What the bill says is that the legislature is concerned
that the possibility exists that students will be dropped off at
school during contentious times of negotiations. It is possible
for a teacher's union to call a strike immediately and go on
strike at that time. He emphasized that this bill in no way
restricts teachers' ability to go on strike. It simply says
that in all fairness to students and working parents, the
legislature would prefer to have a warning. The question has
come up in the past during negotiations when the sides were
definitely not close to an agreement. The schools have asked if
they could have a 24-hour notice and there was no answer to
their question. There was an understanding that the union was
not going to give that to them. That is the justification for
SB 95, which simply says 72 hours is not asking too much,
especially when the unions have said that they would do that
anyway. Chair Gatto said that there is no objection to the bill
and for the most part, from talking to union officials, they do
not object to it. They asked for something in return he said,
but "we" do not want to complicate this language. If there is
another issue, the legislature will take it up with a separate
bill. If the unions have something they are interested in, the
committee will certainly hear it.
Number 0321
REPRESENTATIVE OGG asked if Chair Gatto would entertain a
motion.
CHAIR GATTO responded that there are two people who would like
to testify on the bill first.
Number 0333
SENATOR LYDA GREEN, Alaska State Legislature, sponsor of SB 95,
told the committee that she believes Chair Gatto did a fine job
in explaining the bill and that she would be available to answer
questions from the members.
Number 0394
KIM FLOYD, Public Information Officer, Matanuska-Susitna School
District, testified in support of SB 95. She said that she is a
parent of two school-aged children and asked the committee not
to allow anyone to confuse what is really the issue in this
bill. She said Chair Gatto pointed out exactly what this is
about. This bill is not about contracts or about adults, but is
about student safety. Ms. Floyd said she strongly supports this
bill not only as a parent because she cares about the children,
but as a communicator because it would be very difficult in the
case of a last-minute strike to get the word out to parents.
She told the committee that 40 percent of the parents commute to
Anchorage. They leave early in the morning, making it very
difficult to get the word to them. One child left unattended
would be one too many. Things happen when parents are not
around to watch over them. She reiterated her support of this
legislation and said that she believes the 72 hours' notice is
necessary to cover the Friday to Monday weekend timeframe. Ms.
Floyd said she appreciates Senator Green's sponsorship of this
bill and the committee's support.
Number 0553
PAULA HARRISON, Director, Human Resources and Labor Relations,
Matanuska-Susitna School District, testified in support of SB
95. She told the committee the district appreciates both Chair
Gatto's and Senator Green's support of this legislation. This
bill is about student safety. As the committee may know, the
district has had problems in the past on this issue.
Number 0598
REPRESENTATIVE SEATON moved to report SB 95 out of committee
with individual recommendations and the accompanying fiscal
notes.
Number 0657
REPRESENTATIVE GARA objected. He explained that he had missed
part of the introduction of the bill and he had a few questions.
Unions say that they would normally give 72 hours' notice in any
case and that has some persuasive power to it, but he said he is
wondering about the other side of the issue. Is there really a
problem that would be solved by this legislation? Are there
really instances when unions have not given 72 hours' notice?
REPRESENTATIVE SEATON referred Representative Gara to an
Anchorage Daily News editorial dated January 16, 1999, after
this occurred. He told the committee it was on a Thursday night
that the strike vote was taken and the strike was called for
Friday. It was after the evening news, so there was no way to
get the notice out through the news. So students came to school
and there was a student safety problem because the teachers were
not there. He said [Chair Gatto] had introduced the [companion]
bill as student safety legislation, which allows parents the
assurance of student safety.
CHAIR GATTO commented that the strike did happen and it was
strategically timed. He emphasized that it was not the teachers
who went out on strike; it was the classified employees. It
happened, and this bill would see that parents are not blind-
sided like that and that it is not an option available. This
bill does not affect anyone's right to strike. It is very clear
that the right to strike remains intact. He said he encourages
people to exercise that right if that is the decision they make,
but with that goes the responsibility to the students.
Number 0833
REPRESENTATIVE GARA told the committee his other question is a
bit complex. There is a lot of language under the current law
that is deleted starting at page 1, line 10, and going through
page 2, line 11. This has to do with the whole procedure for
advisory arbitration. He asked, if the union gives a 72-hour
notice, whether that entitles them to go out on strike even
after 72 hours. For instance, could they go out on strike 120
hours or 200 hours later? He asked if the union has to wait for
the advisory arbitration to be scheduled or to be resolved
before the 72-hour rule kicks in.
Number 0910
SENATOR GREEN replied that on page 1, line 10, and through page
2, line 11, the language is deleted and immediately restored
beginning with page 2, lines 12-25 [new subsection (g)]. She
pointed to language beginning on page 2, line 26, which says in
part:
(2) if, under (1) of this subsection, advisory
arbitration fails, a strike may not begin until at
least 72 hours after notice of the strike is given
SENATOR GREEN pointed out that the same procedure is in place in
the future as it is now. So if advisory arbitration fails,
notice will be given before a strike by school district
employees can occur.
Number 1049
REPRESENTATIVE GARA asked for clarification that under existing
law and under SB 95, no strike may occur before advisory
arbitration fails.
SENATOR GREEN replied that she assumes that is true.
REPRESENTATIVE GARA asked if there is any limitation that would
prevent a union from saying they believe they will be out on
strike 72 hours from now, but it might be 120 hours or a week
from now. Is there anything that holds the union to the 72-hour
timeframe, as opposed to a longer period of time?
SENATOR GREEN responded that she could not answer that question.
She said she assumes there would be a "date certain" advisory.
Number 1086
JACQUELINE TUPOU, Staff to Senator Lyda Green, Alaska State
Legislature, responded to Representative Gara's question by
saying that according to case law, it defines what notice is.
Notice is enough information to let a reasonable person know
that when notice of a strike is given, the strike will occur on
this date and at this time. She summarized by saying the unions
could place the strike more than 72 hours out, but the notice
would have to say exactly when it would occur. That is part of
the notice requirement.
REPRESENTATIVE GARA asked how the 72-hour notice will be
interpreted. What happens if a union gives its 72-hour strike
notice but it is off by a couple of days as to when it begins
its strike? For instance, a union gives a 72-hour strike
notice, but then they do not go out on strike because they are
continuing to try to work things out. A week later, the union
determines that it is not working. In this case, can the school
district tell the union they cannot go out on strike because the
72-hour notice has passed?
Number 1181
MS. TUPOU responded that they could not do that. The definition
of notice is very strict. It says if a union wants to go on
strike, they must give at least 72 hours' notice prior to when
the strike will occur. So if the union says they will start a
strike on Wednesday and Wednesday passes, the union no longer
has given strike notice. So if the union wanted to strike after
that date, they would have to give 72 hours' notice. So
whatever is noticed is binding.
REPRESENTATIVE GARA commented that this bill may actually have
the opposite effect. If a union has given a 72-hour strike
notice, it is making progress and does not want to go out on
strike; however, on the other hand, if the union does not want
to go through the 72-hour notice provision again, then the union
could go out on strike just to avoid another three-day strike
notice.
SENATOR GREEN reiterated that when the advisory arbitration
fails, a strike may not begin until 72 hours. She told the
committee that there is an assumption that a certain series of
events occurred that brought the participants to failed advisory
arbitration. The second issue is the safety of students. This
bill is not trying to get into one side or the other side; she
said this is about parents' having a right to know that when
they drop their children off at school there will be school that
day. Or if parents drop their children off at the bus stop and
go on their way to work in Anchorage, parents have a right to
know they are not leaving their children at a phantom bus stop.
That is all this is about. It is about proper notice for action
among adults.
Number 1324
REPRESENTATIVE GARA said that he is surprised that no one from
the unions came to testify. He said he does not see any other
problem with the bill and believes it may be a good idea.
Number 1336
CHAIR GATTO commented that the thought of leaving little
children at the bus stop [when no bus will be coming] is scary,
but what is even scarier is high school students' being left all
day long unsupervised. So this is important for all age levels.
He told the committee he has talked to union officials about the
bill, and they have assured him that they would never [fail to
give notice] anyway; however, if the legislature believes
legislation is necessary, they have no objection.
Number 1388
REPRESENTATIVE GARA withdrew his objection to reporting SB 95
from committee.
Number 1393
CHAIR GATTO asked if there were objections to the motion to
report SB 95 from committee. There being no objection, SB 95
was reported from the House Special Committee on Education.
ADJOURNMENT
There being no further business before the committee, the House
Special Committee on Education meeting was adjourned at 5:37
p.m.
| Document Name | Date/Time | Subjects |
|---|