State Labor Agency Joins Dispute on Teacher Pay

In another twist in a high-stakes case that could push the Los Angeles school district into insolvency, a state labor relations agency contends it has the primary authority to determine the legality of teacher pay cuts.

The state Public Employment Relations Board on Wednesday was granted court permission to argue its case in a critical hearing next week before Judge Stephen E. O’Neil.

The board opposes O’Neil’s intervention in the pay dispute, which temporarily halted the salary reductions from taking effect. The board, which is investigating unfair labor practice charges against the district, contends that the move has interfered with the collective bargaining process.

In a hearing that has tremendous ramifications for the financial solvency of the mammoth district, O’Neil will decide next Wednesday whether to permanently stop pay cuts the district imposed to help make up for an unprecedented $400-million budget shortfall.

By allowing the state agency to become a party in the case, O’Neil will be “as fully informed on the issue as possible,” said Thomas J. Allen, the agency’s regional attorney.

The teachers union sought the temporary restraining order as a last-ditch effort to forestall the Nov. 6 pay cuts. The district lost an appeal of the temporary order this week and must issue $20 million in supplemental checks by Nov. 24.

The agency’s position is in agreement with the district’s contention that the court is prematurely injecting itself into contract negotiations. By becoming an official party to the case, the state employment board has the right to appeal O’Neil’s decision to the state appellate court.

“We are not saying what (the district) did was legal,” Allen said. “We are saying we should decide first.”

The teachers union did not oppose the state agency’s move to join the case. “We want to protect our good relations with PERB,” said UTLA attorney Lawrence Trygstad. “By not objecting we are in no way conceding that PERB has exclusive jurisdiction on this issue.”

Gordon Krishcher, an attorney with O’Melveny & Myers who represents the district, said: “I don’t think it can hurt” the district’s case.

The state agency, which has authority to interpret labor laws in public schools, has already issued an unfair labor practices complaint against the district for unilaterally imposing the salary reduction while bargaining was still taking place. A hearing before an administrative law judge is scheduled for Dec. 4.

That case also has the potential to reverse the salary cuts, although it would likely take months to work through the legal process. On the other hand, the Superior Court actions could quickly propel the district into insolvency if the temporary order is not lifted.

The legal action on Wednesday sets the stage for next week’s hearing in which the union and school district and the state public employment board will argue whether a provision in the state education code supersedes state laws regulating collective bargaining between school districts and public school unions.

O’Neil agreed on Nov. 5 with the union, which contended that the state education code prevents the school district from changing the salary schedule of credentialed employees after the July 1 start of the school year.