Copyright© 1999 by School Services of California, Inc.
Fact Finding - An Extension of Negotiations
Fact-finding is a misleading term in that few facts are ever found during the process of bringing the parties together for the purpose of reaching an equitable settlement of collective bargaining issues. More likely, the presence of outsiders facilitates another review of the existing facts and assertions and brings into sharper focus the issues that prevent settlement.
A quick review of the process is in order. First, under the collective bargaining laws of the State of California, the district and the duly elected and recognized employee bargaining units are obligated to engage in good faith bargaining of topics related to salaries, benefits, job security, and working conditions. Most districts complete the collective bargaining process at this stage by reaching a tentative agreement that is then ratified by both the bargaining unit members and the Board of Education.
Some districts are unable to reach agreement at that level and one or both sides declare(s) impasse. At that point, the state becomes more involved in the process. A mediator is appointed and charged with working with both parties to move past the impasse and reach agreement. The mediator meets with the parties and works diligently to help them resolve the sticking point and reach settlement; many districts reach tentative agreement at this stage and end the process at mediation.
Each year, a few districts do not reach agreement at the mediation stage and the mediator certifies them for fact finding. When that happens, the Public Employment Relations Board (PERB) initiates the fact-finding hearing process. The district and the union each select a panel member for the hearing and PERB provides the appointed panel members with a list of PERB approved neutral chairpersons. The panel members appointed by the parties alternately strike names until they either reach agreement on a chairperson or have only one name left. PERB appoints the person selected by the other two panelists as the neutral chair.
Both the union and the district assemble information about the negotiations history and the issues and present it to the panel. The hearing looks legalistic, but is more administrative in nature. After hearing the evidence presented, the panel members may ask questions, make suggestions, and work with the parties to produce a settlement that is acceptable to both sides. If agreement is reached, the panel may or may not issue a report, but the report is much less important because the issues are settled.
If the parties do not reach agreement, there will be a report (sometimes three of them) issued to the parties. The most important report is written by the neutral chairperson. Each of the partisan panel members then has an opportunity to concur with the chairperson's report or to write a dissenting opinion. These reports together become the "official" fact-finding report.
It is important to note that the fact-finding report doesn't compel anyone to do anything; unless the parties reach agreement, there is still no settlement. Completion of the process does, however, allow both parties to take unilateral actions if they choose to do so. The district may impose a settlement consistent with its last offer, and the union may engage in job actions that could include a strike. Neither of these is likely to result in a positive situation for the district or the union.
Remember, fact finding is not to be feared, but it is not a panacea either. Fact finding is not as good as negotiating a fair and reasonable agreement earlier in the process, but it sure beats accepting a bad contract. Use fact finding as a way to assist you in reaching a good negotiated agreement.
-- Ron Bennett