Changes to Interest Arbitration Statute for School Districts
2009-07/09 Dean R. Dietrich

As you know, Governor Doyle has signed the Budget Bill and its provisions take effect at various times and stages.  One of the most important aspects of the Budget Bill for school districts are the changes to Section 111.70 of the Wisconsin Statutes, the Municipal Employment Relations Act.  This memorandum summarizes the changes to the collective bargaining law for school districts including a discussion of the elimination of the qualified economic offer provisions, changes to the factors that are used by an interest arbitrator in proceedings involving school districts, and the new provisions allowing teacher bargaining units to combine with support staff bargaining units in school districts. 

Click here for a copy of Section 111.70 showing the changes that have been made as a result of the Budget Bill.  These changes may be summarized as follows:

• The provisions in Section 111.70 that provided for a qualified economic offer being given by a school district to avoid proceeding to interest arbitration have been eliminated.  This means that, effective with the 2009-2011 contract negotiations, a school district bargaining unit (including teacher associations) may proceed to interest arbitration over disputes with the school district on the provisions of a successor Labor Agreement;

• If a school district proceeds to interest arbitration with the teacher association or the support staff association, the interest arbitrator is not required (or allowed) to consider the “greatest weight” factor involving statutes that limit the revenue received by the local government unit or the “greater weight” factor which requires consideration of local economic conditions as part of the arbitrator decision.  An interest arbitration proceeding involving a school district bargaining unit will be subject to the various “other factors” that are listed in Section 111.70(4)(cm)(7r) of the statutes;

• A school district and a school district bargaining unit (teacher association or support staff association) may enter into an agreement for a four-year labor agreement instead of the limitation of a three-year labor agreement.  If the school district proceeds to interest arbitration with one of its bargaining units, the parties will be required to submit a final offer covering two years unless the parties mutually agree to submit a final offer covering more or less than two years; and

• A new provision has been added to the statute that allows school district bargaining units to combine so a professional bargaining unit and a support staff (nonprofessional) bargaining unit are merged together.  This takes place after a contract has expired and a vote is scheduled between the two bargaining units. 

The specific language changes are identified in the attached document.  The elimination of statutory language regarding the qualified economic offer process is effective immediately and binding upon any petition for arbitration involving the 2009-2011 contract negotiations with a local teacher association.  The elimination of the arbitrator’s requirement to consider the “greatest weight” factor and the “greater weight” factor is also effective for any petition for arbitration filed for the 2009-2011 contract negotiations.  The ability to agree to a four-year labor agreement also commences with the 2009-2011 negotiations; school districts can therefore agree to a one-year, two-year, three-year, or four-year term during the current negotiations. 

The procedure that will be followed for a teacher bargaining unit to combine with a support staff bargaining unit is not clear.  We anticipate that the Wisconsin Employment Relations Commission (WERC) will issue administrative regulations on how this new statutory language will be implemented.  It is not clear whether two bargaining units may merge immediately or whether it must wait until the 2009-2011 (or longer) Labor Agreement has expired.  It is also not clear whether either bargaining unit could initiate the merger election process.  Apparently, however, a school district may not voluntarily agree to the merger of bargaining units without the conduct of a secret ballot election by the WERC. 

Negotiations for the 2009-2011 (or longer) Agreements with teacher and support staff associations will certainly be interesting.  Commentators, including Wisconsin Education Association Council representatives, have suggested that bargaining will be “innovative.”  It is also unclear how interest arbitrators will interpret the new statutory language which does not require them to consider the “greatest weight” and “greater weight” factors.  Some have suggested that local economic conditions will not be a factor whatsoever in interest arbitration proceedings with school district bargaining units.  It is difficult to imagine an interest arbitrator ignoring local economic conditions and the current economic climate when considering wage adjustments sought by the teacher association or the support staff association. 

School districts will now be subjected to the use of comparative data, CPI information, and other traditional factors when considering wage and fringe benefit offers to school district employees.  Ruder Ware has extensive experience in representing school districts in all aspects of traditional collective bargaining.    Please contact an attorney within the Employment, Labor & Benefits group of Ruder Ware with any questions you may have.

© 2009 Ruder Ware, L.L.S.C. Accurate reproduction with acknowledgment granted. All rights reserved.
This document provides information of a general nature regarding legislative or other legal developments. None of the information contained herein is intended as legal advice or opinion relative to specific matters, facts, situations, or issues, and additional facts and information or future developments may affect the subjects addressed.