Could a Kentucky school board give teachers a 13.5 percent base raise while administrators got only 5 percent?

Plain-English summary

After a teacher strike, Floyd County’s school board agreed to a proposed teacher salary increase and a reduction in administrators’ extended work time. The superintendent asked whether he had to carry out the agreement and whether administrators could receive a smaller raise. The Kentucky Attorney General said in 1992 that a lawful board agreement could be implemented even if negotiated after the strike; the board had authority over school funds and employee compensation. A 13.5 percent increase to the district’s single base salary schedule, however, would apply to administrators as well as other teachers. The board could reduce extended employment with proper notice, and the AG could not tell from the request whether the quoted 5 percent for administrators described their base raise or their net pay after reduced extended work.

Currency note

This opinion was issued in 1992. Subsequent statutory amendments, court decisions, or later AG opinions may have changed the analysis. Treat this page as historical context, not current legal advice. Verify current law before relying on any specific rule, deadline, or remedy mentioned here.

Historical summary

Superintendents carrying out board agreements

The AG said a superintendent was bound to carry out lawful duties assigned by the board. The teachers’ illegal strike did not itself make the board’s later agreement illegal. The opinion said the board had no duty to bargain with the teachers’ group, but could choose to do so while remaining free to negotiate with other employee groups. It said failure to carry out a legal agreement could be treated as insubordination.

Boards setting salary and extended work

The AG read the single salary schedule as covering certified administrators along with other teachers for the regular 185-day period. An increase to that base schedule therefore reached administrators too. Extended employment and extra-service assignments were separate discretionary expenditures; the board could reduce administrators’ extended time if appropriate notice was given.

Common questions

Did the teachers’ strike make the later board agreement illegal by itself?

The AG said no. It separated the strike’s illegality from the board’s authority to enter an otherwise lawful agreement.

Could administrators receive only a 5 percent increase on a base schedule raised 13.5 percent?

The AG said a 13.5 percent base-schedule increase would apply to administrators. It could not tell whether the proposed 5 percent figure instead described net pay after a reduction in extended employment.

Could the board cut a month of administrators’ extended employment?

The opinion said it could reduce that discretionary extended work with appropriate notice.

Did the superintendent have to implement a lawful board decision?

The AG said a superintendent must perform lawful duties assigned by the board and could be considered insubordinate for refusing to carry out a legal agreement.

Background and statutory framework

The opinion discussed the board’s school-management and compensation authority, the superintendent’s duties under KRS 160.390, and the single salary schedule in KRS 157.320. It distinguished regular base pay from extra time and duties. The AG answered the pay question only to the extent the facts allowed and noted that the salary schedule was subject to State Board approval.

Citations and references

• KRS 160.390 and KRS 160.290(1): superintendent and board responsibilities discussed by the AG.
• KRS 157.320: single salary schedule and teacher definition.
• KRS 161.760: notice for a reduction in teacher salary discussed in the opinion.
• Jefferson County Teachers Association v. Board of Education, Ky., 463 S.W.2d 627 (1971): cited for the rule against public employee strikes.

Source

• Landing page: https://kdla.access.preservica.com/uncategorized/IO_73a6fd59-431c-4583-9386-97ef17d4fa74/
• Original PDF: https://kdla.access.preservica.com/download/file/IO_73a6fd59-431c-4583-9386-97ef17d4fa74

Original opinion text

OAG 92-29
February 25, 1992

Mr. Ronald L. Hager, Superintendent
Floyd County School District
Arnold Avenue
Prestonsburg, Kentucky 41653
Dear Superintendent Hager:
You have requested an opinion from this Office regarding actions of the Floyd County Board of Education taken on August 30, 1990. You stated that, following an illegal strike by the teachers of Floyd County, the local board of education entered into an agreement with the teachers that included the following: (1)

Subject to legal interpretation as determined by the Attorney General of the Commonwealth of Kentucky, all administrators in Floyd County will be cut back by one month in extended employment in 1991-92 or will be cut back to the state recommended work year. Before May 1991, the superintendent will make a recommendation to the board concerning the specific work year of each administrator.

(2)

The 1990-91 Floyd County teachers’ salary schedule will be increased by a minimum of 13.5 percent in 1991-92, if funds are available according to the Assistant Superintendent of Finance.

(3)

Floyd County administrators will receive the staterequired minimum 5 percent raise in 1991-92.

You note that, in 1989, the board adopted a policy that it would not enter into any special or exclusive relationship with any group. In light of the agreement and policy described above, you ask three questions: (1)

Since this action by the local board was the direct result of an illegal strike, adopted after H.B. 940

Mr. Ronald L. Hager
Page 2
OAG 92-29
became law and not recommended by the
Superintendent, as Superintendent, am I required to carry into effect the provisions of the local board adopted agreement? If the agreement is legal, then would I be considered insubordinate if I did not carry out the terms of the agreement between the local board and the teachers union? (2)

Since the local board of education is responsible for insuring adequate financing of the district’s needs by levying taxes and adopting a budget, then does the local board determine the amount of extended employment and compensation thereof for personnel employed beyond the 185 day period?

(3)

Since the state statutes requires [sic] a single salary schedule, can the local board grant a 13.5 percent raise to teachers and only a 5.0 percent raise to administrators for the 1991-92 school year?

In answer to your first question, as an employee of the local board of education, you are bound to carry out the duties and responsibilities assigned by the board so long as those duties are permissible under the law. The superintendent is to prepare all budgets, salary schedules, and reports required by the local board of education and by the state board of elementary and secondary education. KRS 160.390. The local board has responsibility for control and management of the school district as a whole, and has the authority to make contracts and agreements. KRS 160.160(1), and 160.290(1). The board has management and control of school funds, and fixes the compensation of the employees. KRS 160.290(1). Kentucky courts have held that public employees may not strike. Jefferson County Teachers Association v. Board of Education, Ky., 463 S.W.2d 627 (1971). Nevertheless, they have held that public employees “have a right to join a national labor union and to organize themselves to carry out their collective wishes.” Board of Trustees of the University of Kentucky v. Public Employees Council, Ky., 571 S.W.2d 616, 621 (1978). Just as the Board of Trustees of the university had no duty to negotiate with a representative of the group of employees, neither did the local board of education have any duty to do so. Id at

621. So long as the local board remains free to negotiate or contract
     with any other group of employees, it may negotiate with a group of teachers if it so chooses. Id at 621. Therefore, while the board may have reached its agreement after, and due to, the strike, we do not find that the agreement, on that basis, is illegal. Assuming the

Mr. Ronald L. Hager
Page 3
OAG 92-29
agreement is legal, a superintendent who does not carry out the terms of the agreement could be considered insubordinate. In answer to your second question, while the superintendent is responsible for personnel actions including, among other things, hiring and assignments, to the extent that the local board is responsible for control and management of school funds, the board may determine the amount of extended employment and compensation for personnel employed beyond the 185 day period. KRS 160.290(1). Any reduction in salary to a teacher (which includes most administrators for purposes of the teachers tenure law), must be accompanied by appropriate notice, as required by KRS 161.760. In answer to your third question, KRS 157.320 and 702 KAR 3:070 set the standards on salary schedules. (13) ‘Single salary schedule’ means a schedule adopted by a local board from which all teachers are paid for one hundred eighty-five (185) days and is based on training, experience, and such other factors as the State Board for Elementary and Secondary Education may approve and which does not discriminate between salaries paid elementary and secondary teachers. If the budget bill contains a minimum statewide salary schedule, no teacher shall be paid less than the amount specified in the biennial budget salary schedule for the individual teacher’s educational qualifications and experience; (14) ‘Teacher’ means any regular or special teacher, principal, supervisor, superintendent, assistant superintendent, librarian, director of pupil personnel, or other member of the teaching or professional staff engaged in the service of the public elementary and secondary school for whom certification is required as a term of employment.
*

*

*

KRS 157.320(13) and (14).
702 KAR 3:070 requires each board of education to adopt and submit a single salary schedule to the State Board for Elementary and Secondary Education for approval. Each local board may also pay increments to professional employees who provide extra services which

Mr. Ronald L. Hager
Page 4
OAG 92-29
extend beyond the regular school day. Id at Section 3. The increments for extra duties are to be paid from local, or non-SEEK funding. Id at Section 4. Upon review of these standards, it is clear that the “single salary schedule” adopted by Floyd County had to meet the minimum standard for all teachers (which includes administrators), as defined in KRS 157.320, based on 185 days, and any minimum statewide salary schedule specified in the biennial budget. The schedule may be based on training, experience, and other factors that the State Board approves. Accordingly, the Floyd County teachers’ salary schedule could be increased by a minimum of 13.5 percent in 1991-1992. However, an increase of 13.5 percent to the base pay would apply to administrators as well as other teachers. It is not clear from your letter whether the 5 percent increase for school administrators is instead of the 13.5 percent increase included in the “single salary schedule,” or whether the increase of the administrators is a net increase, after reduction in extended employment. Extended employment and extra service assignments are discretionary expenditures by the local school board. KRS 158.070 and 702 KAR 3:070 Section 3. Therefore, it is permissible to cut back administrators by one month of extended employment for 1991-92, or back to the state recommended work year, so long as appropriate notice is given. KRS 161.761. We note that the salary schedule was subject to approval by the State Board for Elementary and Secondary Education. For more information on the factors that may be included in the single salary schedule, you may wish to get in touch with the Office of School Administration and Finance in the Department of Education. Sincerely, CHRIS GORMAN ATTORNEY GENERAL

Anne E. Keating
Assistant Attorney General
AEK/par

Mr. Ronald L. Hager
Page 5
OAG 92-29