Opinion ID: 901992
Heading Depth: 1
Heading Rank: 4

Heading: Terms of the District's Last Offer

Text: [¶ 9.] Both the 2005-06 negotiated agreement and the 2006-07 implemented last offer recite that the District recognizes the Association[ ] as the exclusive representative for the purpose of negotiations under SDCL 3-18 for all certified teaching personnel and further agrees not to negotiate with any other teacher or teacher organization for the duration of this agreement. Negotiations for the 2006-07 agreement took place during the spring and summer of 2006. The District had been facing financial problems and was attempting to tie increases in teachers' salaries to the District's annual available funding. Consequently, the 2006-07 negotiations involved a new salary schedule with significant changes from the 2005-06 salary schedule. [¶ 10.] The salary schedule in the 2005-06 agreement provided a $25,000 base salary with annual incremental increases based on years of service and education. It was replaced in the District's last offer for 2006-07 with an entirely new formula. The 2006-07 salary schedule increased the base salary to $27,000 and tied annual increases to (1) teachers' degrees and (2) a pool of money referred to as the Average Daily Membership (ADM) Advancement Pool. The amount of money in the ADM Advancement Pool determined the amount of increase teachers would receive for the 2006-07 school year. The primary factor in setting the amount of money available in the pool was based on the projected 2006-07 per student state allocation minus the prior year's allocation. For 2006-07, the pool amount was $165,000. The District then divided the pool pro-rata by the percentage of teachers with master's (47%) and bachelor's (53%) degrees. This calculation resulted in an increase of $1,588 for a teacher with a master's degree and an increase of $1,003 for a teacher with a bachelor's degree. [¶ 11.] Under the 2006-07 salary schedule, the returning teachers retained their 2005-06 increment for initial placement on the new salary schedule. [1] Thus, all returning teachers realized an increase in salary under the new schedule. The negotiations also involved a separate salary schedule provision, Article X, that established salaries for 2006-07 new hires. Article X set the base salary for new hires at $27,000 with adjustments for educational degrees and prior years of teaching. [2] [¶ 12.] It appears from the written rationale as part of the negotiations that some discussion had been directed at the salary inequities between existing teachers and new hires. The District wrote: the increment schedule has been adjusted so that all existing employees, assuming the District's proposed salary schedule is applied, will have salaries greater than the new hires with like years of experience and credits. The record does not, however, reflect any discussion concerning the new salary schedule's effect on new teachers hired during negotiations and prior to implementing the last offer. School administrators testified that it was not until the District began to adjust salaries in line with the new salary schedule that it realized some of the new hires would receive less pay. Both parties agree that this was a unique situation they had not encountered before and one that neither party anticipated. The Association makes no allegation of bad faith by the District.