STATE OF MAINE MAINE LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
Case No. 77-36
_______________________________
)
SANFORD TEACHERS ASSOCIATION )
of the Town of Sanford, County )
of York, and State of Maine, )
)
Complainant )
)
v. )
)
SANFORD SCHOOL COMMITTEE )
of the Town of Sanford, )
County of York and ) DECISION AND ORDER
State of Maine, )
)
and )
)
CHARLES ACKERMAN, )
Labor Consultant for the )
Sanford School Committee )
)
Respondents )
_______________________________)
This case comes to the Maine Labor Relations Board by way of a prohibited prac-
tice complaint dated May 3, 1977 and filed on May 5, 1977, by Shirley R. Bissell,
Director, UniServ District #1, MTA/NEA. The response to the aforesaid complaint was
dated May 16, 1977, and filed on May 17, 1977, by Charles Ackerman, Labor Consultant
for the Sanford School Committee. A pre-hearing conference was held in this matter
on Friday, June 17, 1977, at 2:00 p.m. in Alfred, Maine with Alternate Chairman
Donald W. Webber presiding. As a result of the pre-hearing conference, a Pre-Hearing
Conference Memorandum and Order was issued by Mr. Webber, the contents of which are
incorporated herein by reference. A hearing was held on Thursday, July 28, 1977, in
Portland, Maine, Alternate Chairman Donald W. Webber presiding, with Robert D. Curley,
Employer Representative and Michael Schoonjans, Employee Representative.
JURISDICTION
The parties did not challenge the jurisdiction of the Maine Labor Relations
Board in this matter, and we conclude that the Board has jurisdiction to hear and
render a decision in this case as provided in 26 M.R.S.A. 968(5).
FINDINGS OF FACT
Upon review of the testimony given at the hearing, as well as the Pre-Hearing
Conference Memorandum and Order and the pleadings, the Board finds:
[-1-]
_____________________________________________________________________________________
1. At all times material herein, the Complainant, Sanford
Teachers Association, hereinafter referred to as the
"Association," was an association of teachers, a public
employee organization and exclusive bargaininq agent
for all certified teaching personnel in the Sanford
School System, but excluding:
a) Substitute teachers
b) Probationary teachers until they have been
in the system 6 months
c) The holders of the following positions:
(1) Superintendent of Schools
(2) Principal of Sanford High School
(3) Principal of the Sanford Junior High
School.
(4) Principal of the Sanford Middle School
(5) Full-time Assistant Principals
(6) Elementary Supervisor.
2. At all times material herein, the Respondent School Committee,
hereinafter referred to as the "School Committee," was the duly
authorized, elected, and acting superintending school Committee
of the Town of Sanford, and is a public employer as defined in
26 M.R.S.A. Section 962(7).
3. At all times material herein subsequent to February 1, 1976,
Respondent Charles Ackerman was the duly authorized Chief
Negotiator for the School Committee.
4. The Association and the School Committee entered into compre-
hensive contracts covering employer-employee relationships for
many years, the most current one at the time of the filing of
the Complaint commenced September 1, 1974, and contained a
duration clause.
5. The 1974-1977 Collective Bargaining Agreement was amended by an
Arbitration Award rendered August 26, 1976.
6. On or about March 24, 1977, the Association filed a unilateral
request for a private fact-finding board listing thirteen issues
in dispute.
7. On or about April 5, 1977, Form 6-A, "Acknowledgment of Notice for
Fact-Finding Hearing," was received by the Association's represen-
tative, Shirley R. Bissell, stating that a fact-finding hearing had
been scheduled for Saturday, April 23, 1977, at 9:30 a.m. in the
Sanford High School Library, Sanford, Maine.
8. On or about April 5, 1977, the Association acknowledged receipt
of the notice and returned the original form to the Maine Labor
Relations Board.
9. On or about April 18, 1977, the Association's representative,
Shirley R. Bissell, received notification of the appointment of the
following fact finders:
William M. Houston, Esquire - Chairman
Edward I. Bernstein, Esquire - Employer Representative
Albert B. Camire - Employee Representative
10. On or about April 19, 1977, the Association sent its Summary of
Position to each member of the panel and to Charles Ackerman.
-2-
_____________________________________________________________________________________
11. The Association's Summary of Position was mailed to
Mr. Charles Ackerman, Sanford School Department, 265
Main Street, Sanford, Maine, 04073.
12. The normal practice between the Association and Charles
Ackerman is for the Association to mail communications
to Charles Ackerman addressed to the Sanford School Depart-
ment offices.
13. On or about April 20, 1977, Charles Ackerman mailed a copy of
his fact-finding Summary of Position to each member of the
fact-finding panel, but "opted" not to send a copy to the
Association.
14. The Association did not receive a copy of the School Committee's
fact-finding statement or brief until five minutes before the
fact-finding hearing.
15. Five minutes before the fact-finding hearing held on April 23,
1977, the Association's representative, Shirley R. Bissell,
requested and received a copy of the School Committee's
statement or brief from Charles Ackerman.
16. Nine new issues were raised by Respondents at the fact-finding
hearing which were not contained in Respondents' Summary of
Position.
17. In the Respondents' Summary of Position and at the fact-finding
hearing, the Sanford School Committee through its Labor Consultant,
Charles Ackerman, raised as an issue in dispute a demand to change
the composition of the bargaining unit.
18. During the fact-finding hearing, the Association requested the right
to file a post-hearing brief basing that request on the lack of
proper notice of Respondents' issues.
19. At the end of the fact-finding hearing, the panel requested post-
hearing briefs from both parties because of the confusion caused
by the new issues in dispute which were not contained in Respondents'
Summary of Position.
20. The total cost to the Association for the services of the fact-find-
ers was one thousand one hundred fifty two dollars and fifty two
cents ($1,152.52) and the proven costs to the Association for the
preparation and mailing of the post-hearing brief was forty-four
dollars and thirty cents ($44.30).
DECISION
The Sanford Teachers Association has charged the Sanford School Committee
and its Labor Consultant, Charles Ackerman, with a failure to participate in good
faith in the fact-finding process in violation of 26 M.R.S.A. 965(1)(E) and 26
M.R.S.A. 964(1)(E). The Association has proved that the conduct of the Respondents
at the fact-finding hearing resulted in confusion concerning the issues in dispute and
the position of the School Committee with respect to the issues. The Summary of Posi-
tion of the Committee, which was little more than a restatement of the initial contract
proposals of the Committee, even if it had been presented to the Association in a
timely manner, would have done little to allay the confusion at the hearing.
In addition to the confusion at the hearing caused by the School Committee's
pre-hearing brief and its late submittal to the Complainant herein inconsistent
with Rule 5.05, of the Rules and Procedures of the Maine Labor Relations Board,
-3-
_____________________________________________________________________________________
nine new issues were raised by the Respondents at the hearing which resulted in
prolonging the fact-finding process and increasing the cost to the Association.
The number of issues allegedly improperly raised by Respondents must be
proved with specificity in this case since the Association is not only seeking a
cease and desist order against Respondents for failing to participate in fact
finding in good faith, but has also asked for monetary damages to compensate the
Association for the additional expense incurred as a result of the School Committee's
improper conduct. The Association has proved that nine of the issues presented to
the fact finders were presented improperly and we conclude that the conduct of the
Respondents in presenting issues to the fact finders not properly raised by the briefs
constituted a violation of 26 M.R.S.A. 964(1)(E).
The second count in the complaint charged the Respondents with a failure to
participate in good faith in the fact finding process by presenting to a fact-finding
panel an issue concerning the appropriateness of the bargaining unit. The Respondents'
testimony indicated that the proposed change in the bargaining unit may have been un-
intentional. Mr. Ackerman did not know if the change in the descriptions of the bar-
gaining unit would in fact change the composition of the bargaining unit. A benign
disregard for the consequences of one's actions cannot excuse the natural consequences
of those actions. Other means are available as established by statute and the Maine
Labor Relations Board rules to resolve a controversy covering the composition of a
bargaining unit. We conclude that the proposal of the School Committee could have
changed the composition of the bargaining unit and consequently was improperly pre-
sented to the fact finders. The action of the Respondents in presenting the improper
issue violated 26 M.R.S.A. 964(1)(E).
As a result of the School Committee's improper conduct, the Association incurred
additional expense of $288.13 for fact finding and $44.30 for the preparation of a
post-hearing brief. We conclude that the School Committee must compensate the Asso-
ciation for a total of $332.43 as a fair and reasonable assessment of the expense in-
curred by the Association as a direct result of the improper conduct.
ORDER
On the basis of the foregoing findings of fact and by virtue of and pursuant
to the powers granted to the Maine Labor Relations Board by the provision of Section
968 of the Municipal Public Employees Labor Relations Law, it is ORDERED:
1. That the Sanford School Committee, their representatives,
servants and agents, cease and desist from engaging in
any of the acts prohibited by 26 M.R.S.A. 964(1) and
especially from refusing to bargain collectively with
the bargaining agent of their employees as required by
Section 965 of the Municipal Public Employees Labor
Relations Law.
-4-
_____________________________________________________________________________________
2. That the Sanford School Committee forthwith pay the
Sanford Teachers Association compensatory damages
attributable to the violation of 26 M.R.S.A. 964(1)(E)
of $332.43 together with legal interest.
3. That copies of the Notice attached to this Decision and
Order shall be signed and dated by the Sanford School
Committee and posted at all work locations of the employees
where notices are normally posted for a period of 60 consecu-
tive days from the date of posting.
4. That within 30 days from the date of this Order, the Sanford
School Committee shall notify in writing the Maine Labor Re-
lations Board at its offices in Augusta, Maine, the steps they
have taken to comply herewith.
Dated at Augusta, Maine, this 14th day of September, 1977.
MAINE LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
/s/_______________________________________
Donald W. Webber, Alternate Chairman
/S/_______________________________________
Robert D. Curley, Employer Representative
/S/_______________________________________
Michael Schoonjans Employee Representative
-5-
_____________________________________________________________________________________
STATE OF MAINE
MAINE LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
Augusta, Maine 04333
NOTICE
NOTICE TO ALL EMPLOYEES
PURSUANT TO
a Decision and Order of the
MAINE LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
and in order to effectuate the policies of the
MUNICIPAL PUBLIC EMPLOYEES LABOR RELATIONS LAW
we hereby notify our employees that:
WE WILL NOT in any manner refuse to bargain collectively with the
bargaining agent of our employees as required by Sections 964 and
965 of the Municipal Public Employees Labor Relations Law.
Sanford School Committe
(Employer)
Dated________________________ BY_____________________
(Name and Title)
____________________________________
This Notice must remain posted for 60 consecutive days as required by the
Decision and Order of the Maine Labor Relations Board and must not be al-
tered, defaced, or covered by any other material.
If employees have any questions concerning this Notice or compliance with
its provisions, they may communicate directly with the Offices of the Maine
Labor Relations Board.
[-6-]
_____________________________________________________________________________________