San Diego Federation of Teachers, Local 1278, AFL-CIO v. Board of Ed. of City of San Diego

• Decision Date: 29 May 1963
• Docket Number: AFL-CIO
• Citation: 216 Cal.App.2d 758,31 Cal.Rptr. 146
• Parties: SAN DIEGO FEDERATION OF TEACHERS, LOCAL 1278,, et al., Petitioners and Appellants, v. BOARD OF EDUCATION OF the CITY OF SAN DIEGO et al., Respondents. Civ. 6954.
• Court: California Court of Appeals Court of Appeals

Page 146

31 Cal.Rptr. 146

216 Cal.App.2d 758

SAN DIEGO FEDERATION OF TEACHERS, LOCAL 1278, AFL-CIO, et al., Petitioners and Appellants, v. BOARD OF EDUCATION OF the CITY OF SAN DIEGO et al., Respondents.

Civ. 6954.

District Court of Appeal, Fourth District, California.

May 29, 1963.

Hearing Denied July 24, 1963.

Gostin & Katz, and Irwin Gostin, San Diego, for petitioners and appellants.

Henry A. Dietz, County Counsel, Donald L. Clark, Deputy County Counsel, Schall, Nielsen & Boudreau and W. J. Schall, San Diego, for defendants and respondents.

COUGHLIN, Justice.

This is a proceeding in mandamus to compel the Board of Education of the City of San Diego to increase the amount of salary payable to a group of teachers included within a previously designated salary classification; was instituted on behalf of the teachers in question; and resulted in a judgment in favor of the Board, from which the petitioners have taken the appeal at hand.

For salary purposes the Board has classified its certificated teachers according to their academic training and creditable experience; has placed them in one of five classes; has identified each of these classes by one of the letters 'A' through 'E'; in its annual salary schedules has provided a salary range for each class; also has provided different salary steps within the salary range dependent upon years of creditable experience; and has identified each step by number, commencing with the numeral '1'. In the salary schedule adopted for the school year 1960-1961, classification 'E' included teachers having a Doctor's degree or equivalent training, which was deemed to be 72 units of upper division or graduate work after a Bachelor's degree, including a Master's degree; carried an annual salary range of $6000 to $9400; contained 15 salary steps; and, under the classification and step rating designated 'E-15' entitled a person so classified to an annual salary of $9400, which was the highest salary then paid to certificated teachers.

The teachers on whose behalf the instant proceedings were instituted had been employed by the San Diego Unified School District for over 15 years. The Board of Education of the City of San Diego is the governing board of that district.

In the latter part of May, 1961, each of the teachers in question had been notified in writing by the Board that he had been elected to serve as a certificated employee of the San Diego City Schools with permanent classification for the school year beginning July 1, 1961, and ending June 30, 1962; that such employment would be subject to the provisions of law and the rules, regulations and salary schedule adopted by the Board; and that, according to the record of his training and experience on file, his salary classification for the year 1961-1962 would be 'E-15'. On July 18, 1961, the Board, at a regular meeting, adopted a salary schedule identified as 'San Diego Unified School District Teachers' Schedule No. 30, 1961-1962', to become effective for pay purposes upon final enactment of the 'School Assistance Act of 1961,' and directed that until said schedule No. 30 should become effective that compensation should be paid 'as provided by CURRENT 1960-1961 salary schedules and rules.' The new schedule, i. e., 'Schedule No. 30, 1961-1962,' as adopted at this time, appeared to provide for a 'Class E' salary range of $6350 to $10,000; with 15 salary step rates, and directed that the 15th step should be 'achieved by an earned doctorate only.' Thereafter, at the same meeting, the 'earned doctorate' provision which had been adopted was discussed further; a reconsideration thereof was urged; but no further action was taken in the premises. Two weeks later, on August 1, 1961, at a regular meeting, the Board members continued their discussion respecting the 'earned doctorate' provision; considered the desirability of an earned unit achievement level in approved courses higher than that prescribed for 'Class E' membership, as an incentive to improved teacher qualifications; and, as an alternate to the provision for payment of the Step 15 'Class E' rate to those having an 'earned doctorate,' adopted a regulation providing for the payment thereof to those who had 90 earned units or upper division courses approved by the District's salary committee. On August 15, 1961, the teachers on whose behalf the present proceedings were instituted received notices from the school district advising that they were in 'Class E' at Step 15, and that their annual salary would be $9400. This notification conformed to the provisions of the 1960-1961 salary schedule which then was in effect. The new salary schedule did not become effective until October 4, 1961. Thereafter the teachers in question received a letter on the subject which enclosed a copy of what purported to be the 1961-1962 salary schedule adopted by the board, which set forth in a vertical column identified at the top thereof by the term 'Step' the numbers '1' to '14', and opposite thereto five other vertical columns identified respectively by the terms 'Class A', 'Class B', 'Class C', 'Class D' and 'Class E', which contained the rates of compensation payable for each step in each class. The column marked 'Class E' was further identified by the following: '72 Sem. Hrs. After date of Bacherlor's with Master's,' then followed the salary schedule for the 14 steps, commencing with the figure $6350 and ending with the figure $9700; and below this, at the extreme bottom of the column, on a line not identified with any step number, appears the figure $10,000 with an asterisk. Below all of these columns was the following paragraph: '*This salary attainable only with earned doctorate, or 90 semester hours of approved upper division or graduate work after date of the Bachelor's degree, with a Master's degree, and at last fourteen years of creditable experience.' By way of further explanation the schedule in question also contained this paragraph:

'Class E (Steps 1 through 14)

Master's degree with a total of 72 semester hours of approved upper division or graduate work after the date of Bachelor's Degree, or possession of an earned doctoral degree (Ph. D., Ed. D., or other earned degrees or equivalent academic status).

The petitioner teachers do not have earned doctorates or 90 units of graduate work; therefore would be paid at the annual rate of $9700 which was $300 more than the annual rate of compensation paid them pursuant to the schedule in force at the commencement of the 1961-1962 school year; claim that the $10,000 annual rate provided by the 1961-1962 schedule is Step 15 in 'Class E,' being the step and class which they previously had achieved; and contend that the action of the Board in limiting their salary to the $9700 rate identified as 'Class E', Step 14, in the new schedule, was arbitrary and discriminatory, constituted a down-grading of their position without reason and, therefore, was unlawful.

Subject to designated minimum requirements, a city board of education is vested by statute with authority to fix the compensation to be paid to teachers (Ed. Code, §§ 13502, 13525), including those who have attained a permanent classification (Kacsur v. Board of Trustees, 18 Cal.2d 586, 116 P.2d 593), and in the exercise of that authority may adopt a schedule increasing or decreasing the amount of compensation previously paid, providing (1) it is not arbitrary, discriminatory, or unreasonable; (2) any allowance therein based upon years of training and experience is uniform and subject to reasonable classification; and (3) it is adopted prior to the beginning of the school year (Ed. Code, § 13506; Rible v. Hughes, 24 Cal.2d 437, 444, 150 P.2d 455, 154 A.L.R. 137; Kacsur v. Board of Trustees, supra, 18 Cal.2d 586, 591, 116 P.2d 593), except that a schedule increasing salaries may be adopted during the school year if the Board has reserved the right to do so by an appropriate rule adopted prior to commencement thereof or by a provision in the contract of employment. (Ed. Code, § 13510.)

A classification of teachers for salary purposes based on...