Forward shift

April 2, 2006

JOEL DAVIDSON

Frontiersman reporter

MAT-SU - The union that represents 112 custodians in the Mat-Su School District claims workers rights were intentionally violated when the Mat-Su School Board voted last month to remove the custodians from next year's budget by approving a contract with private company NANA Management Services.

The school board voted 4-3 on March 1 to enter a three-year contract with NANA to clean Mat-Su schools and provide light maintenance.

Ron Rucker, union president for the Classified Employees Association, claims the district has a legal obligation to fulfill the three-year-contract it entered with CEA members last year.

By approving the NANA deal, Rucker said, the school board effectively violated a legally binding contract with union members.

To resolve the issue, CEA has filed an administrative grievance with the district, the first step before heading to arbitration hearings.

Rucker, however, said he doesn't expect the district will change its stance.

Rucker added that CEA is prepared to take legal action if arbitration doesn't work, and the union already has filed an unfair labor practice suit with the state Department of Labor.

That suit is on hold, however, until discussions with the district are exhausted.

&#8220We would call off the dogs if the school board terminated the [NANA] contract,” Rucker said.

The district's labor relations director, Mark Pasier, argued that the school district is within its rights to reorganize a contract to fit its operational need.

&#8220The contract has not changed,” he said Tuesday.

Within the contract, the district's Chief School Administrator Bob Doyle has the right to reorganize and restructure personnel as operational needs dictate, Pasier explained.

&#8220Has the district reorganized in the past? Yes,” Pasier said.

&#8220As the community has grown the last three or four years, we've added more bus drivers and custodians and support staff. Those are restructuring steps, just as reducing employees in some departments are restructuring steps.” The district restructures human resources every year to meet operational needs, Pasier explained, it's just that most restructuring moves add rather than delete positions.

&#8220People are latching onto this decision because we are deleting positions,” he said.

The district still is under contract with about 500 classified employees, Pasier added.

The entire dispute might be moot, however, if the school board votes to terminate the NANA contract at its April 5 meeting. At the last meeting, board members Linda Menard and Rob Wells managed to get the issue back before the board to consider whether to terminate the contract outright. Whether they muster the four votes needed is another matter.

It also is unknown whether terminating the NANA contract would be legal, said Jack Sherman, the district's assistant superintendent of business.

&#8220Usually when you terminate a contract, it is based on performance,” he said. &#8220In this case, there is no performance yet.”

NANA doesn't begin work for the district until July 1, but Sherman said the company already has purchased new equipment and hired employees in anticipation of the July start date.

Before deciding the fate of the NANA contract on April 5, the school board is scheduled to hear a legal opinion from the school district's attorney as to whether terminating the NANA contract is lawful.

Contact Joel Davidson at 352-2266 or joel.davidson@ frontiersman.com.