Federation of Connecticut Taxpayer Organizations

1. (NEW) Municipal officials, news media, and members of the public are often highly critical of the teacher binding arbitration law and of arbitrators� decisions on particular contracts. How do such criticisms affect your decisions as an arbitrator?

2. (NEW) The Teacher Negotiation Act (TNA) requires arbitrators to give priority to the public interest and the school district�s financial capability in deciding issues. Do these two factors ever conflict? How do you give priority to both? How important is a �priority� factor? Can other factors overcome it?

3. (NEW) Does the fact that voters in a particular district or in several districts in the state have repeatedly rejected local education budgets weigh in your consideration of a district�s financial capability?

4. (NEW) A common criticism of the binding arbitration law is that it requires arbitrators to choose between the parties� last best offers rather than allowing them to �split the difference. � What is your opinion of the last-best-offer system? What do you think the effect of eliminating it would be?

5. (NEW) Unlike the Municipal Employee Relations Act, the TNA deadlines are tied to the local budget submission date and cannot be waived by mutual agreement of the parties. Do you think the TNA�s relatively short negotiation timetable gives the parties enough time to reach an agreement without arbitration?

6. (NEW) When the state took control of the Hartford school system and set up financial oversight boards for West Haven and Waterbury, the legislature established special arbitration procedures for teacher contracts in those cities, overriding the TNA. Do you consider these special legislative acts to be a criticism of TNA arbitration decisions in general?

7. (NEW) When a town rejects an initial arbitration award, the TNA requires the issues to go to a review panel. How effective is the review system? Does a town�s rejection typically change the outcome? Does it have any effect?

8. (NEW) Many municipal officials think that, when a town rejects an award, the parties should resume negotiations, as is the case under the state employee collective bargaining law. What do you think of this proposal? Does it have advantages or disadvantages compared to the current system?

QUESTIONS FOR ARBITRATORS REPRESENTING THE PUBLIC

1. (NEW) How can the public be assured that you are truly neutral?

2. (NEW) Do you base your decision only on the evidence and arguments the parties present in the arbitration hearings?

3. (NEW) The TNA allows the parties to mutually agree to use a single neutral arbitrator rather than a three-member panel. How does a proceeding with a single arbitrator differ from one with a panel? In what kinds of situations might the parties prefer a single arbitrator to a panel?

QUESTIONS FOR ARBITRATORS REPRESENTING PARTIES

1. You will be representing the interests of unions or school districts in arbitration decision discussions. How do you seek to influence the outcome?

2. (NEW) Do you ever vote against the offer of the party whose interests you represent? In what type of situation would such a vote be justified?