Title: An act relating to faculty salary increments for community and technical colleges.

Brief Description: Providing a specific funding mechanism for making community and technical college faculty salary increment awards.

Sponsors: Representatives Kenney, Cox, McDermott, O'Brien, Jarrett, Berkey, Fromhold, Chase, McIntire, Lantz, Upthegrove, Morrell, McCoy, Priest, Boldt, Clements, Buck, Kagi, Edwards, Kessler, Linville, Santos, Conway and Rockefeller.

Brief Summary of Substitute Bill

• Requires community and technical colleges to award faculty salary increments based on local collective bargaining agreements.

• Establishes the intent of the Legislature to appropriate funds in the biennial budget to cover the costs of increments.

Majority Report: The substitute bill be substituted therefor and the substitute bill do pass. Signed by 15 members: Representatives Kenney, Chair; Fromhold, Vice Chair; Cox, Ranking Minority Member; Priest, Assistant Ranking Minority Member; Berkey, Boldt, Buck, Chase, Clements, Condotta, Gombosky, Jarrett, Lantz, McCoy and Morrell.

Salary increments are pay increases based on years of service and, in some pay systems, additional education.

In some cases employees receive increments even if there is no state funding provided specifically for that purpose. For example classified employees in the state personnel system receive 5 percent increments for each year of service (up to a cap), but the Legislature assumes that state agencies can pay the costs through savings from employee turnover or other resources. Classified staff in the K-12 system receive increments based on local collective bargaining agreements, but the state funding formulas for K-12 are not adjusted based on these costs. School districts rely on turnover savings and other resources.

Certificated instructional staff in the K-12 system receive increments based on years of service and education. In this case the state funding formulas specifically recognize the costs school districts incur through the statewide salary schedule.

Salaries for faculty at community and technical colleges are also established through local collective bargaining agreements, and most salary schedules provide for increments based on some combination of years of service and education. In this case, however, state law limits salary increases provided through collective bargaining agreements to the percentage authorized in the biennial budget (usually a cost-of-living increase). This restriction is reinforced in language within the budget bill. As a consequence community and technical colleges may not use turnover savings or other resources to pay for faculty increments without a special authorization.

For at least the last 10 years, the Legislature has added approximately $1 million each year specifically to pay for community and technical college faculty increments. Language in the budget bill authorized colleges to use turnover savings or money provided for cost-of-living salary increases for faculty increments. In the 2002 supplemental budget, the Legislature eliminated the additional state funding for faculty increments for the 2002-03 academic year.

Community and technical college boards of trustees will award faculty salary increments based on local collective bargaining agreements. The State Board for Community and Technical Colleges (SBCTC) will include in its biennial budget request the projected costs of increments for the community and technical college system, adjusted by expected faculty turnover savings. It is the intent of the Legislature that the costs of faculty increments should be funded with a state appropriation. The appropriation should exclude turnover savings and not exceed 1.5 percent of the faculty salary base. When the SBCTC receives a line item appropriation, it will distribute the funds in a fair and equitable manner. The SBCTC will convene a task force to advise it on guidelines for this distribution.

The college faculty representative on a task force to advise the SBCTC on distribution of the increment funds represents both part-time and full-time faculty.

Effective Date of Substitute Bill: The bill takes effect 90 days after adjournment of session in which bill is passed.

Testimony For: (In support) Faculty increments are very important to the colleges and to the SBCTC. Funding has been consistent over the last 10 years (with the exception of 2002), but in each biennial budget the system requests funding as a maintenance level item and instead the funding for increments is treated as a policy discussion. Putting into statute the expectation that funding should be provided for increments is intended to make this an established part of the budget process and not subject to uncertainty. Providing some certainty in faculty salaries is a retention tool. Now there is a salary schedule in place, but no guarantee that the work or additional education will be recognized. This is not a labor-management issue, but an issue of quality education.

(With concerns) Community colleges continue to balance their budgets on the backs of part-time faculty. Two-thirds of part-time faculty receive no increments at all. Providing increments to full-time faculty only exacerbates the salary differential over time. The bill should be expanded to ensure part-time faculty are treated equitably.

Testified: (In support) Representative Kenney, prime sponsor; Mary Alice Grobins, State Board for Community and Technical Colleges; Wendy Rader-Konofalski, George Darkenwald, and Sandra Schroeder, Washington Federation of Teachers; Ruth Windhover, Washington Education Association; Ellie Menzies, Service Employees International Union; and Lynn Dodson, Seattle Central Community College.