Resolving the conflict: Halstead-Bentley teacher contract negotiations inching forward

Stuck. It’s not where anyone wants to be, but it is where negotiations on the 2007-08 teacher contract in USD 440, Halstead-Bentley, have been for months.

Initially the board of education and teacher representatives reached an impasse of over the amount of an increase to the salary schedule — but when the two sides went into mediation meetings, the issue changed.

“We are currently in agreement with a 3.62 percent increase,” said teacher negotiations team member Ron Chronister. “The issue is early retirement.”

The two sides participated in a fact-finding hearing at the end of April.

They are now in a waiting mode — waiting for a report from the fact finder. When that report is received by both the teachers and Board of Education, both sides are required by law to have at least on negotiating session to try and resolve the matter.

What they are wrangling over, it seems, is years of service and when a teacher can qualify for early retirement benefits.

The benefit is how much of their salary, according to where they are on the salary schedule, the can receive as a sort of pension payment for five years after retirement.

“The dispute is on early retirement language in our negotiated agreement,” Chronister said. “We currently have an early retirement provision that allows teachers who have been in the district to request and receive a portion of their final salary to be paid over the next five years. The amount depends on how long they have been in the district.”

Currently a teacher who has been in the district for 10 years and has five years in another KPERs qualifying position, or 15 years in USD 440, can request 22.5 percent of the salary each year for five years. With 20 years in the district and five years in a KPERs qualifying position, or 25 years in Halstead-Bentley schools, a teacher qualifies for payments equalling 25 percent of the final salary.

The Board of Education is seeking to change the number of years of service for qualifying service — removing the qualifying service from outside the district and requiring teachers to have 25 years of service for the 22.5 percent payments and 35 years of service for the 25 percent payments.

According to what was said during the fact finding hearing, the district is seeking the change because it creates a financial burden — and it encourages teachers to leave the district early.

Keeping qualified teachers is a concern because of No Child Left Behind legislation.

Chronister says he understands the board position, but believes the early retirement plan is what helps keep the district competitive with districts in Wichita and Newton when trying to recruit experienced teachers.

“We know from our own experience in this district having an early retirement provision has attracted teachers, and teachers have stayed in the district because of the early retirement,” Chronister said. “It is one of the best things that we have to make us competitive with districts around us within driving distance.”

The teachers have put a counter offer on the table — which would basically add five years of in-district service to the current plan but preserve the provision of allowing for teachers to get credit for KPERs qualifying work outside of the district.

He said the teachers believe preserving the five-year provision is key to recruiting experienced teachers to the district.

“With no qualifying outside of the district, if I teach for five years in Wichita I come here at 0,” Chronister said. “It’s a 10 year difference between what the board wants and what the teachers want to settle for.”

Chronister said the teachers also presented evidence at the fact finding hearing that having the plan as it is saves the district money — rather than creating a financial burden.

Both sides will wait to see what is in the fact finder’s report, and then schedule the mandated negotiation session.

“The report is nonbinding,” Chronister said. Something important to remember is what is on the table — we are agreeing on the amount of money.”

It took time to get to an agreement on the money issue — initially in negotiations the board offered a 2.5 percent increase, and did not budge off of that number until after an impasse had been declared and the two sides went to mediation.

During mediation the increase was agreed on at more than 3.6 percent by both sides.

What both sides will agree to on the retirement issue remains to be seen.

“Negotiations are open to the public,” Chronister said. “At that point in time we will try and resolve the dispute. If it is not possible to resolve the dispute the law sets out what is acceptable from that point on.”