Pawtucket School Committee v. Pawtucket Teachers' Alliance, Local No. 930, American Federation of Teachers

• Court: Rhode Island Supreme Court
• Writing for the Court: PER CURIAM; LEDERBERG
• Citation: Pawtucket School Committee v. Pawtucket Teachers' Alliance, Local No. 930, American Federation of Teachers, 652 A.2d 970 (R.I. 1995)
• Decision Date: 24 January 1995
• Docket Number: No. 94-35-A,94-35-A
• Parties: 97 Ed. Law Rep. 400 PAWTUCKET SCHOOL COMMITTEE et al. v. The PAWTUCKET TEACHERS' ALLIANCE, LOCAL NO. 930, AMERICAN FEDERATION OF TEACHERS et al. ppeal.

Page 970

652 A.2d 970

97 Ed. Law Rep. 400

PAWTUCKET SCHOOL COMMITTEE et al. v. The PAWTUCKET TEACHERS' ALLIANCE, LOCAL NO. 930, AMERICAN FEDERATION OF TEACHERS et al.

No. 94-35-Appeal.

Supreme Court of Rhode Island.

Jan. 24, 1995.

Stephen Robinson, Katherine Merolla, Providence, for plaintiffs.

Richard Skolnik, Providence, for defendants.

OPINION

PER CURIAM.

This matter came before a panel of the Supreme Court on December 20, 1994, pursuant to an order directing the defendants to appear and show cause why their appeal should not be summarily denied and dismissed. In this case the defendants, the Pawtucket Teachers' Alliance, Local No. 930, American Federation of Teachers, and Mary Ann Kaveny, in her capacity as president of the Pawtucket Teachers' Alliance, and Donna DiBiasio, in her capacity as secretary of the Pawtucket Teachers' Alliance, appeal from the entry of judgment for the plaintiffs in this litigation over whether a particular matter is arbitrable under their collective bargaining agreement with the Pawtucket School Committee.

After reviewing the memoranda submitted by the parties and after hearing their counsel in oral argument, this court is of the opinion that cause has not been shown. The issues raised in this appeal will be considered at this time.

In this case plaintiff school committee petitioned for a declaratory judgment in the Superior Court based on the following events. In February 1993, the associate director of the Pawtucket Bilingual/English as a Second Language Program (ESL) issued a directive requiring all teachers in the Limited English Proficiency Program to submit to her, once a month, a copy of their lesson plans for the following week. In that memorandum to the teachers, the director explained that, "[the] purpose of this new procedure is to provide me with a greater knowledge of what is being taught in your classes." The school committee denied the grievance filed by the teachers' alliance and the union sought arbitration under its collective bargaining agreement. The school committee then petitioned the Superior Court for a declaratory judgment and sought to enjoin arbitration.

The plaintiff school committee took the position that the new directive was a management prerogative and therefore not arbitrable. According to the school committee, the union's only recourse was to seek administrative remedies by appealing to the Commissioner of Elementary and Secondary Education pursuant to G.L.1956 (1988 Reenactment) § 16-39-2. The union argued that the new procedure was a unilateral change in working conditions and therefore constituted a violation of the collective bargaining agreement.

On January 18, 1994, the trial justice found that the lesson plan directive was a management prerogative that is not arbitrable. Judgment was entered for plaintiffs and defendant filed a timely appeal.

Under G.L.1956 (1988 Reenactment) § 16-2-9, as amended by P.L.1991, ch. 44, art. 44, § 1, the local school committee is responsible for the operation and management of the schools within its district. More particularly, § 16-2-9(a)(3) imposes a duty on the school committee, "To provide for and assure the implementation of federal and state laws, the...