Independence-Nat’l Educ. Assoc. v. Indep. Sch. Dist., No. 87980 (Mo. May 29, 2007)
The Missouri Supreme Court has ruled that public employees have the right under the state constitution to organize and bargain collectively on the same basis as private-sector employees. The decision overrules a 60-year-old precedent by the same court. The court also concluded that if a public employer negotiates an agreement with its employees, it may not unilaterally impose a new employment agreement that contradicts the terms of the agreements then in effect. The Missouri Constitution’s bill of rights contains a provision guaranteeing employees the right to organize and to bargain collectively through their representative. Three unions, representing transportation workers, custodians, and teachers and paraprofessionals employed by Independence School District (ISD), sued the district ISD over the school board’s adoption of a new "Collaborative Team Policy" that ISD acknowledged constituted a refusal to bargain collectively with the unions. Adoption of the policy unilaterally rescinded agreements that ISD had made voluntarily with the unions. A state trial court dismissed the case. The intermediate appellate court reversed in part and remanded the case. This time the trial court agreed that ISD had refused bargain collectively with the unions and had unilaterally rescinded the agreements, but concluded that these actions were allowed under state law.
The supreme court overturned its decision in City of Springfield v. Clouse, 206 S.W.2d 539 (Mo. 1947) that the constitutional right to collective bargaining does not apply to public employees. The court in Clouse had ruled that under the legal doctrine of nondelegation, the legislative powers of a public entity would be unconstitutionally delegated to nongovernmental entities through the collective bargaining process. But the nondelegation doctrine, the court now ruled, has been "largely abandoned" in Missouri. Nothing in the state’s public sector labor law requires a public employer to agree to any proposal by its employee union, the court noted, providing the employer has met and conferred with employee representatives. As a result, no legislative power or prerogative is being delegated, which complies with the nondelegation doctrine to the extent it still exists. The plain meaning of the constitutional language, the court concluded, clearly encompassed both private and public sectors employees. In reversing the previous understanding that contracts between public employers and public unions are nonenforceable, the court also overruled its decision in Sumpter v. City of Moberly, 645 S.W.2d 359 (Mo. 1982), to the extent that decision permitted a public employer unilaterally to impose a new employment agreement that contradicts the terms of an existing agreement the employer entered into voluntarily.
Independence-Nat’l Educ. Assoc. v. Indep. Sch. Dist., No. 87980 (Mo. May 29, 2007)
[Full opinion]
[Editor’s Note: Background on the case is available at the first link below. Reactions to the decision and its implications for Missouri public schools are discussed in the article at the second link. While some of the observers quoted question how much will change, the article cites some concerns. "Employees in general should have the ability to discuss salaries and benefits with the board, and that has occurred in most school districts," says Missouri School Boards’ Association spokesman Brent Ghan. "But this takes it to a whole new level. It creates a much more adversarial environment."]
[NSBA School Law pages on oral arguments]
Columbia (MO) Tribune
By Janise Heavin
[Full article]