Education

Minnesota To Force Districts To Meet Contract Deadline or Lose Aid

By Ann Bradley — June 21, 1989 3 min read
  • Save to favorites
  • Print

A new Minnesota law gives school boards and teachers’ unions a compelling reason to conclude their contract negotiations promptly: If they fail to reach agreements by a specified date, their districts will lose state aid.

The new law, thought to be the first of its kind in the nation, was added as an amendment to an education measure passed by lawmakers last month.

Beginning in the next school year, districts will lose $25 per pupil if negotiations extend beyond Jan. 15. The state will distribute the money among districts that meet the deadline.

“We’ve had a significant number of districts that have really been dragging their feet in getting contracts settled,” said Senator Steven Morse, the measure’s sponsor. “We’ve seen contracts going a year without being settled.”

Senator Morse, a former school-board member, said he “wanted to provide a powerful incentive” for districts to speed up the negotiating process.

Teacher contracts in Minnesota expire in July of every odd-numbered year, and cannot be reopened. Because the state adopts two-year budgets in the same years, Mr. Morse explained, some local unions and school boards have stalled on contract negotiations in the hope that the legislature would appropriate more money for education during the second year of the biennium.

When the legislature has done so, the effect has been “devastating” for contract negotiations, said Bob Meeks, the Minnesota School Boards Association’s associate director for legislative services.

The new provision, which was8added by Mr. Morse shortly before the omnibus education bill won final legislative approval, took the state’s education community by surprise.

Representatives of state and national education groups differed in their assessments of its impact.

Both Mr. Meeks and Thomas A. Shannon, executive director of the National School Boards Association, said students would suffer the most if their districts did not receive their full share of state aid.

Mr. Shannon described the penalty as an unwelcome intrusion into labor-management relations that would never be tolerated in private business.

Mr. Meeks added that districts that have gone to arbitration in labor disputes may be unfairly penalized if the process extends beyond Jan. 15.

James P. McDermott, a business agent for the Minnesota Federation of Teachers, said the law could “wind up in the courts” because it could be construed as denying students equal education opportunity.

“It has yet to be tested as to its impact, legality, or constitutionality,” Mr. McDermott said. “Our basic, visceral reaction is, let’s wait and see.”

But Gene Mammenga, a lobbyist for the Minnesota Education Association, said teachers in his union welcomed an incentive to reach agreements--and potential salary increases--more quickly.

“Wouldn’t you hate to be a board member and explain to the public why 25 bucks of your money is going to go down the road to someone else?” he asked.

Mr. Mammenga predicted the penalty would hurt rural districts more than urban systems, since the former have traditionally taken4longer to settle contracts.

“I think they may be somewhat surprised about who suffers the penalty in this,” he said.

Jewell Gould, director of research for the American Federation of Teachers, said the law was the latest in a series of steps that states have taken toward greater control over the collective-bargaining process.

He suggested that either side could use the threat of the penalty to its advantage.

“Teachers will know that the closer they get to that day, if [the contract is] not resolved, it’s going to cost the employer a percent,” he said. “They can say, ‘Give me that percent.’ Or the employer can say, ‘Tomorrow the 7 percent deal will be 6 percent.”’

Mr. Meeks said the state school-boards association had advised its members to “settle by Jan. 15 if at all possible.” Bargaining has already begun in many districts, he noted.

A version of this article appeared in the June 21, 1989 edition of Education Week as Minnesota To Force Districts To Meet Contract Deadline or Lose Aid

Events

Jobs Virtual Career Fair for Teachers and K-12 Staff
Find teaching jobs and other jobs in K-12 education at the EdWeek Top School Jobs virtual career fair.
Ed-Tech Policy Webinar Artificial Intelligence in Practice: Building a Roadmap for AI Use in Schools
AI in education: game-changer or classroom chaos? Join our webinar & learn how to navigate this evolving tech responsibly.
Education Webinar Developing and Executing Impactful Research Campaigns to Fuel Your Ed Marketing Strategy 
Develop impactful research campaigns to fuel your marketing. Join the EdWeek Research Center for a webinar with actionable take-aways for companies who sell to K-12 districts.

EdWeek Top School Jobs

Teacher Jobs
Search over ten thousand teaching jobs nationwide — elementary, middle, high school and more.
View Jobs
Principal Jobs
Find hundreds of jobs for principals, assistant principals, and other school leadership roles.
View Jobs
Administrator Jobs
Over a thousand district-level jobs: superintendents, directors, more.
View Jobs
Support Staff Jobs
Search thousands of jobs, from paraprofessionals to counselors and more.
View Jobs

Read Next

Education Briefly Stated: March 13, 2024
Here's a look at some recent Education Week articles you may have missed.
9 min read
Education Briefly Stated: February 21, 2024
Here's a look at some recent Education Week articles you may have missed.
8 min read
Education Briefly Stated: February 7, 2024
Here's a look at some recent Education Week articles you may have missed.
8 min read
Education Briefly Stated: January 31, 2024
Here's a look at some recent Education Week articles you may have missed.
9 min read