Meeting Fails to Bring Teachers, District Closer : Education: A two-hour session with a mediator yields no progress. Both sides continue to press legal actions.

A private, two-hour meeting before a state mediator Thursday failed to bring the Los Angeles school district and teachers union negotiators closer to an agreement, as both sides fired more legal salvos in an increasingly contentious labor dispute.

The session came one week after a Los Angeles Superior Court judge ruled that the district and union must wage their legal battles before a state labor relations agency that is legally empowered to enforce labor laws applying to school districts.

The meeting was a last attempt to settle an argument in which both sides accuse each other of bad-faith bargaining. After the session, Gary Gallery, an administrative law judge for the Public Employment Relations Board, said the union and district agreed to continue contract negotiations, but are headed to court Jan. 19 over the issue of whether labor codes have been broken.

Jesus E. Quinonez, an attorney representing the union, described the meeting as “a very open discussion. . . . I sensed that at this point both sides are very interested in not having to litigate until the very end” and that a “reluctantly acceptable” agreement can be reached.

United Teachers-Los Angeles filed papers in Sacramento on Thursday seeking another court order through the state labor board to halt a 12% teacher salary cut that was imposed by the district Oct. 2 and to stop a more restrictive health benefits package from taking effect on Jan. 1.

The request is similar to the one filed last month in Los Angeles Superior Court, where a judge temporarily halted the cuts but later reversed his decision and ruled that the state labor agency, not the courts, has first jurisdiction.

The state agency has already issued a bad-faith bargaining complaint against the district. The union alleged that the district violated codes included in the Educational Employment Relations Act by imposing the salary reductions while negotiations were continuing and for refusing to turn over requested information.

Attorneys with the state agency will review the request for a restraining order and make a recommendation to the five-member board that governs it by Thursday. The board can reject the request or accept all or parts of it.

If the panel agrees that there is “reasonable cause” to believe that the district engaged in bad-faith bargaining, agency attorneys can seek a temporary restraining order on behalf of the union in Los Angeles Superior Court.

The union argued that the salary and benefit cuts will together force many teachers “to face the prospect of being unable to afford their existing housing. Many who are sole providers for their families will be unable to meet family needs and will be forced to forgo needed medical care because of the increased costs,” according to legal documents.

At the same time, the district filed its own allegations of unfair labor practices against the union, alleging that it failed to seriously bargain by not making any concrete salary proposals as a counteroffer. The state agency has not yet ruled whether that complaint will become part of the arguments that will be heard on Jan. 19.

The legal maneuvering came as union representatives throughout the district were conducting lunch-hour and after-school seminars with teachers, laying out the reasons the union is urging them to go on strike Feb. 22 rather than accept the district’s so-called last and best contract offer. The results of the voting will be announced Thursday.

At an emotional meeting and rally Wednesday night, attended by more than 600 union representatives from schools throughout the district, union President Helen Bernstein said the district presented a “zero” offer because “they don’t think we are serious about going out.”

Among other issues, the union has been fighting for a guarantee that teacher salaries will not be cut again next year. In the last offer, the district promised not to cut salaries only if state funding stays at current levels.

The union had been pushing to present a broad package of money-saving incentives and agreements with the district on restructuring and budget issues in their new offer.

The school board, however, has refused to make any agreement with the teachers union that affects other employees or school district restructuring efforts.