| SCHOOL DISTRICT OF SEWARD EDUCATION | | | CASE NO. 358 |
| ASSOCIATION, An Unincorporated | | | |
| Association, | | | |
| | | ||
| Petitioner, | | | |
| | | ||
| V. | | | OPINION AND ORDER |
| | | ||
| THE SCHOOL DISTRICT OF SEWARD, IN THE | | | |
| COUNTY OF SEWARD, IN THE STATE OF | | | |
| NEBRASKA, A Political Subdivision, | | | |
| | | ||
| Respondent. | | |
Before: Kratz, Wall, and Orr JJ.
WALL, J.:
This matter comes on for determination of the industrial dispute between the parties arising from the refusal of Respondent to bargain over deleting payment for sixth period assignments. The Commission has jurisdiction of the parties and of the subject matter.
The facts are substantially undisputed. Since the 1962-63 school year it has been Respondent's policy to make five period assignments for most of the senior high staff and to pay $800.00 per year extra to those teachers carrying a six period assignment load. Since the 1970-1971 school year the provision has been negotiated and included in the contracts between the parties. (PX5 and Par. V, PX6).
Respondent alleges that the matter is solely a matter of educational policy and not subject to negotiation. Petitioner alleges that the matter is one of fundamental concern to it's members financial concern and is a mandatory subject for bargaining even though educational policy or management prerogative may also be influenced.
The law is well settled in Nebraska with regard to primary and secondary educators. In Metropolitan Tech. Community College Ed. As8n v. Metropolitan Tech. , etc. , 203 Neb. 832, 281 N. W. 2d 201, 206 (1979) the Supreme Court said: "A matter which is of fundamental, basic, or essential concern to an employee's financial and personal concem may be considered as involving working conditions and is mandatorily bargainable even though there may be some minor influence on educational policy or management prerogative. However, those matters which involve foundational value judgments, which strike at the very heart of the educational philosophy of the particular institution, are management prerogatives and are not a proper subject for negotiation even though such decisions may have some impact on working conditions.However, the impact of whatever decision management may make in this or any other case on the economic welfare of employees is
a proper subject of mandatory bargaining."
It is clear from the evidence here that the six period assignment change by Respondent was not based on a change in educational philosophy, but was instead based solely on a desire to save money and hold down or reduce the budget for the coming year.
We find the matter of elimination of extra compensation for six period assignments to be a mandatory subject for bargaining.
ORDERED that the parties are directed to return to the bargaining table and negotiate the matter of extra compensation for six period assignments as well as any other unresolved items as listed in PX7.
Filed May 5, 1980.
_______________________________