Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Compensation topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Board committee debates whether Act 93 negotiations should be handled by personnel subcommittee or full board
Summary
Committee members debated whether administrative compensation under Act 93 should be negotiated by a personnel subcommittee or the full board; legal language in existing law referring to the 'school employer' prompted disagreement and the group agreed to send the draft compensation policy to PSBA for review.
Committee member Elizabeth presented a draft compensation plan that adds explicit Act 93 language and urged the committee to align policy text with legislative requirements. The discussion centered on whether the board should formally delegate administrative compensation negotiations to a personnel subcommittee or reserve negotiation authority for the full board.
Elizabeth pointed to statutory language using the term "school employers" and argued that the law requires the board itself to meet and discuss compensation with administrators upon written request. Other members, and an advisor with experience in other districts, said using a personnel committee can streamline negotiations and reduce the number of full‑board meetings required.
"If you put [committee] language in there, you're pigeonholing yourself," the advisor said, urging some flexibility in policy draft language. Several members said the contentious Act 93 process this year divided the board and that clear committee procedures could avoid repeated meetings.
The committee agreed to send the compensation draft to PSBA for review and to consider adding language that would permit the board president to form a committee to handle negotiations, while leaving final authority with the board. No formal policy change was adopted at the meeting.
