A'Hearne v. City of Chelsea

• Decision Date: 10 June 1966
• Parties: Norman B. A'HEARNE et al. v. CITY OF CHELSEA.
• Court: United States State Supreme Judicial Court of Massachusetts Supreme Court

Page 767

217 N.E.2d 767

351 Mass. 105

Norman B. A'HEARNE et al. v. CITY OF CHELSEA.

Supreme Judicial Court of Massachusetts, Suffolk.

Argued April 7, 1966.

Decided June 10, 1966.

Joseph G. Crane, Boston, for plaintiffs.

Alexander E. Finger, City Sol., for defendant.

Before WILKINS, C.J., and SPALDING, CUTTER, KIRK and SPIEGEL, JJ.

SPIEGEL, Justice.

In this action of contract thirteen teachers in the public schools in the city of Chelsea seek to recover for loss of salary resulting from their reclassification by the school committee. The judge of the Superior Court sitting without a jury made a finding for the defendant, and filed a 'memorandum of law in connection with * * * (his) finding.' The case is here on exceptions to the 'rulings and finding' of the judge.

The action was tried on a statement of agreed facts. In 1947 the committee established salary schedules differentiating between the teachers not having a bachelor's degree, those having a bachelor's degree, and those having a master's degree. In 1951 the committee voted to increase the salary of 'those persons who possess a doctorate degree.' Six plaintiffs have doctorate degrees from unaccredited institutions. Four of these six plaintiffs hold master's degrees from accredited colleges, and two have master's degrees from unaccredited schools. The other seven plaintiffs have master's degrees from unaccredited institutions. For at least three years prior to 1962, the plaintiffs had been included in the salary schedule for their highest degrees. On May 31, 1962, the committee voted to increase the salary schedule for teachers by $500 effective January 1, 1963, and by $400 effective January 1, 1964. The committee also adopted a recommendation 'that the salary schedule pertaining to Master's and Doctorate Degrees shall apply only to those individuals who have obtained their Degrees from Colleges or Universities accredited by the New England Association of Colleges and Secondary Schools or the 5 other accrediting institutions.'

The plaintiffs contend that 'to apply the vote of the Chelsea School Committee * * * to those already having tenure on the salary schedules applicable to Masters and Doctors was to impair the obligations of contracts and was therefore invalid and void.'

The plaintiffs contracts, however, were subject to the power of the school committee to reduce salaries as part of a general salary revision affecting equally all teachers of the same salary grade. Sweeney v. School Committee of City of Revere, 249 Mass. 525, 531, 144 N.E. 377; Paquette v. City of Fall River, 278 Mass. 172, 179 N.E. 588; Downey v. School Committee of Lowell, 305 Mass. 329, 25 N.E.2d 738; Watt v. Town of Chelmsford, 328 Mass. 430, 104 N.E.2d 419.

Thus, the basic issue is whether the reclassification of the plaintiffs is in violation of G.L. c. 71, § 43, which provides that '(t)he salary of no teacher employed in any town * * * shall be reduced without his consent...