12 CIR 334 (1997).
NEBRASKA COMMISSION
OF INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS
MILLARD
EDUCATION |
| |
CASE NO. 929 |
ASSOCIATION, |
| |
|
|
| |
|
Petitioner, |
| |
|
|
| |
|
v. |
| |
ORDER |
|
| |
|
DOUGLAS COUNTY
SCHOOL |
| |
|
DISTRICT NO.
28-0017, |
| |
|
a.k.a. MILLARD
PUBLIC |
| |
|
SCHOOLS, |
| |
|
|
| |
|
Respondent. |
| |
|
MCFARLAND,J:
- This matter came before the Commission upon the Petition
filed by the Petitioner, Millard Education Association,
against the Respondent, Douglas County School Dist. No.
28-0017 a/k/a Millard Public Schools, on February 17, 1997.
A hearing was held on Monday, February 21, 1997, upon
Petitioner's request for temporary relief under the Industrial
Relations Act. Petitioner requested temporary relief in the
form of an order to require good faith bargaining concerning
health insurance benefits and coverage and to preserve the
status quo. Specifically, Petitioner requested "that the
School District refrain from entering into a contract of
insurance with any health insurance carrier until such time as
the Petitioner and Respondent have fully and in good faith
negotiated all issues associated with health insurance and
have reached agreement with respect to Health insurance
issues or otherwise resolve the dispute... and that the School
District be ordered to negotiate with the Association all
issues regarding group health insurance."
- Petitioner was represented by its attorney, Mark D.
McGuire; Respondent was represented by its attorney,
Duncan A. Young. At the time of hearing, Respondent filed
its Special Appearance and a Motion to Quash Hearing,
along with a Request for Findings of Fact and Conclusions of
Law. Arguments on the Special Appearance and Motion to
Quash Hearing were heard. The Commission overruled the
Special Appearance and said Motion.
- FINDINGS OF FACT
- Both parties stipulated to paragraphs #1 through #3 of the
Petition. The Commission finds that the Millard Education
Association (herein the "Association") was formed by the
teachers employed by Douglas County School District No.
28-0017, Nebraska, a.k.a. Millard Public Schools, (herein
"the School District") for the purpose of representation of
said teachers in all matters of employment relations. The
Association is a "labor organization" as that term is defined
by Neb. Rev. Stat. §48-801(6) (Reissue 1993), and has its
usual place of conducting its activity in Omaha, Nebraska.
The School District is a Class III school district organized
and existing under and by virtue of the laws of the State of
Nebraska, and is an "employer" as that term is defined by
Neb. Rev. Stat. §48-801(4) (Reissue 1993).
- From the evidence presented the Commission further finds
that an "industrial dispute" exists between the Association
and the School District. On January 13, 1997, the school
district, through Diana Faust, President of the Board of
Education, requested that the Petitioner enter into contract
negotiations. The parties on February 6, 1997, began
negotiations for a labor contract for the 1997-98 school year.
These negotiations were again held on February 12, 1997.
With regard to health insurance, the Association took the
position that it did not want any changes regarding the
coverage and benefits. The Association further took the
position that it did not want any changes in the identity of the
current health insurance carrier, Blue Cross/Blue Shield. The
school district took the position that it was willing to discuss
any changes regarding changes and benefits but it did not
want to discuss the identity of the health insurance carrier or
the ownership of the policy. The 1996-97 contract between
the parties specified in Article III, Paragraph #5, that the
district would provide full time teachers with insurance
coverage and benefits comparable to that provided during the
1995-96 school year. There was no indication in the
1996-97 contract with regard to the identify of the insurance
carrier.
- Previously, in approximately May of 1996, the school district
had employed Arthur Anderson and Associates as a
consulting firm for its insurance carrier search and selection
process. Scott Blackard was employed as the certified
employment benefits representative of Arthur Anderson and
Associates for this process. After soliciting bids to provide
to the school district the same health insurance coverage and
benefits as currently being provided under the 1996-97
contract between the parties, Arthur Anderson and
Associates issued to the district on January 27, 1997, an
"Evaluation of Proposals to Insure the Medical and Dental
Plans of Millard Public Schools". This Evaluation concluded
that health insurance, both medical and dental, through
United Health Care (Medical) and MetLife (Dental) for the
1997-98 school year would provide identical coverage and
benefits at a cost savings to the school district of $594,103.
- On February 3, 1997, the Association, through its president,
Stephanie Harlan, requested from the district documents
submitted from United Health Care concerning the complete
bidding document, the actual proposed contract documents,
the proposed certificates of coverage, and the utilization
management procedures and criteria. The district provided
its response to the request within a reasonable time
thereafter.
- On February 13, 1997, the school district, through Ken
Fossen, Associate Superintendent, notified staff that the
Board of Education for the school district would be
considering the issue of changing the district's health and
dental insurance carriers on its next board meeting, February
17, 1997.
- SCOPE OF REVIEW
- Section 48-811 provides that:
- ...No adverse action by threat or harassment shall be taken
against any employee because of any petition filing by such
employee, and the employment status of such employee shall
not be altered in any way pending disposition of the petition
by the commission.
- Section 48-816(1) provides:
- ...The commission shall have power and authority upon its
own initiative or upon request of a party to the dispute to
make such temporary findings and orders as may be
necessary to preserve and protect the status of the parties,
property, and public interest involved pending final
determination of the issues.
- The Commission stated in Omaha Police Union Local 101 v.
City of Omaha, 11 CIR 86 (1991) as follows:
- The Supreme Court has interpreted these statutes and held
that together they give the Commission the authority to issue
temporary orders restraining the employer from changing
terms and conditions of employment during the pendency of
a dispute, Transport Workers v. Transit Authority of Omaha,
216 Neb. 455, 344 .W.2d 459 (1984). This statutory grant
of authority is, however, limited in nature and can not be
used or abused to give either party more rights than they had
at the time of the filing of the petition.
CONCLUSIONS OF LAW
- The questions before the Commission are: 1) whether the
school district has failed or refused to bargain in good faith
concerning health insurance coverage and benefits; 2)
whether the proposed entry into a contract for health
insurance coverage with United Health Care would alter in
any way the employment status of any association member;
3) whether such proposed contract would not preserve and
protect the status of the parties, property, and public interest;
and 4) whether such proposed contract would change the
terms and conditions of employment for association members
during the pendency of this dispute. The party requesting
temporary relief has the burden of proving that such relief
should be granted.
- There has been no sufficient showing by the Petitioner that
the Respondent has failed or refused to bargain in good faith
regarding health insurance coverage and benefits. Regardless
of whether or not the district enters into a contract with
United Health Care, the district remains willing to negotiate
terms and conditions of the coverage and benefits of such
health insurance different from such coverage and benefits
currently being provided. In fact, there has been no showing
by Petitioner that the district would necessarily be prevented
from negotiating health insurance coverage and benefits with
another carrier.
- The Commission concludes that the school district has not
refused to bargain in good faith concerning health insurance
coverage and benefits. The district has indicated its
willingness to negotiate concerning the coverage and benefits
of the health insurance. Even if the school district enters into
a contract with United Health Care for such health insurance
coverage and benefits, which is not only the same but is
identical to the coverage and benefits now being provided by
Blue Cross/Blue Shield, the school district remains open to
negotiating different coverage and benefits if requested to do
so by the association.
- Furthermore, there has been no sufficient showing by the
Petitioner that entry into a contract for health insurance
coverage and benefits with United Health Care would alter
the employment status of any association member, would not
preserve and protect the status of the parties, or would
change the terms and conditions of employment for
association members. There has been no showing by the
Petitioner that the benefits and coverage under United Health
Care will be in any way different from the benefits and
coverage being provided currently by Blue Cross/Blue
Shield. The evidence showed that the benefits and coverage
with United Health Care would be the same as and identical
to the coverage and benefits currently being provided by
Blue Cross/Blue Shield.
- The Commission concludes that, if the district enters into the
contract with United Health Care for such coverage and
benefits, the employment status of any association member
will not be altered in any way; the status of the parties,
property, and public interest will be preserved and protected;
and the terms and conditions of employment of association
members will not be changed. The benefits and coverage of
the health insurance from United Health Care are the same as
and are identical to the benefits and coverage being provided
currently by Blue Cross/Blue Shield.
- IT IS, THEREFORE, ORDERED that the Petitioner's
request for temporary relief in the form of an order to require
good faith bargaining concerning health insurance benefits
and coverage, and Petitioner's request for temporary relief in
the form of an order to preserve the status quo are denied.
- Entered February 17, 1997.