Legislature(1999 - 2000)
04/07/1999 03:20 PM House L&C
| Audio | Topic |
|---|
* first hearing in first committee of referral
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
HOUSE LABOR AND COMMERCE STANDING COMMITTEE
April 7, 1999
3:20 p.m.
MEMBERS PRESENT
Representative Norman Rokeberg, Chairman
Representative Andrew Halcro, Vice Chairman
Representative Jerry Sanders
Representative Lisa Murkowski
Representative John Harris
Representative Tom Brice
Representative Sharon Cissna
MEMBERS ABSENT
All members present
COMMITTEE CALENDAR
HOUSE BILL NO. 129
"An Act excluding school principals from collectively bargaining
under the Public Employment Relations Act."
- HEARD AND HELD
* HOUSE BILL NO. 158
"An Act relating to the annual report of the director of the
division of insurance and to notice of cancellation of personal
insurance."
- HEARD AND HELD
(* First public hearing)
PREVIOUS ACTION
BILL: HB 129
SHORT TITLE: COLLECTIVE BARGAINING; PRINCIPALS
SPONSOR(S): REPRESENTATIVES(S) OGAN, Kohring
Jrn-Date Jrn-Page Action
3/05/99 368 (H) READ THE FIRST TIME - REFERRAL(S)
3/05/99 368 (H) HES, L&C
3/27/99 (H) HES AT 10:00 AM CAPITOL 106
3/27/99 (H) MOVED OUT OF COMMITTEE
3/27/99 (H) MINUTE(HES)
3/29/99 600 (H) HES RPT 2DP 2NR
3/29/99 600 (H) DP: DYSON, COGHILL; NR: MORGAN,
3/29/99 600 (H) WHITAKER
3/29/99 600 (H) ZERO FISCAL NOTE (ADM)
3/29/99 600 (H) REFERRED TO L&C
4/07/99 (H) L&C AT 3:15 PM CAPITOL 17
BILL: HB 158
SHORT TITLE: NOTICE OF INS. CANCELLATION TO ELDERLY
SPONSOR(S): REPRESENTATIVES(S) ROKEBERG
Jrn-Date Jrn-Page Action
3/24/99 556 (H) READ THE FIRST TIME - REFERRAL(S)
3/24/99 556 (H) L&C, JUD
4/07/99 (H) L&C AT 3:15 PM CAPITOL 17
WITNESS REGISTER
REPRESENTATIVE SCOTT OGAN
Alaska State Legislature
Capitol Building, Room 128
Juneau, Alaska 99801
Telephone: (907) 465-3878
POSITION STATEMENT: Presented HB 129 as the bill sponsor.
DR. ROBERT LEHMAN, Superintendent
Matanuska-Susitna Borough School District
125 West Evergreen Avenue
Palmer, Alaska 99645
Telephone: (907) 746-9255
POSITION STATEMENT: Testimony read into the record which indicated
that passage of HB 129 would be a "landmark" in the efforts to stop
the decline of Alaska's educational system and improve the quality
of instruction.
GREG DANIELS, Executive Director
Alaska Association of Elementary School Principals
426 Rogers Road
Kenai, Alaska 99611
Telephone: (907) 283-7918
POSITION STATEMENT: Read a joint resolution from the Alaska
Association of Secondary School Principals and Alaska Association
of Elementary School Principals in opposition to HB 129.
ANDRE' LAYRAL, President
Alaska Association of Secondary School Principals (AASSP);
Principal, North Pole Middle School;
Alaska Council of School Administrators
300 E. 8th Ave.
North Pole, Alaska 99705
Telephone: (907) 488-2271
POSITION STATEMENT: Testified in opposition to HB 129 representing
the AASSP executive board.
GLEN SYZMONIAK
Kenai Peninsula Administrative Association
Alaska Association of Elementary School Principals
P.O. Box 1431
Homer, Alaska 99603
Telephone: (907) 235-2569
POSITION STATEMENT: Testified in opposition to HB 129.
FRED GIDDINGS, Principal
Bayshore Elementary School
2056 Stanford Drive
Anchorage, Alaska 99508
Telephone: (907) 258-6479
POSITION STATEMENT: Testified in opposition to HB 129.
ERIC HENDERSON, President
Mat-Su Principals Association;
Principal, Wasilla Middle School
P.O. Box 2501
Palmer, Alaska 99645
Telephone: (907) 376-7311
POSITION STATEMENT: Testified in opposition to HB 129.
RICH TOYMIL, Principal
Paul Banks Elementary School;
Kenai Peninsula Administrative Association;
Alaska Association of Elementary School Principals
P.O. Box 2168
Homer, Alaska 99603
Telephone: (907) 235-1478
POSITION STATEMENT: Testified in opposition to HB 129.
CHERYL TURNER
PO Box 1567
Palmer, Alaska 99645
Telephone: (907) 745-7901
POSITION STATEMENT: Testified in support of HB 129.
SOPHIA MASEWICZ, President
Anchorage Principals Association;
Principal, Romig Middle School
2001 Shore Drive
Anchorage, Alaska 99515
Telephone: (907) 344-3269
POSITION STATEMENT: Testified in opposition to HB 129.
MARY JOHNSTONE, President
Alaska Association of Elementary School Principals;
Principal, Susitna Elementary School
3210 Seawind Drive
Anchorage, Alaska 99516
Telephone: (907) 344-3364
POSITION STATEMENT: Testified in opposition to HB 129.
TODD SYVERSON, Principal
Soldotna Middle School
254 Katmai Avenue
Soldotna, Alaska 99669
Telephone: (907) 262-4344
POSITION STATEMENT: Testified in opposition to HB 129.
DON GLAZE, Assistant Principal
Nikiski Middle/High School
PO Box 7354
Nikiski, Alaska 99635
Telephone: (907) 776-3456
POSITION STATEMENT: Faxed testimony in opposition to HB 129.
LEE YOUNG, Assistant Principal
Soldotna Middle School
P.O. Box 3494
Soldotna, Alaska 99669
Telephone: (907) 262-4344
POSITION STATEMENT: Testified in opposition to HB 129.
DON ETHERIDGE
District Council of Laborers
710 West Ninth Street
Juneau, Alaska 99801
Telephone: (907) 586-3707
POSITION STATEMENT: Testified on collective bargaining.
DARROLL HARGRAVES, Executive Director
Alaska Council of School Administrators
326 Fourth Street, Suite 404
Juneau, Alaska 99801
POSITION STATEMENT: Discussed concerns with HB 129.
JOHN CYR, President
NEA-Alaska
114 Second Street
Juneau, Alaska 99801
Telephone: (907) 586-3090
POSITION STATEMENT: Expressed the need for the Mat-Su School
District to work through it's own problems.
VIVIAN DAILEY, President
Fairbanks Principals Association
Principal, North Pole High School
1039 Fifth Avenue
Fairbanks, Alaska 99701
Telephone: (907) 479-6388
POSITION STATEMENT: Testified in opposition to HB 129.
ACTION NARRATIVE
TAPE 99-33, SIDE A
Number 0001
CHAIRMAN NORMAN ROKEBERG called the House Labor and Commerce
Standing Committee meeting to order at 3:20 p.m. Members present
at the call to order were Representatives Rokeberg, Halcro, Sanders
and Harris. Representatives Cissna, Brice and Murkowski arrived at
3:24 p.m., 3:25 p.m. and 3:28 p.m. respectively.
HB 129 - COLLECTIVE BARGAINING; PRINCIPALS
Number 0095
CHAIRMAN ROKEBERG announced the committee's first order of business
is HB 129, "An Act excluding school principals from collectively
bargaining under the Public Employment Relations Act."
Number 0107
REPRESENTATIVE SCOTT OGAN, Alaska State Legislature, came forward
as the sponsor of HB 129. He said that he would like to keep his
statements short in order to read a statement from the
superintendent of the Matanuska-Susitna Borough School District.
Representative Ogan summarized that he believed principals should
be part of the management team, not part of the labor team. He
compared the school board to the legislature, the superintendent to
the governor, and the principals to the governor's commissioners;
therefore, he believed principals should serve at the pleasure of
the superintendent as commissioners serve at the pleasure of the
governor. Principals need to be part of the management team which
is currently not the case. Representative Ogan noted a case in the
Mat-Su Valley in which a superintendent's performance evaluation of
a principal lead to a grievance, and binding arbitration.
Regardless of the outcome, Representative Ogan found it troubling
that a situation could exist such that a principal is not
subordinate to a superintendent and the school board. He believed
HB 129 puts the public back in public education by ensuring that
the policy of the school board is carried out by superintendents
and that principals are subordinate to superintendents and the
school board.
Number 0309
REPRESENTATIVE OGAN read a March 24, 1999, letter into the record
from Dr. Robert A. Lehman, Superintendent, Matanuska-Susitna
Borough School District. Dr. Lehman's letter reads:
Thank you for this opportunity to testify on House Bill
129. I am sorry that due to prior commitment, I am
unable to deliver my comments in person. I appreciate
Representative Ogan reading this into the record on my
behalf. I would like to recognize Scott Ogan for the
foresight and awareness that led to his introduction of
this bill, which would eliminate the unionization of
school principals.
To be candid, when I first reviewed this legislation I
had mixed feelings about it. This bill proposes a change
in the way that we do business as educators. As both an
experienced superintendent and trainer of school
administrators, I felt an obligation to consider how this
legislation would affect the children of Alaska. Several
hours of contemplating this and discussing it with
colleagues failed to generate one single reason that the
unionization of principals in any way enhances student
achievement.
In order to validate my findings, I surveyed professional
research on principal unionization. I found that the
elimination of principal unions and tenure is a national
issue. Within the past few years several states,
including Georgia, Massachusetts, North Carolina,
Wisconsin and Oregon have eliminated the unionization of
school leaders. New York, New Jersey and Pennsylvania
are moving in this direction. Is it coincidental that
these are some of the same states that have made the most
progress in moving toward standards based instruction and
accountability? According to the National Association of
Secondary School Principals, only in 16 states, Alaska
included, do principals receive tenure or equivalent
rights to a continuing contract.
Why is the concept of collective bargaining for
principals on the endangered species list? There are
several reasons to eliminate unionization at this level.
The first has to do with the core of the principal's job.
Let's make no bones about the fact that schools fail
primarily because of poor teaching. Textbooks may be
outdated or in short supply, teachers may be underpaid,
classes may be too large and parents may even be
neglectful, but new books, affluent teachers, smaller
classes and attentive parents alone do not insure student
learning. We seem to have lost sight of the main reason
for principals. They exist not to maintain the status
quo, but rather to lead the development of an effective
learning relationship between teachers and students.
Principals must be empowered to produce results in this
realm and then be held accountable for those results.
Another reason that principals should be released from
the constraints of unions has to do with the amount of
authority delegated to them. They should have a great
deal of authority. They need the freedom to organize
their schools in a way that makes the best use of
available resources for students. It is up to us as
superintendents to foster the growth of principals and to
determine how much power to delegate to each at any given
time. Principals will end up with real authority and
respect from the staff and community if they earn it
through their actions. They cannot command it based on
a union agreement, which by its nature has a ceiling
defined by the limitations of the least qualified
members. Rather than bargain collectively, they should
actively be set free to compete to the ultimate benefit
of excellence in schooling.
Additionally, most districts employ a management team
operation. This provides a structure for administrators
to participate in management planning under the
leadership of the superintendent. The elimination of
unions will allow principals to be included in the team
and to help shape the formulation of policy.
Educational policy has to do with the specific things
that make quality education happen. School boards set
policy in terms of goals and purposes. They approve
specific policies drawn by the administrative team. In
this process, the first hand experience and perspective
of principals is essential to the making of sound
policies. Good policy is designed from diverse
viewpoints, independent thinking, and objectivity. It
also considers the minority viewpoint. Unions foster
single points of view.
The most compelling reason that principals should stay
out of unions is the fact that principals are management.
Success should be measured based on how well the job is
done in comparison to others in similar roles.
We want principals to continue to have a great influence
on school systems in Alaska. We need to empower
principals who unashamedly do the job better than anybody
else and who want a reward system based on performance.
These things are the bane and peril of unions. They also
have little attraction for principals who are interested
only in keeping the lid on and avoiding change.
The passage of this bill will be a landmark in your
efforts to stop the decline of our system and enable us
to improve the quality of instruction. As Sitting Bull
said, "It is time to put our minds together and see what
we can do for our children." The children of Alaska
deserve no less.
Number 0665
REPRESENTATIVE OGAN asked to briefly touch on Title 29, United
States Code, Section 152, definitions. He noted, "This is the
labor management relations -- the national labor relations. It
defines a supervisor - means any individual having authority in the
interest of employer to hire, transfer, suspend, layoff, recall,
promote, discharge, assign, reward, or discipline other employees,
and a number of other things - and also talks about professional
employees: any employee engaged in work predominately
intellectual, varied in character as opposed to routine mental,
manual, mechanical, physical work." Representative Ogan said these
descriptions fit managers. Principals are managers, and, with all
due respect to labor, principals should not be included in the
collective bargaining process.
Number 0734
REPRESENTATIVE HARRIS requested that Representative Ogan provide
the committee with some history regarding this concept and how this
issue was brought to his attention.
REPRESENTATIVE OGAN said that a number of incidents have occurred
over the last couple of years in his district. One particular
principal was violating school district policy and was asked to
stop an activity which the principal refused to stop.
Representative Ogan informed the committee that he was denied
access to his son's school because it was campaign season, although
he had been invited by a teacher to speak to his son's class on a
non-campaign-related issue. Representative Ogan commented that
there was a lot of politics and ignoring of school district policy.
He noted that one principal told him to go through the proper
channels of complaining to the school board and the superintendent.
Representative Ogan said he complained to the borough, the borough
manager, the mayor, school board members, and the superintendent.
From those complaints, Representative Ogan received a letter from
a school board member on her attorney letterhead, although the
letter was signed as a school board member, threatening him with
litigation for making libelous statements. He commented, "She was
in somewhat of violating policy when the policy was plain on its
face what it was, that they weren't supposed to engage in certain
activity." This made him realize there was a real lack of control.
School boards should set the policy and the board's hired
representative should translate that policy into the district.
Furthermore, the principals need to be subordinate to the school
board, and in this case they were not.
Number 0888
REPRESENTATIVE HARRIS asked if, in this case, a principal gave a
teacher direction not to allow Representative Ogan entrance into a
classroom.
REPRESENTATIVE OGAN said that he did not know exactly what had
happened. He clarified that he was met at the door by a teacher,
the same teacher who had invited him to speak, and told he could
not enter the classroom. Representative Ogan clarified that is not
the reason he introduced the legislation. Through a series of
situations Representative Ogan came to realize that the principals
are in control of their district, not the school board or the
superintendent. As a public policy, Representative Ogan felt it to
be in the best interest of the children and education for the
policy setters, the school board, to have the ability to control
the actions of its employees. Recognizing the problem in that
area, led to the introduction of HB 129.
REPRESENTATIVE CISSNA indicated her agreement that experiences such
as Representative Ogan's are not the way it needs to be. She noted
the tendency of people to interpret things differently in various
situations and asked how this bill would make the situation
Representative Ogan had different.
Number 1003
REPRESENTATIVE OGAN stressed that HB 129 was not necessarily
introduced to make his situation different. He reiterated that HB
129 was introduced in order to place the public back in public
education. The public should establish the policy for teaching
methods, the curriculum, and the management of the school district.
He also reiterated that it is not in the best interest of the
children to have principals "thumbing their nose at school district
policy" and filing grievances for disliked performance evaluations.
Representative Ogan stated that it would be more beneficial for
parents to set policy through their elected representatives rather
than unionized principals.
REPRESENTATIVE HALCRO noted a letter of support in the bill packet
from the Association of Alaska School Boards. He asked if this
type of legislation has been introduced in the past and if so, did
the association support it?
REPRESENTATIVE OGAN stated that he was not aware of any such
legislation introduced prior to this.
Number 1116
REPRESENTATIVE CISSNA related a discussion she had that day with a
principal for whom she has much respect. This principal felt very
strongly that putting a union hat on principals undermined their
ability to serve the children which is the first and foremost
concern. This principal commented that he saw the caliber of the
principals and teachers in Alaska slowly declining due to
decreasing wages. Alaska used to have some of the highest wages in
the country. She indicated that more qualified people can teach
children better. She asked Representative Ogan to comment.
REPRESENTATIVE OGAN said that collective bargaining does not
necessarily guarantee good caliber personnel. He questioned how
standards could be raised or an outstanding principal rewarded, if
it is not possible to do a performance evaluation without an
arbitrated grievance. He indicated that such programs as bonus
programs could not be done under collective bargaining.
Representative Ogan mentioned that one principal had commented in
the House Health, Education and Social Services Standing Committee
that salaries tend to go up when collective bargaining is
eliminated. He noted maybe it will give school boards the ability
to attract quality people and eliminate those that are not.
Number 1273
REPRESENTATIVE MURKOWSKI said, with regard to Representative Ogan's
comment that collective bargaining is broken and needs to be fixed,
that several principals in her district would disagree. She
informed the committee of the concern that has been expressed to
her about individual bargaining situations with future
superintendents; where would principals be left without collective
bargaining?
REPRESENTATIVE OGAN reiterated that it leaves the responsibility to
the elected public-policy setters where it should be. If the
school district hires a superintendent with a prejudice, that
superintendent should be disciplined and fired if the situation
does not improve. He indicated the same actions should be allowed
if there are problems with a principal. Principals should serve at
the will of the school board; the school board should be able to
terminate or discipline principals without worrying about
grievances and arbitration. Representative Ogan said he is simply
asking that the hands of school boards and superintendents be
untied. He commented, "Right now, one thing the NEA [National
Education Association] said on the record .... 'This is a major
shift of power from the collective bargaining agreement and power
abhors a vacuum; it's going to be consumed by someone. That
someone is likely to be the superintendent and board of
education.'" Representative Ogan emphasized that is exactly his
point. The power should be with the people's elected
representatives, the board of education, and the responsibility
should ultimately stop there, not with the principals.
[Representative Ogan's statement came from a handout provided to
the committee by the sponsor. The handout excerpts testimony from
Mr. Marshall of NEA-Alaska to the House Health, Education & Social
Services Standing Committee.]
Number 1417
REPRESENTATIVE HALCRO referred to a 1996 law that made collective
bargaining agreements a very public process. Therefore, since the
school board and the superintendent have the ability to
collectively bargain with the principals, this process is open to
the public.
REPRESENTATIVE OGAN agreed that there is a more open process, but
once the collective bargaining agreement is made the public is not
involved in the process nor are the superintendents and the school
board. Representative Ogan reiterated the previously mentioned
case in the Mat-Su Valley in which the principal did not like his
evaluation and requested binding arbitration. Representative Ogan
stated, "You can't manage people when you're doing that. ... These
people are management, they're not worker bees, these are the upper
(indisc.) management ...."
REPRESENTATIVE BRICE asked how principals would be protected from
arbitrary and pernicious acts by a superintendent, if principals
are taken out of the definition of public employees.
Representative Brice posed a scenario in which a school principal
allowed the writing of letters to the legislature, governor, or
government in general as part of a social studies class. The
legislator receiving the letters became upset with the contents of
the letters and demanded that the principal be fired. That is a
real case scenario and the principal was protected from an
arbitrary act on behalf of the superintendent due to the
principals' right to bargain and coverage under collective
bargaining. Representative Brice asked, "How do you deal with
those situations?"
Number 1550
REPRESENTATIVE OGAN stated that is the risk managers take when
deciding to become management. He indicated that perhaps, he has
more faith in the public process and that the school board would
oversee the superintendent to make sure such arbitrary events do
not occur. Representative Ogan believed the best government to be
local government, when people have access to it. He hoped the
system would work in those cases. He mentioned it would certainly
violate ethics codes. Furthermore, Representative Ogan believed
the school board provided a safety net.
CHAIRMAN ROKEBERG invited the sponsor to join the committee at the
table, noting the committee would proceed to teleconference
testimony. The chairman asked witnesses to limit testimony to
three minutes and questions.
Number 1619
GREG DANIELS, Executive Director, Alaska Association of Elementary
School Principals (AAESP), testified via teleconference from Kenai
in opposition to HB 129. He read a joint resolution by the Alaska
Association of Secondary School Principals and Alaska Association
of Elementary School Principals which follows:
The Alaska Association of Secondary School Principals and
the [Alaska] Association of Elementary School Principals:
Whereas HB 129 adds 'principals' into the Alaska Statute
23.40.250[(6)] along with Superintendents which makes
collective bargaining unavailable to both groups of
administrators, and
Whereas Alaska Statute 23.40.070[(1)], is the declaration
of policy recognizing the rights of public employees to
organize for the purpose of collective bargaining, and
Whereas Alaska Statute 23.40.070[(2)] requires public
employees to negotiate with and enter into written
agreements with employee organizations on matters of
wages, hours, and other terms and conditions of
employment, and
Whereas under HB 129 principals would lose their voice in
determining their conditions of work, paving the way for
arbitrary reassignment, removal from their positions
without just cause, and would have no formal means of
appeal or grievances and termination, nor representation,
and
Whereas HB 129 will further restrict the ability of
school districts to recruit and retain qualified school
principals in a market which already predicts severe
shortages of principals in Alaska and the United States,
and
Whereas the stability of schools and school districts
throughout Alaska often calls on the longevity and
commitment of dedicated principals when there is high
turnover of superintendents in Alaska, now
Therefore be it resolved that the Alaska Association of
Secondary School Principals and the Alaska Association of
Elementary School Principals oppose HB 129 and would ask
that HB 129 be defeated.
CHAIRMAN ROKEBERG noted the presence of an e-mail message with
other comments from Mr. Daniel in the committee packet.
Number 1768
ANDRE' LAYRAL, President, Alaska Association of Secondary School
Principals (AASSP); Principal, North Pole Middle School; Alaska
Council of School Administrators (ACSA), testified next via
teleconference from Fairbanks in opposition to HB 129. He noted
that he represents the executive board of the AASSP. He informed
the committee that he has been a principal in Fairbanks for the
past 7 years and that he has been an educator in Alaska for 25
years of which 16 years were as an administrator. Mr Layral, using
his written materials as the basis for his remarks, stated:
I've spoken to many principals in the last ten days and
none support this bill. Many are offended by the
generalization that principals as professionals are based
on the sponsor's perception and personal experience that
is the catalyst for this bill.
Principals are not political appointees like
commissioners. They are the front line leaders in
Alaska's schools. They bridge the school districts and
their school communities, and they are charged with the
accountability to ensure that students achieve content
standards, teachers meet standards, schools meet
standards, and the parents and community work together.
Principals have a lot of autonomy.
The school boards are the policy setters, and in the
absence of policies, principals are the policy makers for
their individual buildings. I believe there is a public
process for the public to be involved in policy setting.
I'd also like to point out that school boards approve the
evaluation procedures for principals.
HB 129 will deter teachers from going into administration
at a time when they will be called on to lead schools.
Becoming a principal is an awesome responsibility.
Principals are professionals, and as such, deserve the
same rights as other public employees to organize for a
voice in determining their working conditions. Certainly
they should have protections equal to teachers and
superintendents. Collective bargaining works to ensure
this fair treatment.
The Alaska Association of Secondary School Principals'
executive board urges you to defeat this bill in
committee and allow principals to focus on more important
educational matters related to Chapter 31 and SB 36.
This bill is counter to the professional relationships
districts must have in today's schools. There is nothing
landmark about this bill, and I thank you for your time.
Number 1864
REPRESENTATIVE OGAN asked if Mr. Layral believed principals should
have the right to strike and binding arbitration.
MR. LAYRAL replied in their district in the negotiated agreement
principals currently cannot strike. He indicated that is addressed
through the collective bargaining process.
REPRESENTATIVE OGAN asked about binding arbitration.
MR. LAYRAL answered, "I believe on those matters where working
together you can't find a reasonable solution, if that's called for
in the negotiated contract, it is appropriate." He did not believe
that has been an issue in his district and he felt good about the
principals' and school board's working relationship within his
district.
CHAIRMAN ROKEBERG asked if there were concerns regarding the loss
of employment benefits, or is the concern regarding the lack of
grievance or job position protection through the collective
bargaining process.
Number 1928
MR. LAYRAL clarified that he believed principals should, as
professionals, be afforded the same rights as other public
employees which is what is specified in state law. Long before
principals were included under the Public Employment Relations Act
(PERA), principals had similar rights. Mr. Layral indicated that
principals should have the same rights to collective bargaining as
fire chiefs, ferry captains, and police chiefs. He pointed out
that these officials are not political appointees and that they are
hired, fired, and have the same fair treatment as principals.
CHAIRMAN ROKEBERG asked if principals could be fired at the will of
the school board or superintendent, or are principals subject to
the grievance procedures for which principals collectively bargain.
MR. LAYRAL indicated that if principals, based on their
performance, do not perform at the level expected, or if they do
not meet state standards they can be fired. He noted that
evaluation procedures fora district are approved by the school
board. If the principals violate aspects of their negotiated
contract, they would be subject to discipline under the conditions
in that contract.
CHAIRMAN ROKEBERG asked if there could be contract conditions which
were not collectively bargained.
MR. LAYRAL noted that school boards establish policies. If it is
not contained in school board policy or the negotiated agreement,
he supposed that could be the case. Mr. Layral commented that
those kinds of issues are best settled by sitting down and
conferring; he believed that everyone should work together when
these things are not outlined.
CHAIRMAN ROKEBERG asked, for the committee's understanding, if
principals' have a separate bargaining unit, or does it vary from
district to district or between the elementary and secondary
levels.
Number 2020
MR. LAYRAL answered that statewide most of the larger districts
have a collective bargaining agreement. There are a number of
single site schools where the principal's negotiation is simply
meeting with the superintendent and the school board to establish
the conditions of the principal's employment. Mr. Layral suspected
the silence from those areas means that process works in those
areas. He noted that those areas are not in support of the bill.
For the larger districts which negotiate with 45 to 50 different
principals, there is the possibility of being arbitrary. He
further stated, "I believe that we have standards for principals.
They were passed as part of HB 165 and Chapter 31 now. Those
standards are very clear. That's what we're evaluated on and I
think that if you're meeting those standards you shouldn't be fired
without just cause."
Number 2070
GLEN SYZMONIAK, Kenai Peninsula Administrative Association, Alaska
Association of Elementary School Principals, testified via
teleconference from Homer in opposition of HB 129. He read the
following testimony:
I am opposed to HB 129 and request that this bill not
proceed out of the Labor and Commerce Committee. The
state is a public employer and principals are currently
public employees with all the rights and responsibilities
of public employees under PERA. The key word in this act
is "relation." Currently, and in the past, principals
have remained steadfast in maintaining a positive
partnership type of relationship with the legislature,
the DOE, school boards, parents, voters and the
community. Eliminating the opportunity to collectively
bargain removes the process and structure that allows
principals and school districts to define that
relationship. Doing this unilaterally without the
principals' support goes beyond severing the current,
desirable ties and it establishes and institutes an
adversarial relationship based on threats and arbitrary
decisions.
Number 2127
Representative Ogan gives grievance procedures and
arbitration, but what that grievance and arbitration
procedure does is assure fairness and a procedure for,
either getting a principal out of a position or keeping
a body from doing an arbitrary act like removing a
principal from his job without due cause. So, those
things do need to be in the contract and they're actually
part a labor right that we do (indisc.) not just
principals, but any other employee. When I saw this
bill, something didn't seem right, and then sitting here
listening, I think that was confirmed. It looks like
Senator [Representative] Ogan had a pretty disdainful
incident whereby one act by one principal maybe wasn't
correct, and it sounds like it went through the
procedures, but I would really hate to see anybody use
this as their position of authority for any vindictive
act, and really what that does is draw in all the
principals in the state and it affects the relationship
that we have with our employers which we really
appreciate and like right now. Thank you.
Number 2183
REPRESENTATIVE ROKEBERG commented that the legislature does not
allow vengeful acts. He said that this is a topic that deserves
discussion.
REPRESENTATIVE OGAN felt he was clear to point out in his testimony
this is not a vindictive act. Furthermore, he resented it being
characterized as such. He stated it is simply a matter of whether
or not it is good public policy to have our principals as managers,
as part of the management team or part of the collective bargaining
team.
Number 2222
FRED GIDDINGS, Principal, Bayshore Elementary School, testified
next via teleconference from Anchorage. Mr. Giddings was thankful
to hear thoughtful questions and discussion from the committee
members. He informed the committee that he had testified two weeks
prior in the Health, Education, and Social Services Committee and
was bewildered at the speed with which HB 129 moved out of the
committee without much discussion. He emphasized the importance of
understanding that this bill resulted from an unfortunate incident
in the Mat-Su Valley. The solution to the problem, if there is one
in the Mat-Su Valley, is being broadcast to principals everywhere
in Alaska. Mr. Giddings wanted to make it very clear that the
problems besetting the Mat-Su Valley, if there are any, are not
problems that Anchorage is experiencing. With respect to
Representative Ogan's comment that the principals are in control,
not the board or the superintendent, he stated, "At least as far as
the Anchorage School District is concerned, we enjoy our
relationship with the superintendent, we have a board that is quite
literally in control and a superintendent that manages the business
of principal quite effectively and we don't need this solution
imposed on us ... there's nothing broken here; there's really
nothing that needs fixing here." Much of the content in HB 129
bothered Mr. Giddings. He stated in his 21 years in the Anchorage
School District and 40 years in Alaska, he found that principals
are the constant in the administrative chain of command, but
superintendents, each with their own philosophies and priorities,
come and go. Principals need to have a seat at the table with the
superintendent and the school board. Furthermore, principals need
to be able to discuss concerns and divergent views with the
superintendent without fear of reprisal. He felt HB 129 imposed a
nuclear solution to a problem that is localized in the Mat-Su
Valley.
Number 2355
REPRESENTATIVE OGAN asked why the State School Board Association
supports HB 129 if the solution is nuclear.
MR. GIDDINGS said he could not answer that question and suggested
the question would be better directed to the State School Board
Association. He noted that he could only speak on behalf of the
Anchorage principals, the Elementary Principals Association and
himself.
CHAIRMAN ROKEBERG asked whether the Anchorage School District is
able to insert additional conditions on a contract the district has
bargained with an individual principal or do they have to bargain
as a unit.
MR. GIDDINGS understood the process to entail developing an
agreement with the director of labor relations, who is guided by
the school board and the superintendent. The agreement is
generalized to all principals in the Anchorage area. There are not
separate conditions of employment for different principals.
CHAIRMAN ROKEBERG wondered if "middle, senior and elementary
principals" in Anchorage are handled as a unit.
MR. GIDDINGS said they are handled as a unit for the purposes of
collective bargaining.
CHAIRMAN ROKEBERG asked if a distinction in pay scales existed
between the type of schools that principals head.
Number 2416
MR GIDDINGS indicated principals are placed on a pay scale based on
years of experience which is accrued from elementary through high
school.
CHAIRMAN ROKEBERG asked if it was conceivable to have a "relatively
small elementary population and be paid more than a ... principal
at Service High School. Is that correct?"
MR. GIDDINGS stated, "Well, at the elementary level you could
probably find principals who are paid higher at smaller schools."
He noted that school size is not the only consideration in terms of
what is required to manage a school. The pay scales show that high
school principals are paid more than elementary school principals.
CHAIRMAN ROKEBERG inquired if Mr. Giddings testimony was "that they
didn't make a distinction, but, yet, a senior high school principal
... could be paid more or would be?"
MR. GIDDINGS explained that high school principals get paid more
than elementary school principals because they have a longer school
year. Both are paid roughly the same on a per diem basis, but high
school principals work more days.
ERIC HENDERSON, President, Mat-Su Principals Association;
Principal, Wasilla Middle School, testified via teleconference from
the Mat-Su Valley.
TAPE 99-33, SIDE B
MR. HENDERSON relayed an incident in which a superintendent
informed him he was going to fire a major high school principal
because the principal had allegedly lied. Mr. Henderson further
stated:
This was, at first, a surprise to me. I was a
representative of the Principal's Association and we went
to bat for this principal. After, about, 100,000 dollars
later, and with a lot of hearings, private
investigations, a very active association for this
principal. It was found the district was totally wrong
and he was hired back. That individual that
Representative Ogan speaks of, of the evaluation process
and the arbitrations, that individual was one of our
point persons in this battle. That person had 35 years
of educational experience; probably about 25 years as a
principal. He was honored nationally in a variety of
different areas for his excellence as a principal. He
received the poorest evaluation because of his
association activities that he ever received. We went to
arbitrations with that. An arbitrator was found that
the district was totally at fault and were prejudiced in
his evaluations. All this has taken place over the last
two years. Because in the collective bargaining
agreement, it's given the principals a protection to
question those types of activities that are misled by a
certain superintendent who, by the way, has resigned
recently. I really take issue with some of the
comparisons that have been made. Principals need to have
the protection that is only allowed at a collective
bargaining agreement to do the job to advocate for kids
to raise standards.
Number 0090
Representative Ogan talked about going to a high school
that he was turned down by the principal at the door.
You know, principals have an obligation to the children.
That obligation is outlined in school board policy. The
principal was, in that case, was supporting school board
policy. The school board still has control. The
superintendent still has control. Principals support
policy. If they aren't, they can be removed and
principals have been removed .... Principals are on a
one-year contract. If they aren't to the liking of what
the school district wants, they can be removed and put
back into the classroom every year and that's stated
pretty much in contract. They can't do it for capricious
reasons, but they can be removed and put back into the
classroom. Principals are teachers first, principals
second.
Number 2454
CHAIRMAN ROKEBERG asked if the Mat-Su Principal's Association was
the actual bargaining unit.
MR. HENDERSON clarified that the Mat-Su Principal's Association is
a bargaining unit for the principals and is not associated with any
teacher's association or NEA.
REPRESENTATIVE OGAN asked if Mr. Henderson could site the school
board policy the principal was enforcing when he kept
Representative Ogan from entering the school.
MR. HENDERSON noted that he did not have the policy in front of
him, but he believed the policy being enforced was "political
activity cannot be carried on in the school." He was not certain
of the particulars in Representative Ogan's case, but principals
have the right to prevent campaigning from occurring in schools
during an election. He noted there is a procedure to reprimand a
principal if a policy has been violated.
Number 0182
REPRESENTATIVE OGAN asked, "If you don't know particulars, then how
do you know that the principal was supporting school board policy,
as you say?"
MR. HENDERSON indicated he was basing his response on what
Representative Ogan said.
REPRESENTATIVE HALCRO remembered, last fall, hearing Mr. Henderson
on the radio supporting Representative Ogan's opponent. He stated
Mr. Henderson identified himself as a principal and asked if there
was anything in the collective bargaining agreement prohibiting Mr.
Henderson from campaigning under the auspices of representing the
school.
MR. HENDERSON replied he was not campaigning under the auspices of
representing the school. He said there was nothing in the
collective bargaining agreement referring to campaigning. He
explained there are procedures the district can take if the
district felt he had been in violation of professional practices.
REPRESENTATIVE HALCRO asked if any action had been taken because
Mr. Henderson had been "so out front in this campaign."
MR. HENDERSON replied no.
REPRESENTATIVE OGAN stated for the record there was a school
district policy that prohibits school district employees from
engaging in partisan activities. He indicated Mr. Henderson had
clearly identified himself as a school district employee; thereby
he represented the district. There is also a state law which says
a person who engages in partisan activities as a part of their job
may not receive public funds.
Number 0284
RICH TOYMIL, Principal, Paul Banks Elementary School, Alaska
Association of Elementary School Principals, Kenai Peninsula
Administrators Association, testified next via teleconference from
Homer. He informed the committee that he had been principal at the
Paul Banks Elementary School for the last year and a half. Prior
to that, Mr. Toymil worked as an administrator in the Bering
Straits School District before which he taught in Oregon for 10
years. He read the following testimony:
I want to first and foremost ... I am an educator that
has focused on the need of children and the success of
children and their parents in the community. I want to
speak for all the administrators out there, I know there
are a lot that I have met over my years in Alaska as a
teacher and an administrator who are focused on children.
I would like to say that the rhetoric surrounding this
potentially far-reaching bill assumes that principals
have too much power, that we're in too much control. In
fact, we are managers who are part of a team. We are
answerable to the public and subordinate, so to speak,
via the school board and to the district via the
superintendent and the director that we work for. We are
part of the management team. We have clearly outlined
expectations and responsibilities and due process
regarding this (indsic.) procedures if we are out of
line, so to speak.
Number 0332
Regardless of the bargaining situation that in the
district we have, there are management processes to deal
with inappropriate actions by individuals in each
district. Individual problems can be solved, first and
foremost, by crafting hiring processes that screen
candidates rigorously and evaluation processes that have
clear expectations that are formulated through a
collaborative effort of school board members, the
district's management team and the principals and
directors. Legal guidance is always available as
necessary in every district. As principals and state
employees, I believe we have the right to help formulate
our employment situation via collective bargaining unit
without the widespread annihilation of our employability
rights as represented by this bill and I urge its defeat.
Number 0381
CHERYL TURNER, Parent, informed the committee that she has worn
several hats in the past. She noted that she has been active in
the Parent Teacher Association (PTA) and was the President for four
years at Pioneer Peak Elementary. After that time, she became the
PTA Council President for the Mat-Su School District. Later she
ran and was elected to the Mat-Su School Board. Ms. Turner
emphasized that she is not speaking on behalf of the Mat-Su School
Board. She read the following testimony:
I am a school board member, and a parent.
Today I speak to you as a parent who has the additional
perspective of serving on an elected body created to
carry out school policy on behalf of the public.
My focus, and I am sure your focus, as you consider this
legislation is to do what is best for children and their
education.
In any organization, when management is overturned or is
not properly followed there is a lack of direction and
policy begins to flow in the wrong direction.
In our education system when teachers, are joined by
administrators in collective application of policy, the
chain of management is severed between the public and our
schools. Instead of public education we have union
education dictated to the public, the Boards, and the
Superintendent. Instead of carrying out the directives
of the public via the District, we have as the NEA
desires [per written testimony], a policy set by a
collective, political group.
When a Superintendent gives a negative evaluation of a
Principal, as his or her manager, they need to have
results in correcting the situation. In Mat-Su one of
our Principals received such an evaluation only to file
a grievance and have the management finding overturned.
If Principals are administrators, if they are part of the
management team, if they are an extension of the
Superintendent, Board and public, then they are not to be
collectively organized. If we want to recognize
Principal unions then we must also be prepared for them
to go on strike, sick outs, push for binding arbitration,
and support not the District, but the NEA when there are
differences of opinion.
I ask you as legislators, as supporters of the proper
role and balance between management and labor, to put the
public back in education. Keep the balance in education.
Help our constituents restore public education to a
better place.
People are wondering what is wrong with public education?
Why are so many people putting their children in other
alternative programs? What will it take to restore
quality in our schools?
I submit to you that as the public has become
disenfranchised from public education their support for
it has waned. As leaders you know the importance of
public involvement. Unless we re-balance our management
team as HB 129 does, and put the public back into a
meaningful role as originators, not followers of
education policy we will continue to see the erosion of
public education in Alaska.
HB 129 will not make those who feel they are in charge of
education happy. It will not be popular with those who
seek collective protection as managers. But it will
restore the balance we need to make management work for
our constituents.
Number 0566
CHAIRMAN ROKEBERG asked how long Ms. Turner has been a member of
the Mat-Su School Board.
MS. TURNER replied she was elected in October of 1998.
CHAIRMAN ROKEBERG asked if she has been there long enough to know
whether she feels the principals are implementing school board
policy in her area.
MS. TURNER, speaking strictly as an individual school board member,
said she has been "put through the ringer by the Mat-Su Principals
Union." She stated she was threatened with a lawsuit which she
discovered while reading the local paper. The results of the
investigation were null and void, and the investigation was thrown
out with an expense to the district. She was uncertain if there
was an expense to MSPA [Mat-Su Principals Association]. Ms. Turner
withdrew her children from the public school system and placed them
in a Christian school. She was told she was a board member and not
a parent at the school. The superintendent attempted to intervene
by setting up a meeting with the principal, herself, and her
husband, but the superintendent was told to "butt out" or the
principal would seek an attorney. Ms. Turner said the
superintendent advised her to remove her children from school.
Number 0636
CHAIRMAN ROKEBERG asked if this incident occurred after she was
elected to the school board.
MS. TURNER said the incident occurred before she was elected, but
she withdrew her children from school after she became a board
member.
REPRESENTATIVE OGAN referred to Mr. Henderson's testimony and asked
Ms. Turner if a school board policy exists which prohibits
principals or employees from participating in partisan activities.
Number 0670
MS. TURNER replied yes. There is a policy stating any employee is
allowed to campaign on their own time and with their own name, but
not with the school district's title. She indicated Mr. Henderson
used his principal title and also recognized the building where he
is a principal. No repercussions came from this incident because
the Mat-Su is in a tough situation. The superintendent had strict
orders from the school board on his evaluation from last year to
mend the relationship with the principals. This was the number one
item the school board requested of the superintendent. Therefore,
she felt that was the reason there were no repercussions to Mr.
Henderson.
REPRESENTATIVE HALCRO said he understood "the directive to mend
fences and build good will, but when somebody violates policy,
whether it's school board or local assembly or legislative ethic
policy, you know, you get in trouble." He indicated he did not
understand why nothing was done since a policy had been violated in
this case.
MS. TURNER replied she is only one member of the school board and
cannot respond to that. She said she can give her opinion, but
feels she may be crossing some lines.
Number 0755
REPRESENTATIVE HARRIS said it sounds as if this is an isolated
situation for the Mat-Su Valley. He wondered if Ms. Turner had
heard of a similar situation in other areas.
MS. TURNER informed the committee that she spoke with other school
board members at the Alaska State School Board Convention, of which
the Mat-Su School Board is no longer a member, last fall regarding
the activities with the radio ad. She said she did not have a
single conversation with anyone who accepted the behavior of the
union president. She further commented that she did not believe
these types of situations are isolated to the Mat-Su area. She
believed there is a nationwide trend of these types of situations
which she attributed to the movement to the standard-based
assessments. She said "in order to do that, you have to have
communication." Such is achieved with HB 129 which supports
communication from the administration, the school board, the
superintendent and the principals. She informed the committee that
currently, there are 16 states in the nation that have unionized
principals. In Alaska, 14 out of 53 districts have unionized
principals.
Number 0869
REPRESENTATIVE MURKOWSKI indicated that she wondered if this is
something that needs to be fixed on a statewide basis or is it just
a problem in the Mat-Su Valley. With regards to Ms. Turner's
comment that educators would be happy with the passage of HB 129,
Representative Murkowski expressed concerned that there is already
a shortage of educators and an even more severe shortage with
respect to administrators. She stressed, "If we just have an
incident going on in one part of the state, and, in an attempt to
fix that, we throw out what might be working in the other 52 school
districts, and lose a lot of good educators in the state, which I'm
not convinced that we can afford to do."
MS. TURNER pointed out that change such as the Quality Schools
Initiative enacted last year, standard-based assessment for the
state of Alaska, and new superintendents, is not always
well-received. She believes anytime you step into the arena of
change, there will be a lot of negative feedback. She expressed
surprise at the tone of negativity regarding HB 129 which she felt
gets people more involved with administrative processes. People
"want to be involved, they want to be able lobby, they want to be
able to do things, you know, with the administrators and with the
school board, and work together." She further commented, "Now,
when they're in disagreement with the direction that we're trying
to go in, we get grievanced."
Number 1018
CHAIRMAN ROKEBERG wondered if Ms. Turner meant that principals
would file a grievance if a new policy was implemented. He wanted
to know what would "trip the grievance against the board?"
MS. TURNER said she is not sure what trips grievances.
CHAIRMAN ROKEBERG asked her to provide an example.
MS. TURNER described an incident in which a principal sent a
newsletter to parents with information about the budget process and
who should be contacted during the budget process. In the
newsletter, the parents were instructed to call the "head shed"
which resulted in three phone calls from parents in the community.
One parent asked Ms. Turner to give her a definition of the "head
shed". Ms. Turner said she does not know what it means, but noted
it sounds drug-related. She instructed the parent to address the
principal. Ms. Turner requested the superintendent speak with the
principal regarding his use of the term "head shed", and asked the
superintendent to be low-key. The superintendent spoke with the
principal, and they apparently had a good conversation. The
principal spoke with the Rights Chair of the union who subsequently
relayed to the superintendent that he was uncomfortable with him
interfering with school business.
Number 1141
CHAIRMAN ROKEBERG asked Ms. Turner if her testimony is "principals
are empowered by their collective bargaining agreements to file
grievances if they have certain problems with the superintendent or
with the board."
MS. TURNER agreed, but noted that she was not going on record to
say that a grievance was filed. Instead, it was a notification
from the Rights Chair to the superintendent that he acted
improperly when addressing the principal.
REPRESENTATIVE HALCRO commented, with respect to Ms. Turner's
statement regarding negative feedback, that the committee members
simply want to know. Representative Halcro noted that he is a past
PTA president and he has never heard of this type of situation
between the principals in the Anchorage School District and the
school board. Perhaps, the Mat-Su Valley is the exception versus
the rule.
MS. TURNER said she did not mean to interpret that the negative
feedback is coming from the committee, but rather from the
testimony. She acknowledged Representative Murkowski's past PTA
experiences and commended the people that have a great relationship
with their principal because it is vitally important. However Ms.
Turner commented, from her experience as the Mat-Su PTA President
and sitting as the Board Manager on the State PTA, that there are
some situations in Anchorage.
Number 1261
REPRESENTATIVE HALCRO pointed out that no other school districts
had submitted letters of support. He was surprised, especially if
these problems exist elsewhere, no one else is "jumping on the band
wagon." He asked if AASB is speaking on behalf of the 53 school
districts.
MS. TURNER reiterated that the Mat-Su Valley is not a member of the
of AASB. She said that she would share Representative Halcro's
same concern.
REPRESENTATIVE OGAN commented, "Maybe they don't want to get
sideways with the principals' union."
Number 1326
SOPHIA MASEWICZ, President, Anchorage Principals Association,
testified from Anchorage in opposition of HB 129. She informed the
committee that the Anchorage Principals Association is the largest
organization of principals in the state, with 119 association
members. There are no principals in this district in support of HB
129. She clarified that HB 129 was not supported because it would
be detrimental to the check and balance system that is critical in
a complex organization. She noted the difficulty for the board and
the superintendents to negotiate individual salaries and benefits
for the 119 association members. She stressed, "Principals are in
a unique position of protecting the rights of parents and students.
Allowing principals to do the job that they need to do to be
effective leaders, and to serve kids in the state. I have sat in
many arbitrations with a number of union organizations where
concessions may have been given if there had not been devoid of
principals. And principals cannot be in a position of being just
mimicked of an arm of the administration. It is true that we
follow policy and we are subordinate, but because we are able to
collective bargain, we are free to give reflections and earnest
opinions about how policy and other matters of negotiation among
various unions will effect kids in our district. So, I urge you,
please, do not support this bill because it is very detrimental to
kids."
Number 1474
MARY JOHNSTONE, President, Alaska Association of Elementary School
Principals; Principal, Susitna Elementary School, read the
following testimony:
I was born in Alaska and I've been in education here in
Anchorage as a teacher and administrator for nearly 25
years. I appreciate the opportunity to speak against
this bill that I believe could have a real negative
impact on Alaska's students.
The Executive Board of the Alaska Association of
Elementary School Principals strongly opposes it; as it
has been stated.
While we know there are individuals, and we've heard from
some today, or groups who support this bill denying
school principals the right to collective bargaining, I
suggest that diminishing the role, influence and morale
of the principalship is not in the best interests of the
education of our children, and should not be in the best
interests of anyone. Principals are rising to the
challenge of bringing our students into the twenty-first
century - with new standards, assessments and graduation
requirements. We, as principals, are on the front line
in addressing issues of teacher training in effective
practices, in school change, diversity, school safety,
parent involvement, and the development of partnerships
in the community. I invite anyone listening to spend a
day in my school to see first-hand the job of the
principal.
With over half of our current principals likely to be
gone by 2002, it is incumbent on us that we be able to
recruit and retain the best and brightest school leaders.
HB 129, in my opinion, would seriously undermine the
ability of districts to staff our schools and accomplish
our rigorous goals for public education.
HB 129 increases the power of top-down leadership,
running counter to current research, practices, and
common sense regarding the most effective way to run
schools - where involvement of stakeholders, shared
decision-making, and strong accountability are paramount.
School quality is directly related to ongoing district
and site-based school improvement efforts, focusing on
world class content and performance standards, on high
quality professional staff delivering the best
instructional practices, on quality school organization,
and on parent and community involvement.
We should be looking for ways to strengthen the role of
school principals, while at the same time providing
principals and schools the resources we need to
accomplish the goals the public has set for us. Our
political leaders should not create instability and
uncertainty for principals, and with it some of our
motivation for implementing the continuous improvement of
education for the children of Alaska.
Number 1633
CHAIRMAN ROKEBERG asked if 14 out of 53 districts have unionized
principals.
MS. JOHNSTONE said she did not know.
Number 1656
CHAIRMAN ROKEBERG called an at-ease at 4:44 p.m. The committee
came back to order in less than a minute. He announced that HB 129
would be set aside for the moment in order to bring up HB 158.
HB 158 - NOTICE OF INS. CANCELLATION TO ELDERLY
Number 1676
CHAIRMAN ROKEBERG announced the committee's next order of business
is HB 158, "An Act relating to the annual report of the director of
the division of insurance and to notice of cancellation of personal
insurance." The chairman stated the legislation would be set aside
to be addressed at the committee's next meeting [April 9, 1999].
HB 129 - COLLECTIVE BARGAINING; PRINCIPALS
Number 1696
CHAIRMAN ROKEBERG announced the committee would return to the
public testimony on HB 129. Chairman Rokeberg passed the gavel to
Vice-Chairman Halcro.
TODD SYVERSON, Principal, Soldotna Middle School, testified next
via teleconference from Kenai in opposition of HB 129. He read the
following testimony:
I would like to testify in opposition to HB 129 and I am
requesting that HB 129 does not make it out of committee.
Nine years ago I was a principal in the State of North
Dakota. I left North Dakota to move to Alaska because of
low salaries and poor benefit packages in North Dakota.
I was very fortunate to be named a 1997 National Milken
Educator Award winner for the State of Alaska and I feel
that my move to Alaska was good for both my family and
for my educational career.
In Alaska, I have enjoyed the privilege and the right to
belong to a union who has collectively bargained in good
faith with our school district. The Kenai is currently
one of the lowest paid school districts in the state of
Alaska and we are currently having problems recruiting
principals because of those low salaries. The loss of
the right to bargain would put the Kenai even further
behind in the recruitment of master principals who will
lead our schools and will focus on providing the very
best education for our students.
Number 1801
Principals are much like coaches. The better the coach
the better the team. The better the principal the better
the school. Principals provide the leadership and
guidance needed to set high standards in the delivery of
curriculum, in the improvement of instruction and are
consistently assessing our schools to find new ways to
improve instruction which lead our schools in better
meeting the educational needs of our students.
We need the best principals for our schools in Alaska.
Please allow us to continue the right to collective
bargaining in hopes that we can continue to provide the
packages needed to recruit and to keep the best possible
principals who will lead our schools in meeting the ever
changing needs of our students in the State of Alaska.
We truly have a unique challenge in Alaska, please help
principals and school boards in meeting that challenge by
dropping HB 129.
Number 1853
VICE-CHAIRMAN HALCRO asked Don Glaze to testify next via
teleconference from Kenai. The Kenai LIO indicated Mr. Glaze had
to leave before his name was called. Mr. Glaze's faxed testimony
to the committee reads:
Thank you for listening to my testimony. My name is Don
Glaze. I am the Assistant Principal at Nikiski
Middle/High School. I have been an educator in Alaska
for 18 years. I am also the President of the Kenai
Peninsula Administrators Association, and I would like to
speak as one of their representatives on behalf of all
the school administrators in our district. We are very
much against HB 129.
I would like to give two main reasons for opposition to
this bill:
(1) It is a big step backwards in the effort for the
KPBSD [Kenai Peninsula Borough School District] and for
Alaska to draw quality people to the field of education.
We can set all the standards that we want; we can come up
with higher expectations for students; we can create a
qualifying exam; but if we don't have good teachers and
good leaders in our schools, then neither Alaska school
goals nor national school goals are going to be met. A
specific statistic was given in our local paper earlier
this week by our district's personnel director. In the
past few years the number of teachers applying for each
job in our district has gone down from 125 to 50 for this
year. For a principalship position the number of
applicants is much lower. In fact the principal job at
Skyview High has reopened twice because there aren't
enough qualified applicants. The position is currently
unassigned for next school year. With HB 129 what
principal would want to come to Alaska to take a job
without the ability to have a say in salary and benefits.
(2) With those who are currently in principal positions,
morale will a [sic] be dramatically affected because
principals will be lowered in bargaining ability below
anyone else in the system. The principal is not just a
manager, but also the instructional leader in a school.
If leaders experience a low morale swing, the entire
educational process may be negatively affected through
the trickle down effect ... [sic] right down to our
students. We building administrators have a right to
collective bargaining, and we need to keep that right.
My questions are: What is the real purpose of HB 129,
and what will the effects be?
My statement is: Please do not allow HB 129 to move any
further through our legislative system. Thank you for
your time.
Number 1877
LEE YOUNG, Assistant Principal, Soldotna Middle School, testified
next via teleconference from Kenai in opposition to HB 129. He
informed the committee that he moved from Washington State last
summer because of legislation there. He noted that he wanted to
further his professional career and feels he is an excellent
administrator as evidenced by his receipt of the 1995 Washington
State Educator of the Year award. Mr. Young said that he enjoyed
being in Washington, but because of "unfortunate legislation" he
moved to Alaska where the benefit package was more attractive. He
felt that the passage of HB 129 would effect the kind of people
attracted to Alaska. Alaska's students deserve the best.
REPRESENTATIVE HARRIS inquired as to the legislation that drove Mr.
Young out of the State of Washington.
MR. YOUNG clarified that the particular legislation centered around
the retirement system which is one area that Alaska is holding onto
for the time being.
Number 2015
DON ETHERIDGE, District Council of Laborers, came forward to
testify on HB 129. He noted that the District Council of Laborers
does not represent any principals, but he wanted to speak to the
process of collective bargaining. Collective bargaining is a basic
right all people should have; to be able to bargain for working
conditions and wages. Based on the testimony today, it seems that
there is a problem in one school district where there has been a
poor job of collective bargaining and administering contracts. He
stated, "We have a grievance procedure and the grievance procedure
is set up only for violations of the collective bargaining
agreement. And if you start trying to grieve everything else under
the sun before arbitrators, they only will look at what's in the
bargaining agreement. And that's what it's there for. And if it's
not been bargained properly, then that's the fault of the school
board that sets those bargaining standards as to what they want to
see." In response to an earlier question posed by Representative
Brice, Mr. Etheridge feels the only recourse, if no grievance
procedure is available, is to go to court which "will cost the same
amount of money on either side, if not more, to have lawyers
involved with work issues." It seems to him that collective
bargaining is being blamed for poor management in the Mat-Su
Borough School District. He does not believe the process should be
thrown out because one school district cannot handle the system.
Number 2187
DARROLL HARGRAVES, Executive Director, Alaska Council of School
Administrators, came forward to testify on HB 129. He pointed out
that the committee had received the resolution from the elementary
and the secondary principals stating their position. He noted that
the superintendents, part of the Alaska Council of School
Administrators, recently met in Juneau and discussed HB 129. "From
that discussion, there were numerous comments made by numerous
superintendents and, as I recorded it, it was 100 percent opposed
to the bill. Now, the group did end up not taking a position on
it, ... but the individual comments were very clear in those
discussions." He acknowledged that the committee has a letter of
support from the Superintendent of the Mat-Su Valley, Dr. Lehman.
MR. HARGRAVES expressed mixed feelings. He informed the committee
that he has worked as a superintendent since 1974 in Alaska.
During that time, he never had any problem and of all the problems
in school districts, principals were never the problem. He was
concerned that a lot of dirty laundry was thrown out before the
public about the Mat-Su community and school district. He regrets
this because last week he wrote a substantial property tax check to
the Mat-Su community. If the situation is as dysfunctional as it
has been described, policies need to be made and enforced.
Number 2360
MR. HARGRAVES commented that had Representative Ogan visited a
school in his district he would have been welcomed with open arms.
"Had any of you come as a campaigner to the school district, you
would have been welcomed and put in a civics class, a government
class, and let speak to the kids, but the policy would have been
that anyone else could have come. So, if the Democrat came, the
Republican could come in. And I suppose that would open it up as
a public forum, at that point, so some other pedigrees could come
in. Some unknowns."
Number 2418
MR. HARGRAVES indicated that he may start reviewing the elected
officials and the people running the school in the Mat-Su Valley.
He noted that he has grandchildren in the Mat-Su Borough School
District and that his wife has visited one of the principals
several times. His wife has participated in the school and has
commented about the fine principal of this school. Mr. Hargraves
found it interesting to now hear his name mentioned today. Mr.
Hargraves stated, "I don't know what's happened up there, but it
almost looks dysfunctional to the point that I'd like to get a hold
of those policies and shake them up, and then put somebody in
charge of administering them ..." [TESTIMONY INTERRUPTED BY TAPE
CHANGE]
[Per the tape log notes Mr. Hargraves asked the following: What
happens if you take these principals out of PERA?]
TAPE 99-34, SIDE A
Number 0001
MR. HARGRAVES continued, "...[What happens to] Mt. Edgecumbe?
What happens to the principals at the vocational technical schools?
These principals are being, they are part of a union, a statewide
union, and is it the public employees association? ... I just asked
that question because I think that you've got other equivalents in
state government that are represented by unions. These principals
have this little meet and confer type of thing locally. They have
no statewide organization. When you hear these executive directors
say, 'I'm executive director of elementary principals.', they're
not talking in terms of a union group. They're not the goons that
come in and strong-arm situations, in a strike situation or set
principals up to strike. For the most part, you could say that
they're volunteers working with that statewide organization
[indisc.] their retirement, and taking care of that group in that
way. So, Mr. Chairman, members of the committee, I will simply say
there is a lack of a problem. The problem that exists is not
elegant enough to use the broad brush from Eagle River to Soldotna
to North Pole and to Fairbanks. Let those folks in the Mat-Su iron
this out. ... The concern about the present action that might
awaken-here is a concern I have; these principals have not been the
active union, again strong-arm kinds of things. Let me tell you
how, not one of the five biggest schools, but, perhaps, the sixth
biggest in the state, where I was superintendent. The principals
would come in and say, 'We'd like to have this, this and this.',
and I'd say, 'Well, you can have this, but you can't have that. Go
back and figure out another way to approach this.' Then they would
come back and they'd say, 'Oh, here's what we'd like and, by the
way, we'd like to invite you and the board to dinner.', and at that
dinner, they'd buy dinner, and we'd meet and confer. That settled
it. Those principals were not overly paid. They didn't have
tremendous rights, and keep one other thing in mind. That comment
that this principal grieved, and won the grievance, if that right
had not been in the negotiated agreement, it's my belief, that
board policies would have put that person through the grievance
process where they may have prevailed. The policies of a district
usually include a grievance process. That person, then, could have
still taken it to the courts, and we know that wrongfully dealt
personnel, in any school district or any other agency, can take
things to court and win there. So, you don't stop that principal
from winning his case by taking the right for collective bargaining
away from him."
Number 0252
REPRESENTATIVE OGAN welcomed Mr. Hargraves' involvement in helping
straighten out some of the problems in the Mat-Su Valley.
Representative Ogan concurred that someone needs to be in charge of
administrating. He stated an administrator cannot discipline if
his hands are tied. He wondered, "If you can't give a performance
evaluation, or other disciplinary things, without the kind of
incidence we're hearing about, don't you think it's an almost
impossible situation for an administrator?"
Number 0304
MR. HARGRAVES said, "When I gave a performance evaluation it
stuck, but I'm sitting here thinking about the possibility that a
principal got an evaluation if the information laundried out before
us today is correct. It sounds like that he was, the appearance
was that he was being punished, being rated down in the evaluation
because he had had an active hand in some other thing. ... Here's
the concern I have when I see somebody win a grievance case; did
they maybe really have a grievance. I think I was known as a
superintendent of somebody that never lost a grievance, but I know
full well that if I'd done wrong, ... There could have been things
I could have done that would have justified the employee of
prevailing."
REPRESENTATIVE OGAN asked if the school board should set that
policy and reign in the superintendent if he is being arbitrary,
capricious or spiteful.
MR. HARGRAVES agreed. He believed that every school district "of
any sophistication" in the state has those policies in place. If
a school district does not have such policies he offered to write
those policies.
Number 0404
REPRESENTATIVE OGAN wondered about a situation in which a principal
is in violation of school district policy, and the superintendent
attempts to remedy the situation, but operates under a
"no-confidence vote." He stated, "That's the school board's job,
not the principal's union."
MR. HARGRAVES agreed. He stated, "I think that principals need to
think twice when they do that kind of thing. In this instance,
they may have felt that they had grounds to do it." He recollected
that no-confidence votes have only happened maybe twice, including
this one.
REPRESENTATIVE SANDERS took exception to the statement regarding
personal union goons in Alaska which he did not believe to be a
true characterization.
MR. HARGRAVES clarified the intent was not to apply the term toward
anybody he knows working in unions.
Number 0550
VICE-CHAIR HALCRO mentioned an e-mail included in the bill packet
written by Malcolm Fleming referring to Ed Gilley, a former Adak
superintendent. Mr. Fleming's letter brought up an interesting
question about "if you give individuals, whether principals or
whoever else, to negotiate with the board, they might cut a
favorable deal with one and not the other, instead of bargaining
collectively as a group." He asked Mr. Hargraves to address that
concern which Vice-Chairman Halcro felt was a valid concern.
MR. HARGRAVES noted that the superintendent mentioned in the e-mail
lost his certification before the Professional Teaching Practices
Commission (PTPC). He noted that except for the small group of
large school districts up and down the rail belt, negotiations do
not occur as one would think; they meet and confer. Mr. Hargraves
could not imagine Anchorage wanting to deal with 119 principals
individually. That would become unwieldy. Therefore, collective
bargaining is a matter of convenience and provides an orderly
process. He reiterated that those principals are not affiliated
with any statewide group, but this legislation may precipitate
those principals becoming a member of a statewide group which would
be regrettable.
Number 0686
JOHN CYR, President, NEA-Alaska, came forward to testify on HB 129.
He informed the committee that NEA-Alaska (NEA-AK) represents
approximately 11,000 teachers, classroom aides, custodians and
other educational support personnel and most importantly, NEA-AK
represents 130,000 children. He pointed out that NEA-AK does not
represent any principals. He viewed the role of a principal as an
instructional leader, a manager, or "whether they should be what
amounts to a political appointee." He noted that he is from the
Mat-Su Valley and spent the majority of his educational career
there. He felt the Mat-Su School District has been one of the
bright spots in education around Alaska, but was not sure that
remains true today. The problems are not solely with the
principals' association. He commented that the principals'
association should be referred to as such because, to his
knowledge, they are not affiliated with any organized union. He
stressed that NEA-AK or the local Mat-Su affiliate do not represent
nor wish to represent the principals there.
Number 0785
MR. CYR commented that there have been on-going negotiations in the
Mat-Su Valley with the Teachers' Association which have not been
fruitful. Furthermore the Classified Association is also at the
table, and that is not working out well. The superintendent's
contract has not been renewed. Such a situation would be a
challenge for even Mr. Hargraves with all of his expertise. There
are many things in the Mat-Su Valley that need to be fixed.
MR. CYR informed the committee that the substance of an evaluation
cannot be grieved, only the process can be grieved. If the process
has been mishandled, then it can be grieved. He said, "I think
it's interesting to note that the principal in this case won.
Clearly, his supervisor didn't follow the process and that's where
this whole thing breaks down." He sympathized with Representative
Ogan and said, "I taught in Wasilla High. I mean, I think it's no
secret that some of the elected representatives in the Mat-Su
Valley and myself, personally, and at some level organizationally
have had some problems, but those same folks come into my classroom
every year and they make presentations. They were invited in." He
stressed policy clearly allows for teachers to do that, and it is
only fair to open up that kind of forum for students to listen to
those points of view. Mr. Cyr said that he was unsure as to what
happened in this case. If a principal violates school board
policy, it is no different than if a teacher violates school board
policy or anyone else. "They should be disciplined. Through the
fact that they weren't, either means, they didn't violate the
policy or that there is a level of dysfunctionality there that runs
through the system that needs to be addressed."
MR. CYR commented that he was a little uncomfortable discussing a
district and it's problems. He indicated the need to look at what
we want our school administrators to be. Is the desire to have the
classic iron-handed managers or team leaders? To his knowledge,
there is no recent research which advocates running a school with
a "top-down model where you lay out those dictates and everybody
stands in lines and salutes." Schools are team processes where
everyone gets together through the process to make the school a
better place. He emphasized that no one needs protection more in
that arena than principals who are on the front line getting
bombarded from all sides. Therefore, taking away the collective
bargaining agreement from principals places them in a terrible no
man's land where he did not believe anyone would want to be. A
principal's job is difficult enough with the protection they have,
and without it, he asked, "Why would you do that?" Mr. Cyr
believed that some unintended consequences would occur with HB 129
which would be more far-reaching than what is trying to be fixed.
He said, "I think in this instance, Representative Ogan, I probably
do agree. There are some problems in the Mat-Su School District,
but they need to be solved at home, and they need to be solved by
all of us who are concerned, sitting down at the table and trying
to work through it. Not at this level."
Number 1061
VIVIAN DAILEY, President, Fairbanks Principals Association;
Principal, North Pole High School, testified next via
teleconference from Fairbanks in opposition to HB 129. She read
the following testimony:
I appreciate this opportunity to speak to a proposed bill
that could have a serious, negative impact on the
students of the state of Alaska. Fairbanks Principals
Association strongly opposes HB 129 which would deny
principals the right to collectively bargain. Collective
bargaining in the Fairbanks-Northstar Borough School
District is not broken and does not need fixing.
Principals do support change and, in fact, are the
leaders of change in our schools. We strongly support HB
36 and the Quality Schools Initiative and Alaska state
standards. The public is in our public schools through
our publicly-elected school board who make policies which
principals enforce. Once again, I would encourage you,
as members of the committee, to oppose this particular
bill of HB 129, and recognize the value that principals
have, and the right that they have as public employees to
collectively bargain.
Number 1159
REPRESENTATIVE OGAN cautioned everyone against getting caught up in
an incident or series of incidents in the Mat-Su Borough School
District. He said it is easy to do that and get distracted from a
decision on policy. Representative Ogan noted that he could site
more incidents, but did not because that is not what he wanted to
focus on. He referred to the numerous comments that top-down
leadership is not a good thing. The people, the voters, are on
top and need to be respected. The voters elect the school board
and therefore, the voters need to be on top and establish the
policy, not the other way around. Representative Ogan stated that
HB 129 empowers the voters through their representatives to
establish and carry out the policy. He suggested that this is not
an isolated problem because other states have done this; the same
states who are on the cutting-edge of making major positive changes
to education. He sympathized with the principals' desire not to
lose this benefit. In conclusion, Representative Ogan stated this
is not about labor, it is about management, and whether or not
management should collectively bargain.
Number 1267
VICE-CHAIR HALCRO closed the public testimony on HB 129. There
being no comments from the committee, Vice-Chair Halcro announced
that HB 129 would be held per Chairman Rokeberg's request.
ADJOURNMENT
Number 1283
VICE-CHAIRMAN HALCRO adjourned the House Labor and Commerce
Standing Committee at 5:16 p.m.
| Document Name | Date/Time | Subjects |
|---|