SAUCON VALLEY SCHOOL DISTRICT

2097 Polk Valley Road

Hellertown, PA 18055-2400
RESOLUTION
August 25, 2015
WHEREAS, the Board of School Directors of the Saucon Valley School District (herein
Board) has been negotiating a successor Agreement with the Saucon Valley Education
Association (herein Association) since January 2012;
WHEREAS, Board and Association agreed to proceed to non-binding, final best offer
arbitration pursuant to PA. STAT. ANN. tit. 24 Section 11-1125-A of the Public School Code, as
modified by the parties;
WHEREAS, Arbitrator Timothy J. Brown, Esquire, issued his Recommendations on
August 19, 2015, (herein Recommendations);
WHEREAS, consistent with the requirements of Section 1125-A(k), within ten (10) days
of receipt of the determination, the employee organization and the employer must consider or
reject the determination at a properly convened special or regular meeting;
WHEREAS, it is the purpose of this Resolution to act on the Recommendations and to
chart a future course of action as the result of the Recommendations;
WHEREAS, the Recommendations call for increasing starting salaries and the Districts
maximum salaries as follows:
YEAR
2012-2013
2013-2014
2014-2015
2015-2016
2016-2017
2017-2018

B STEP 1
$44,232
$45,582
$46,932
$47,871
$48,948
$50,049

M MAXIMUM
$72,821
$74,171
$75,521
$77,031
$78,765
$80,537

M+60 MAXIMUM
$93,072
$94,422
$95,772
$97,687
$99,885
$102,133

WHEREAS, as an example, the Parkland School District, which is considered by many

to be a wealthier and more affluent school district than the Saucon Valley School District, at the
31265489v1

Masters + 60 level during the 2015-2016 school year has a maximum salary of $94,774.00 and a
Doctoral level salary of $98,274.00;
WHEREAS, the Recommendations outstrip the Parkland School District Contract with
respect to maximum compensation levels, which are not warranted in the opinion of the Board;
WHEREAS, a majority of the Board believes that the Recommendations are
unacceptable with respect to the compensation levels awarded to Bargaining Unit Members;
WHEREAS, only factoring in step movement (not column movement), the total dollar
difference between the Boards last best offer and the Recommendations amounts to
$4,320,260.00;
WHEREAS, the difference in dollars between the Boards withdrawn February 26, 2015,
offer only factoring in step movement and not column movement and the Recommendations
amounts to $2,831,214.00;
WHEREAS, in the retirement Recommendations, the Arbitrator mistakenly reviewed
existing Contract language for retiree healthcare benefits and the retirement incentive that will
create a huge problem if both the District and the Association were to agree to the
Recommendations and would cause grievances and grounds for dispute many years into the
future;
WHEREAS, retirees currently pay $55.00 per month plus the escalation in healthcare
benefit costs for seven (7) years. The Arbitrator proposed that retirees pay $60.00 per month to
$80.00 per month for a six (6) year time period and the Board believes improperly omitted the
obligation to pay the escalated costs;
WHEREAS, a retiree is further currently responsible to pay the full cost of a spouses
health benefit coverage. The Arbitrator proposes in unclear and blatantly wrong language that
2
31265489v1

the contribution will be $70.00 per month rather than the current $55.00 per month and
arguably changes the full cost reimbursement for spouses;
WHEREAS, MOU B governs the existing retirement incentive and applies to teachers
with up to 19.99 years of service. The Arbitrator recommended a retirement incentive program
is described below for employees of the District hired prior to the ratification of the 2008-2012
Agreement with less that [sic] 20 years of service;
WHEREAS, the Arbitrators edit served no purpose and creates no change if interpreted
literally;
WHEREAS, in the case of MOU A, the Arbitrator made no comment at all, effectively
maintaining current Contract language for MOU A. If the intent was the same for MOU B and
no edit was necessary, the Board questions why the Arbitrator put in a meaningless edit to
achieve status quo;
WHEREAS, this is not an issue of nominal cost, as the present value cost is
approximately $500,000.00 so this issue becomes a significant issue in the future due to the
ambiguity and imprecision of the Arbitrators language;
WHEREAS, with respect to graduate study, the current Collective Bargaining
Agreement allows for twelve (12) credits per year for column movement and the Boards
proposal was nine (9) credits per year;
WHEREAS, with respect to graduate study, the Arbitrator adopted the Boards proposal,
with the exception that nine (9) credits per year was changed to six (6) credits per year for postMasters courses, and resulting in no more than one (1) column movement per year;
WHEREAS, the Boards interpretation is that by including both clauses in this sentence
for credits and column movement that the Arbitrator intended to apply a six (6) credit limit from
3
31265489v1

Masters to Masters + 60, ultimately creating a ten (10) year process to achieve that column on
the salary schedule. The Board believes that this interpretation is likely not palatable to many
Association members; and
WHEREAS, as the result of the foregoing, the Board seeks an opportunity to meet with
the Association leadership to discuss modifying the framework of the Arbitrators
Recommendations to address the Boards concerns at a session that will take place prior to the
Association voting on the Recommendations.
NOW, THEREFORE, the Board of School Directors of the Saucon Valley School
District hereby resolves as follows:
1

Consistent with the requirements of Section 1125-A(k), the Board hereby rejects

the Recommendations presented by Arbitrator Timothy J. Brown, Esquire, on August 19, 2015.
2

Notwithstanding the foregoing and in anticipation of the Association having a

general membership meeting scheduled for August 27, 2015, to vote on the Recommendations,
the Board Members constituting the Boards negotiating team intend to meet and discuss with the
Association leadership alternatives to settle the differences between the parties, subject to
ratification by both the Board and the Association membership.
3

The Board remains committed to negotiating in good faith with the Association

the areas of ambiguity and confusion in the Recommendations, what the Board perceives to be
an excessive compensation Recommendation, and any other issues that the parties deem
necessary in order to arrive at a Tentative Agreement.
4

In such negotiations, the Board remains committed to using the Arbitrators

Recommendations as a framework, subject to modifying the compensation, retirement incentive,

4
31265489v1

retiree healthcare benefits, and other provisions in the Agreement deemed necessary by both
parties.

BOARD OF SCHOOL DIRECTORS OF

THE SAUCON VALLEY SCHOOL
DISTRICT

Attest:

By:
David Bonenberger
Board Secretary

Michael Karabin
Board President

5
31265489v1

CERTIFICATION
I, David Bonenberger, hereby certify that I am the Secretary of the Board of School
Directors of the Saucon Valley School District, and the foregoing Resolution was duly adopted
by the Board of School Directors at a duly advertised meeting held on August 25, 2015, at which
time a quorum was present, the Resolution being approved by a vote of _____ to _____ on the
25th day of August, 2015.

David Bonenberger
Board Secretary

6
31265489v1