72-2229. Agreements may provide for arbitration of disputes; enforcement of arbitration agreements. (a) A board of education and a professional employees' organization who enter into an agreement covering terms and conditions of professional service may include in such agreement procedures for final and binding arbitration of such disputes as may arise involving the interpretation, application or violation of such agreement.
(b) Where a party to such agreement is aggrieved by the failure, neglect or refusal of the other party to proceed to arbitration in the manner provided for in such agreement, such aggrieved party may file a complaint in court for a summary action without jury seeking an order directing that the arbitration proceed in the manner provided for in such agreement.
History: L. 1970, ch. 284, § 12; July 1.
Source or Prior Law:
72-5424.
Law Review and Bar Journal References:
"Teachers and the School Board—Negotiations in Kansas," Janet Chubb and David Gray, 15 W.L.J. 457, 460, 462 (1976).
CASE ANNOTATIONS
1. Mentioned in action involving collective negotiations of teachers' association with school board. National Education Association v. Board of Education, 212 Kan. 741, 747, 748, 512 P.2d 426.
2. Professional employees organizations authorized to sue and be sued in association's name. Seaman Dist. Teachers' Ass'n v. Board of Education, 217 Kan. 233, 244, 535 P.2d 889.
3. Binding arbitration of grievances not mandatorily negotiable but may be negotiated by mutual agreement. Chee-Craw Teachers Association v. U.S.D. No. 247, 225 Kan. 561, 569, 593 P.2d 406.
4. Applied; school board precluded from rescinding its decision until individual teachers had reasonable time to accept or reject. Burrton Education Ass'n v. U.S.D. No. 369, 4 Kan. App. 2d 141, 143, 604 P.2d 57.
5. Trial court order granting motion to compel arbitration is interlocutory rendering motion unappealable. NEA-Topeka v. U.S.D. No. 501, 260 Kan. 838, 839, 925 P.2d 835 (1996).
6. Trial court holding that plaintiffs did not have to exhaust administrative remedies when remedy was inadequate upheld. NEA-Coffeyville v. U.S.D. No. 445, 268 Kan. 384, 388, 397, 996 P.2d 821 (2000).
7. Plaintiff's failure to invoke mandatory contractual grievance procedure prevents judicial interpretation of contract. NEA-Topeka v. U.S.D. No. 501, 269 Kan. 534, 7 P.3d 1174 (2000).
|
|