February 2, 1990
Mr. Stephen L. Weld
Mulcahy & Wherry, S.C.
PO Box 1030
Eau Claire, WI 54702-1030
Mr. William Kalin
Wisconsin Federation of Teachers
1703 Logan Avenue
Superior, WI 54880
re: Wisconsin Indianhead VTAE District
Case 36 No. 39705 MA-4889
(parties' 7-14-89 request for award clarification)
I have now received and considered Mr. Weld's July 14, 1989 letter jointly
clarification; my July 31 response requesting answers to certain questions; your jointly-signed
letter dated January 10, 1990; Mr. Weld's unilateral response to Question #6 bearing that
(copy for Mr. Kalin's file enclosed); and Mr. Kalin's unilateral response to Question #6
25, 1990. This letter constitutes my supplemental award providing the clarification you have
The August 29, 1988 DECISION AND AWARD at issue read as follows:
1. The District did not
Agreement by its failure to employ Grievant as an FTI
prior to January 15, 1988.
2. The District did violate the
specifically the second paragraph of Art.
IV.R.1. thereof, by its failure on and after January 15, 1988 to transfer Grievant to the FTI
then held by Arlene Burke.
3. By way of remedy for said violation, the District shall
offer to employ
Grievant L. David Lewis in the Farm Training Instructor position held by Arlene Burke on
15, 1988 or in an equivalent Rice Lake Campus position, without loss of seniority or other
privileges that he would have enjoyed had his full-time employment not been
page 2 -- 2-2-90 letter regarding Wisconsin Indianhead VTAE Case 36
terminated as of that date. In addition, the District
shall make Grievant
(without interest) for losses of pay and benefits experienced by him as a consequence of the
District's Agreement violation noted in 2, above. The District shall be entitled to the
customary set-offs including but not limited to a set-off for Grievant's interim earnings which
he would not have earned had the abovenoted violation not occurred.
The parties have requested a clarification of the bold-faced portion of the Award. As
in the parties' July 14 letter, the issue and parties' positions are succinctly framed as follows:
The District interpreted this to mean that Grievant Lewis was to
paid on the basis
of a normal 38 week teacher's contract as Grievant had been paid in the 1986-87 contract
for that matter, since the commencement of his employment in 1979. The Federation
Grievant Lewis should have received pay and benefits based on a 44 week contract. The
reasons that the FTI position of Arlene Burke called for 6 weeks of teaching beyond the
school year and, therefore, had an extended or 44 week contract.
The boldfaced back pay order language directed that Grievant Lewis be made "whole
interest) for losses of pay and benefits experienced by him as a consequence of the District's
Agreement violation noted in 2, above." That violation, in turn, was a "failure on and after
15, 1988 to transfer Grievant to the FTI position then held by Arlene Burke." There appears
no dispute that the "position . . . held by Arlene Burke" on January 14, 1988 was a 44 week
This is confirmed both in terms of job posting specifications for that position (Answer to
#3), the fact that Mr. Splett was initially hired into that position to work 44 weeks, and the
Ms. Burke wound up in fact performing 44 weeks of work (answer to Question #4).
Nothing in the
information supplied appears to have made the extended nature of the contract for an FTI
specific only to either Ms. Burke or Mr. Splett. Indeed, the Answer to Question #1
that the length of contract for such positions in a particular year depends on "an annual
review by the
College of the need; which in turn is determined by the size of the geographic area served
The District evidently determined that the position held by Arlene Burke was one for
the need required 44 weeks of work. Since the violation for which Grievant was to be made
was the District's failure to transfer Grievant to that position, it follows that the boldfaced
portion of the DECISION AND AWARD, above, ordered that Grievant was to be made
the loss of a 44 week position, subject to customary set-offs.
While it is true that the foregoing analysis results in Grievant
page 3 -- 2-2-90 letter regarding Wisconsin Indianhead VTAE Case 36
enjoying an advantage relative to the 38 week length of contract to which he had been
each of the eight years prior to 1987-88 (Answer to Question #1), the District eliminated
been Grievant's prior position. Grievant's prior position was not the one to which Grievant
improperly denied a transfer. It therefore is not the one by which his loss is to be measured.
For the foregoing reasons, and subject to customary set-offs, it is the Arbitrator's
SUPPLEMENTAL AWARD regarding the question presented in the parties' July 14, 1989
In determining his back pay for the 1987-88 school year, Mr.
Lewis is entitled to
pay for six
weeks of summer instruction because of the extended nature of Mr. Burke's particular
rather than being entitled only to compensation for a normal 38 week teaching position.
Please note that I have not forwarded copies of this letter to anyone other than the
you. I leave it to you to communicate about the matter to those you respectively represent.
Very truly yours,
/s/ Marshall L. Gratz
Marshall L. Gratz
4449 North Maryland Avenue
Shorewood, WI 53211
phone: (414) 963-9793