HB 591 Script & Talking Points

HB 591 Script & Talking Points

The personal stories you can tell about what we have been through here in Springfield without binding arbitration and the impact it has had on the education of our students need to be heard. If you prefer, a script has been provided below.

Script:

“My name is ______________ and I teach/work in __________. I am urging you to support HB 591 and report this bill out favorably from the Public Service Committee. Binding arbitration would provide an option and an incentive for good faith bargaining. Thank you.”

Talking Points

Choose two or three reasons you feel most comfortable with and share them with your legislators or add other points from our own local's bargaining history.

HB 591: An Act Relative to the Resolution of School Labor Disputes

Summary:

The absence of a legal mechanism for closure in teacher collective bargaining has been a serious problem for many years. Bargaining crises that result in a breakdown in negotiations are due primarily to the lack of finality in the bargaining process. Additionally, under current law, after the parties have exhausted mediation and fact-finding, the school committee is able to unilaterally implement its final offer. The availability of binding arbitration would prevent this result.

This bill would introduce finality in school bargaining. Once mediation and fact-finding procedures (unless waived) have been exhausted, either party to a school contract dispute could petition for a binding arbitration resolution. Although the school committee would be obligated to support the arbitrator's decision, any monetary features of the decision would be subject to the approval of the local legislative body. If the local legislative body rejects the funding request, the issues in dispute would revert to the parties for further bargaining.

Sponsors:

Sen. Gale Candaras

Sen. Mark Montigny

Sen. Michael Morrissey*

Rep. John Binienda

Rep. Antonio Cabral

Rep. Thomas Calter

Rep. Peter Kocot

Rep. Angelo Puppolo Jr.

Rep. Michael Rush

Rep. William Straus

Rep. Benjamin Swan

Rep. Martin J. Walsh*

*Indicates Lead Sponsors

Reasons for Passage of HB 591:

20 States Have Binding Arbitration

Binding arbitration in the public sector is not a new concept as twenty (20) states have some kind of binding arbitration for public employees. Four (4) states and the District of Columbia have passed laws extending that right to teachers. They include Illinois, New Mexico, and the neighboring states of Connecticut and Rhode Island.

Rational Way to Solve Disputes

Public employees, including teachers, are prohibited from striking even though private sector employees possess this right. Most important, teachers do not want to strike but rather seek a rational way to resolve contract disputes through third party arbitration.

Springfield/Quincy Examples Demonstrate Need for Binding Arbitration

Given the appalling collective bargaining tactics of the Finance Control Board in Springfield and the recent strike in Quincy, a viable option should be made available to help resolve school contract disputes where the parties have been unable to reach agreement.

Collective Bargaining Law Lacks “Finality”

The need to reach “finality” is just as important in a bargaining dispute as in litigation. Courts routinely declare the rights of litigating parties, the declaration is binding, and the dispute ends. This bill brings a similar measure of finality to the bargaining process in the school setting.

Provides Incentive to Settle Disputes

Important, too, when opposing parties understand that an impartial arbitrator has been requested to resolve a dispute, one or both parties become more focused in their demands and, oftentimes, disputes “settle out” before an award is issued. In brief, binding arbitration would provide an option and an incentive for good faith bargaining. This may help create a climate such that binding arbitration would be unnecessary as both parties would “roll up their sleeves” and work it out.