Page 14 - Leadership Matters February 2013_3140b78f.pub
Basic HTML Version
14
Bargaining implications of performance evaluations
Anderson
With new rules regarding the
implementation
of
the
Illinois
Performance Evaluation Reform Act
(PERA) and the Education Reform Act
(Senate Bill 7), school districts are
beginning to grapple with the
collective bargaining implications of
the new laws.
Although the implementation dates
for a student growth component are
not until September 1, 2013, 2015,
and 2016 for many districts, the
bargaining proposals that will impact
evaluation plans (and therefore
reductions in force or RIF) are being
created today. Therefore, it is imperative that
districts carefully examine their plans, their
proposals, and their procedures long before the
implementation dates arrive.
Evaluation plans may now be impacted by as
many as four separate committees:
The
district’s
pre-existing
evaluation
committee;
The PERA joint committee on evaluations;
The ERA joint committee on reductions in
force; and
The bargaining committee.
While nothing in the law requires any of these
committees to have differing membership, each
committee has its own jurisdiction. As such,
decisions made by the “wrong” committee could
jeopardize the district’s ability to enforce the rules
the committee created.
Three components are therefore critical in
decision-making for any district engaging in
bargaining these issues: 1) What committee is
meeting? 2) What authority does that committee
have? 3) What will happen when the committee
reaches agreement? All of these issues should be
addressed at the very first meeting of each
committee, and each meeting should identify
which
committee is meeting, who was present, what the
committee discussed, and to what the committee
agreed. For those going to the bargaining table this
year,
now
is the perfect time to discuss the
answers to many of these questions.
Education Reform Act/RIF Joint Committee
The SB7 or RIF Joint Committee establishes
rules for how teachers’ evaluations are categorized
for purposes of reductions in forces. The law
establishes specific topics for the RIF committee’s
discussions. The RIF committee’s changes must be
complete and agreed to by February 1 of any year
in which a RIF is to be performed; otherwise the
rules from the previous year (or the law if no prior
agreement was reached) apply. The RIF committee
is not required to meet annually unless otherwise
required by agreement.
Issues to watch during discussions:
The law establishes what the committee may
(and may not) agree to. Only the RIF committee
can discuss how to move employees from
Grouping 2 to Grouping 3 (but not Grouping 4), and
only the RIF committee can discuss alternate
definitions for Grouping 4. Further, only the RIF
committee can discuss (and agree to) how to deal
with noncompliant (that is, something other than
Excellent, Proficient, Needs Improvement, and
Unsatisfactory) evaluation summative ratings.
Schools should not agree to changes to the
reductions in force procedure beyond those defined
by law, and should not agree to pre-determine
evaluation outcomes (everyone is an Excellent, for
instance). Limiting discussion to those permitted by
law is advisable.
PERA/Evaluation Joint Committee
The PERA or Evaluation Joint Committee
establishes the rules for implementation of the
student growth portion of the evaluation. The
evaluation committee determines rules for the
implementation of the student growth component
and for the usage of assessments. If the evaluation
This article was written by David
Braun, an Associate in the Monticello
-based law firm of Miller, Tracy,
Braun, Funk and Miller, Ltd. He
focuses his practice in the area of
school law and has been a presenter
at IASA workshops, academies and
conferences. He served on the
Education Law Council of the Illinois State Bar Association
from 2008-2011.
