14. Automatic Collective Bargaining Exemption

In Alabama, it is illegal for teachers to engage in collective bargaining. In addition, Alabama law provides that charter schools are exempt from participation in any school district personnel policies.

Alaska state statute requires that public school teachers, including public charter school teachers, collectively bargain. It requires that collective bargaining address 10 topics: wages, fringe benefits, hours, length of preparation periods, terms and conditions of employment, extracurricular duties, leave, transfers and reassignment, layoffs, and grievance procedures. Two topics are expressly excluded from bargaining: length of the teacher school year and class load or size.Alaska law requires all charter schools to be part of existing collective bargaining agreements, but schools can apply for exemptions.
Prior to the Supreme Court’s ruling in Janus v. AFSCME, Alaska allowed unions to impose mandatory agency fees on non-members. The Supreme Court decision renders that state law unconstitutional. As a result of the decision, the Alaska governor took a step to affirm that the state will not play a role in encouraging or discouraging union membership by issuing an administrative order in August 2018 asserting that the state as an employer remains neutral with respect to membership in an employee organization and will not, for example, share employee information with any third parties — including unions.
Alaska state statute allows for a group of employees to challenge an existing representative if at least 30 percent of a proposed collective bargaining unit want to be represented by a new exclusive representative. If the state labor relations agency has reasonable cause to believe that a question of representation exists, it conducts a hearing and directs a secret ballot. The state labor relations agency determines the rules of the elections and eligibility to vote. If no choices receive a majority, there will be a runoff. An organization will be certified as an exclusive representative if it wins a majority of votes cast. Votes may not be held more than once a year. Collective bargaining agreements cannot bar a petition for a new vote if more than three years have elapsed since the agreement or its renewal.

In Arizona, it is illegal for teachers to engage in collective bargaining. In addition, Arizona law provides that all charter schools are their own legal entity and thus do not have to abide by any outside agreements.

Arkansas allows (but does not require) collective bargaining for public school teachers. There are 12 items for which collective bargaining is permitted (but not required) for those teachers in Arkansas: wages, insurance or fringe benefits, pension and retirement benefits, length of preparation periods, terms and conditions of employment, length of the school year, extracurricular duties, leave, layoffs, dismissal, evaluation process or instruments, and grievance procedures. No items are expressly excluded from bargaining.Prior to the Supreme Court’s Janus v. AFSCME decision, Arkansas state law prohibited unions from charging agency fees to non-union members of any collective bargaining unit. Therefore, the Supreme Court’s decision did not have any direct effect on unions in the state.
Arkansas law provides that open-enrollment charter schools are exempt from participation in school district personnel policies, but conversion charter schools are bound by school district personnel policies. The charter statute is silent on collective bargaining.
Exclusive representation for a public agency’s collective bargaining unit in Arkansas is neither granted nor denied under state labor law. Generally, courts have held that in states without laws or without comprehensive laws, public employers have the authority to grant recognition to public sector unions and to enter into legally enforceable collective bargaining agreements covering employees.

California requires that non-charter public school teachers collectively bargain. State statute requires that collective bargaining address 10 topics: wages, fringe benefits, hours, terms and conditions of employment, class load or size, leave, transfers and reassignment, layoffs, evaluation process or instruments, and grievance procedures. No items are expressly excluded from bargaining.California law provides a charter school with the ability to opt out of the district’s collective bargaining agreement during the application process.
Prior to the Supreme Court’s ruling in Janus v. AFSCME, California allowed mandatory agency fees. The Supreme Court decision renders that state law unconstitutional. The state has since enacted several pieces of legislation in response to this decision, including a bill to prohibit public employers from deterring or discouraging public employees from becoming or remaining members of an employee organization and a bill authorizing an employee organization to make an offer to settle a dispute with an employer, with the employer covering the costs if the offer is not accepted and a more favorable award is not obtained.
Employees must submit a petition to the state’s Public Employment Relations Board indicating a desire to be represented by a petitioning organization, or to rescind current representation, with at least 30 percent of the employees in the unit showing initial proof of support. Unless otherwise directed by the board, to be eligible to vote in an election, employees must be employed in the voting unit at the cutoff date for eligibility and still employed on the day they cast their ballot.

Colorado state statute permits (but does not require) collective bargaining for non-charter public school teachers. It neither mandates nor prohibits specific topics that collective bargaining must address.Colorado law does not explicitly address the issue of whether collective bargaining agreements for traditional public schools apply to charter school employees, but it has been consistently interpreted to exempt charter schools from district collective bargaining agreements.
Prior to the Supreme Court’s Janus v. AFSCME decision, Colorado state law neither required nor prohibited unions from charging agency fees to non-union members of any collective bargaining unit. Subsequent to the Supreme Court decision, it will be illegal to charge agency fees.
The state’s labor law is also silent on the process for selecting or certifying an exclusive representative for a public agency’s bargaining unit, which presumably delegates this authority to local jurisdictions. Generally, courts have held that in states without laws or without comprehensive laws, public employers have the authority to grant recognition to public sector unions and to enter into legally enforceable collective bargaining agreements covering employees.

Connecticut state statute requires collective bargaining for non-charter public school teachers. It requires that collective bargaining address eleven topics: wages, hours, length of preparation periods, terms and conditions of employment, extracurricular duties, leave, management rights, transfers and reassignment, layoffs, dismissal, and grievance procedures. The law expressly prohibits bargaining on pension and retirement benefits.

Connecticut law allows a state charter school’s teachers to negotiate as a separate unit with the charter school governing council or work independently. It requires a local charter school’s teachers to be covered by the school district collective bargaining agreement, but such an agreement may be modified by a majority of a charter school’s teachers and the charter school’s governing council.
Prior to the Supreme Court’s ruling in Janus v. AFSCME, Connecticut allowed unions to impose mandatory agency fees on non-members. The Supreme Court decision renders that state law unconstitutional. Since the decision, Connecticut has enacted a new law that requires public agencies to notify employees and the collective bargaining unit upon receiving a permissible request for that employees’ personnel files.

Connecticut law states that employees may petition the state board of labor relations for an election or change of exclusive representative if they demonstrate that 30 percent or more of the employees of the collective bargaining unit desire a change. Challengers must show that at least 10 percent of the employees desire their representation instead. The board must hold an election by secret ballot to determine whether and by which organization the majority of employees in the unit desire to be represented. It prohibits elections within a 12-month period of a previous election and during the term of an existing collective bargaining agreement unless there is good cause.

Delaware state statute requires that non-charter public school teachers collectively bargain and that six topics must be covered in bargaining: wages, insurance or fringe benefits, hours, terms and conditions of employment, leave, and grievance procedures. No items are expressly excluded from bargaining.Delaware law provides that charter schools are exempt from participation in any district collective bargaining agreements.
Prior to the Supreme Court’s ruling in Janus v. AFSCME, Delaware allowed mandatory agency fees. The Supreme Court decision renders that state law unconstitutional. There has not been any reactive legislation enacted that applies to teachers.
Delaware law states that employees may petition the Public Employment Relations Board for a change or decertification of the exclusive representative. Employees must demonstrate support with signatures from 30 percent of the employees in the bargaining unit and allege that the exclusive representative is no longer the choice of the majority of the employees in the bargaining unit. No petition shall be entertained in the first three years of an active collective bargaining agreement. Petitions must be filed no more than 180 days and no less than 120 days after the expiration of the agreement or if one year has passed since an initial election and no collective bargaining agreement has been executed. The law provides that an election is not necessary if the organization can demonstrate support from a majority of the unit. No election may be held within a year of the past election.

The District of Columbia requires that non-charter public school teachers collectively bargain and that four topics must be covered in bargaining: wages, insurance or fringe benefits, hours, and terms and conditions of employment. Only two items are expressly excluded from collective bargaining: length of the teacher school year and evaluation process or instruments.D.C. law exempts charter schools from school district collective bargaining agreements.
Prior to the Supreme Court’s ruling in Janus v. AFSCME, D.C. allowed mandatory agency fees. The Supreme Court decision renders that law unconstitutional. There has not been any reactive legislation enacted.
In D.C., the Public Employee Relations Board is required to regulate procedures for decertification of an exclusive representative upon the request of 30 percent of the employees or the D.C. government agency in question. Employers may certify an exclusive representative without a full election via an alternative method of majority support, such as a card check showing organization membership. Elections may be conducted by the board or by a mutually agreed-upon impartial body.

Florida requires that non-charter public school teachers collectively bargain. In Florida, eight items must be bargained: wages, insurance or fringe benefits, pension and retirement benefits, hours, terms and conditions of employment, leave, dismissal, and grievance procedures. Four items may be bargained: length of the school year, class load or size, transfers and reassignment, and layoffs. No items are expressly excluded from bargaining.Florida law provides that charter school employees may choose to work independently, collectively bargain as a separate unit, or collectively bargain as part of the existing district collective bargaining unit. Employees of conversion charter schools are automatically considered part of the district bargaining unit, unless they opt out.
Prior to the Supreme Court’s ruling in Janus v. AFSCME, Florida law prohibited unions from charging agency fees to non-union members of any collective bargaining unit. Therefore, the Supreme Court’s decision did not have any effect on unions in the state.
Florida law states that public employers may recognize exclusive representatives independently. If the employer does not recognize the exclusive representative, however, employees may petition the Public Employees Relations Commission to do so. The petition must represent at least 30 percent of employees. The commission then conducts an election that must include the petitioning organization and any registered employee organization desiring placement on the ballot with at least 10 percent of employees in support. No petition may be filed within 12 months of a prior election or an effective certification of an exclusive representative. If a collective bargaining agreement is in place, petitions may only be filed during the 90 to 150-day window preceding the expiration of the agreement.
In spring 2018, Florida enacted a new law putting any teachers’ union with less than 50 percent dues-paying membership at risk of decertification. This law is currently being challenged in a lawsuit by the Florida Education Association.

In Georgia, it is illegal for teachers to engage in collective bargaining. In addition, Georgia law provides that charter schools are exempt from participation in any district personnel policies.Georgia law provides that charter schools are exempt from participation in any district personnel policies.

Hawaii state statute requires collective bargaining for all public school teachers, including public charter school teachers. It requires that collective bargaining address five topics: wages, insurance and fringe benefits, hours, terms and conditions of employment, and grievance procedures. Bargaining on the length of the school year is also permitted. No items are expressly excluded from bargaining. Hawaii law provides that the collective bargaining agreements for traditional public schools apply to charter school employees unless the exclusive union representatives and the local school board of a charter school enter into supplemental agreements that contain additional items to facilitate decentralized decision-making. In addition, any person with civil service status in a conversion charter school retains that status and all privileges and benefits as other civil servants.
Prior to the Supreme Court’s ruling in Janus v. AFSCME, Hawaii allowed unions to impose mandatory agency fees on non-members. The Supreme Court decision renders that state law unconstitutional. Since the decision, Hawaii has enacted a new law that requires employees who wish to opt out of dues to notify unions within 30 days of the anniversary of their first deduction.
Regarding unions’ standing as the exclusive representative of employees in a bargaining unit, Hawaii state statute requires that 50 percent of employees support the exclusive representative, as evidenced by names and signatures collected within a two-month period. The law provides for an election and a runoff election (if appropriate to resolve any dispute). Once certified, the organization remains an exclusive representative until or unless it is replaced, decertified, or dissolved. A new election cannot be held for 12 months.

In Idaho, collective bargaining is required for non-charter public school teachers and must address three topics: wages, insurance or fringe benefits, and leave. Additionally, bargaining may be conducted for hours, length of prep periods, terms and conditions of employment, length of the school year, class load or size, extracurricular duties, management rights, transfers and reassignments, dismissal, evaluations, and grievance procedures. The only topic expressly excluded from bargaining is layoffs.
Idaho law provides that charter schools are exempt from district collective bargaining agreements.

Prior to the Supreme Court’s Janus v. AFSCME decision, Idaho state law prohibited unions from charging agency fees to non-union members of any collective bargaining unit. Therefore, the Supreme Court’s decision did not have any effect on unions in the state. There has not been any reactive legislation enacted.

Idaho education code states that the board of trustees for a school district or designated representatives shall enter into negotiation upon its own initiative or at the request of a local education organization representing the majority of professional employees. Upon request, the local education organization must show written evidence establishing that at least 50 percent of professional employees indicate agreement to be represented for negotiation. Idaho labor code states that when a question arises concerning representation in a collective bargaining unit, the director of the Department of Labor shall investigate and may take a secret ballot. In cases where a secret ballot is taken, the ballot shall permit a vote against representation. No election shall be held within a 12-month period of another election.

Illinois law requires that non-charter public school teachers collectively bargain. State statute requires that collective bargaining address eight topics: wages, fringe benefits, pension/retirement benefits, hours, terms and conditions of employment, extracurricular duties, layoffs, and grievance procedures. In addition, length of the school year, class load or size, management rights, and evaluations may be bargained. No items are expressly excluded from bargaining.
Illinois law provides that charter schools are exempt from district collective bargaining agreements. It also specifies that any bargaining unit of charter school employees must be separate and distinct from any bargaining units formed from employees of a school district in which the charter school is located.

Prior to the Supreme Court’s Janus v. AFSCME decision, the state permitted unions to charge mandatory agency fees to members of a collective bargaining unit who are not members of the union. The Supreme Court decision renders that state law unconstitutional. Since the decision, Illinois has enacted legislation that defines substitute teacher recruiting firms and includes a provision preventing school districts from using substitute teacher recruiting firms to circumvent collective bargaining agreements or laws.
Illinois law states that employers must recognize exclusive representatives upon evidence that the organization has been designated by the majority of employees in the appropriate unit. The employer must post notice of this recognition for at least 20 school days and then send notification to the Illinois Educational Labor Relations Board (IELRB) for approval. The IELRB defines what a unit is and will resolve any disputes as to the majority status of the representative. Any other organization seeking to become the exclusive representative must petition the board within the 20-day notice period with evidence of at least 15 percent support among employees in the unit. Alternatively, the organization seeking representation can go around the employer and straight to the IELRB with evidence that at least 30 percent of employees desire their representation or at least 50 percent of employees desire someone other than their current representative. Employers can also petition the board if they doubt the authenticity of evidence presented to them or the majority status of the current exclusive representative. The board will investigate petition claims and evidence and, if necessary, will conduct an election no less than 90 days after the petition was filed. No election may be conducted during an active collective bargaining agreement except between January 15 and March 1 in the final year of an agreement (which are limited by law to a maximum of three years per agreement). In the case of an election, choices shall be the incumbent organization, any organization with at least 15 percent support, or no one.

In Indiana, collective bargaining is required for non-charter public school teachers and must address three topics: wages, benefits, and pension and retirement benefits. Numerous other topics are expressly prohibited, including hours, lesson preparation periods, terms and conditions of employment, length of the school year, class size, extracurricular duties, leave, management rights, transfers and reassignment, layoffs, dismissal, and evaluation.
Indiana law provides that charter schools are exempt from district collective bargaining agreements. Charter school teachers may choose to work independently or collectively bargain as a separate unit.

Prior to the Supreme Court’s Janus v. AFSCME decision, Indiana state law prohibited unions from charging agency fees to non-union members of any collective bargaining unit. As a result, the Supreme Court’s decision did not have any direct effect on unions in the state.

Indiana state statute also lays out a process for employees to designate an exclusive representative who must have the support of a majority of employees to be recognized by an employer. The employer must provide 30 days’ notice to employees that it intends to recognize the exclusive representative. During that 30 days, a competing organization, an individual employee, an employee petition, or an employer inquiry can prompt an investigation by the Indiana Education Employment Relations Board and a new election of an exclusive representative. A new election cannot be held within two years of an election.

Charter schools authorized by non-district authorizers are exempt from participation in any outside collective bargaining agreements.
Prior to the Supreme Court’s Janus v. AFSCME decision, Iowa state law prohibited unions from compelling agency fees from non-union members. Therefore, the Supreme Court’s decision did not have any direct effect on unions in the state. There have been some recent changes in state policy regarding public sector unions, however. Recent changes in state code now require that recertification occur with each new collective bargaining agreement and that an exclusive representative demonstrate support from a majority of employees, not just a majority of votes cast. In addition, a new law passed in 2017 prohibits school districts from authorizing or administering a deduction of membership dues from its employees.
Iowa state statute lays out a process for employees to designate an exclusive representative, an authority that it delegates to the Public Employees Relations Board (PERB). To certify an exclusive representative, the bargaining unit or the employer must submit evidence from 30 percent of employees requesting collective bargaining. The PERB must evaluate the request and initiate an election, in which a labor organization must receive votes from a majority of employees. If the labor organization fails to secure votes from a majority of employees, there is no provision for a runoff election and the labor organization fails to win a right to exclusive representation. An election cannot be held less than 150 days from the end of an existing collective bargaining agreement.

Kansas state law requires collective bargaining for all public school teachers, including public charter school teachers. Collective bargaining must cover nine topics: wages, insurance or fringe benefits, pension or retirement benefits, hours, terms and conditions of employment, extracurricular duties, leave, dismissal, and grievance procedures. It may not cover two topics: the length of the school year or class size or load.
Kansas law provides that a charter school’s teachers remain covered by the school district collective bargaining agreement, although waivers may be granted if specified in the charter.
Prior to the Supreme Court’s Janus v. AFSCME decision, Kansas state law prohibited unions from compelling agency fees from non-union members. Therefore, the Supreme Court’s decision did not have any direct effect on unions in the state.
In Kansas, state statute allows local boards of education to certify an exclusive representative. To be certified, a labor organization must file a petition demonstrating support from a majority of professional employees in the bargaining unit. The board of education must recognize the labor organization unless it has reason to doubt the petition or another organization files a claim. If a conflict arises, the employer, labor organization, or employees can ask the state secretary of human resources to hold an election, and the ballot must include the labor organization, any new representative group with at least 30 percent employee support, and a choice of no representation. Elections are decided by a majority vote, and if no majority is achieved, a runoff election will follow.

Louisiana law permits (but does not require) collective bargaining for non-charter public school teachers. Under Louisiana law, there are no items that are explicitly included or excluded from negotiations in teachers’ collective bargaining agreements.Louisiana law requires the provisions of any collective bargaining agreement entered into by the local school board in whose jurisdiction the charter school is located to apply to such charter schools, unless its approved charter provides otherwise. A charter operator may select to not be subject to such a collective bargaining agreement in its charter. This provision does not apply to Type 5 charters, which are exempt from participation in any district collective bargaining agreement.
Prior to the Supreme Court’s Janus v. AFSCME decision, Louisiana state law prohibited unions from charging agency fees to non-union members of any collective bargaining unit. Therefore, the Supreme Court’s decision did not have any effect on unions in the state.
The state’s labor law is also silent on the process for selecting or certifying an exclusive representative for a public agency’s bargaining unit, which presumably delegates this authority to local jurisdictions. Generally, courts have held that in states without laws or without comprehensive laws, public employers have the authority to grant recognition to public sector unions and to enter into legally enforceable collective bargaining agreements covering employees. Note that the Fifth Circuit recently held that Louisiana charter schools are subject to the National Labor Relations Act, meaning that they are subject to federal rather than state laws governing labor organizing. This determination is based on the state’s treatment of charter schools’ governing board members and may not be generalizable to other states in the Fifth Circuit.

Maine requires that public school teachers collectively bargain. In Maine, six topics must be bargained: wages, insurance or fringe benefits, hours, length of preparation periods, terms and conditions of employment, and grievance procedures. Pensions and retirement benefits and leave may be bargained. Two topics are expressly excluded from bargaining: length of the school year and class load or size. Maine law provides that teachers in new start-up public charter schools have the right to bargain collectively, but it must be separate from other bargaining units, such as the district bargaining unit. The law also provides that these teachers cannot be required to be members of any existing agreement. Maine law states that teachers in conversion public charter schools have a right to retain the benefits as stated in applicable collective bargaining agreements, or they may vote to be represented in alternative ways.
Prior to the Supreme Court’s Janus v. AFSCME decision, the state permitted unions to charge mandatory agency fees to members of a collective bargaining unit who are not members of the union. The Supreme Court decision renders that state law unconstitutional, and no reactive legislation has been enacted.
State labor law sets the guidelines by which exclusive representatives are selected. Employers may directly certify an exclusive representative upon a petition showing that the majority of employees support the certification of the labor organization. An incumbent representative can be decertified by petition of 30 percent of the bargaining unit. Employers or employees may also request an election process from the Maine Labor Relations Board. If such an election occurs, the ballot must include any organization with at least 10 percent support from employees in the unit as well as an option for no representation. The election is decided by a majority vote, and if no entity receives a majority, a runoff election is held. A new election cannot be held within a year, and no certification can be held unless it is within the 60 to 90 day window before the active collective bargaining agreement expires.

The state of Maryland requires collective bargaining for all public school teachers, including public charter school teachers, on four topics: wages, hours, terms and conditions of employment, and transfers and reassignments. Two topics, evaluation and grievance procedures, may be bargained. And collective bargaining on two topics, the length of the school year and class load and size, is expressly prohibited. Maryland law provides that a charter school’s teachers are covered by the school district collective bargaining agreement, although a charter school and a local teachers union may mutually agree to negotiate amendments to the existing agreement to address the needs of the particular public charter school, including amendments to work days, work hours, school year, procedures for transfers that are consistent with the instructional mission of the school, and extra duty assignments.
Prior to the Supreme Court’s ruling in Janus v. AFSCME, Maryland allowed mandatory agency fees. The Supreme Court decision renders that state law unconstitutional. In anticipation of the Janus ruling, Maryland enacted a new law in spring 2018 that requires teachers unions to have access to new employee orientations and mandates that employers provide unions with employees’ contact information.
In Maryland, employers may directly certify a union as employees’ exclusive representative when the organization demonstrates 50 percent support from the employees in a bargaining unit and if there are no competing claims. If the union cannot demonstrate 50 percent support, or if another organization demonstrates support from at least 10 percent of employees, an election must be held. In such an election, the ballot must include each organization with 10 percent support as well as a choice for no representation. Maryland law provides for a two-week window for election, and a runoff election may be held if no organization receives a majority of votes. Elections may not be held more frequently than every two years. However, two years after an election, a new election can be initiated by a petition signed by more than 20 percent of employees.

Massachusetts state statute requires collective bargaining for non-charter public school teachers. Collective bargaining must address nine topics: wages, insurance or fringe benefits, pension or retirement benefits, hours, terms and conditions of employment, class load or size, leave, layoffs, and evaluation processes or instruments. In addition, management rights, transfers and reassignments, and grievance procedures may be bargained. No topics are expressly excluded from collective bargaining. State law does not require teachers in Commonwealth charter schools to be part of district collective bargaining agreements, though they may choose to collectively bargain. Horace Mann charter teachers remain bound by school district collective bargaining agreements to the extent provided by the terms of their charters.
Prior to the Supreme Court’s ruling in Janus v. AFSCME, Massachusetts allowed mandatory agency fees. The Supreme Court decision renders that state law unconstitutional. There has not been any reactive legislation enacted.
A public employer in Massachusetts may directly certify an exclusive representative if it receives written evidence that the labor organization has the support of a majority of employees. If the certification is disputed, the employer or employees can petition the Massachusetts Labor Relations Commission (MLRC) to investigate and hold a hearing, after which the MLRC may deem it necessary to hold an election or establish another method of assessing employees’ wishes. No specific provision governs what entities are listed on an election ballot. An election may not be held within a year of an election or during the term of an active collective bargaining agreement.

Michigan state statute requires collective bargaining for non-charter public school teachers. There are seven topics that collective bargaining must address: wages, insurance or fringe benefits, pension or retirement benefits, hours, terms and conditions of employment, leave, and grievance procedures. Another six topics are expressly prohibited from collective bargaining: length of the school year, management rights, transfers or reassignments, layoffs, dismissals, and evaluation processes or instruments. Michigan law provides that charter schools are exempted from required participation in the collective bargaining agreement of the district in which they reside.
Prior to the Supreme Court’s Janus v. AFSCME decision, Michigan state law prohibited unions from charging agency fees to non-union members of any collective bargaining unit. Therefore, the Supreme Court’s decision did not have any effect on unions in the state. There has not been any reactive legislation enacted.
Employers in Michigan may directly certify a labor organization as an exclusive representative. If 30 percent of employees believe that the employer is not recognizing their desired representative or asserts that the current representative no longer has majority support among employees, they may petition the Public Employee Labor Relations Commission (PELRC) to hold a hearing. An employer may also petition the PELRC for a hearing if there is a question of representation. The PELRC will determine the need for an election, which will be held by secret ballot.

Minnesota state statute requires collective bargaining for non-charter public school teachers. There are seven topics that collective bargaining must address: wages, insurance or fringe benefits, hours, length of preparation periods, terms and conditions of employment, class load or size, and grievance procedures. Three items — pensions and retirement benefits, management rights, and evaluations — may be bargained. Just one topic, transfers and reassignments, is expressly prohibited. Minnesota law provides that a charter school’s teachers are at-will employees and may organize for collective bargaining similar to teachers in other districts. It also provides that a bargaining unit at a school authorized by a school district must negotiate as a separate unit with the charter school governing body or remain part of the school district unit if certain conditions and approvals are agreed upon.
Prior to the Supreme Court’s ruling in Janus v. AFSCME, Minnesota allowed mandatory agency fees. The Supreme Court decision renders that state law unconstitutional. There has not been any reactive legislation enacted.
Minnesota statute does not permit an employer to directly certify an exclusive representative. Instead, either the employer or the labor organization may petition the Minnesota Bureau of Mediation Services (MBMS) for certification for an election. To establish exclusive representation, the labor organization must certify that 30 percent of employees favor their representation. To challenge exclusive representation, employees must prove that 30 percent of employees wish to be unrepresented. The MBMS will investigate the petitions, hold a hearing, and run an election. The election must be held by secret ballot, and the ballot must include any organizations that have demonstrated 30 percent support as well as a choice for no representation. The election will be decided by majority vote, and if no organization receives a majority vote, a runoff election will be held. Another election may not be held for one year.

Mississippi law permits (but does not require) collective bargaining for non-charter public school teachers. Under Mississippi law, there are no items that are explicitly included or excluded from negotiations in teachers’ collective bargaining agreements.State law provides that charter schools are exempt from participation in state and school district personnel policies, and the statute’s silence on collective bargaining can be read to include collective bargaining in the definition of personnel policies.
Prior to the Supreme Court’s Janus v. AFSCME decision, Mississippi state law prohibited unions from charging agency fees to non-union members of any collective bargaining unit. Therefore, the Supreme Court’s decision did not have any effect on unions in the state. There has not been any reactive legislation enacted.
The state’s labor law is also silent on the process for selecting or certifying an exclusive representative for a public agency’s bargaining unit, which presumably delegates this authority to local jurisdictions. Generally, courts have held that in states without laws or without comprehensive laws, public employers have the authority to grant recognition to public sector unions and to enter into legally enforceable collective bargaining agreements covering employees.

Missouri law permits (but does not require) collective bargaining for non-charter public school teachers. When collective bargaining does take place, however, it is required to address two topics: wages, and terms and conditions of employment. The law is silent on all other commonly bargained topics, neither prohibiting nor permitting their inclusion in negotiations.Missouri law provides that charter schools are exempt from participation in any district collective bargaining agreements.
Prior to the Supreme Court’s ruling in Janus v. AFSCME, Missouri allowed mandatory agency fees. The Supreme Court decision renders that state law unconstitutional. There has not been any reactive legislation enacted.
To be certified as an exclusive representative, a labor organization must present card signatures representing at least 30 percent of public employees in the unit to the State Board of Mediation, which will verify the petition and hold an election. The election ballot must include any organization that has demonstrated support from at least 30 percent of employees, as well as an option for no representative. The election is decided by majority vote, and recertification must occur every three years.Missouri law provides that charter schools are exempt from participation in any district collective bargaining agreements.

The state of Nevada requires collective bargaining for non-charter public school teachers. There are 10 topics that collective bargaining must cover: wages, insurance or fringe benefits, hours, length of preparation periods, length of the school year, leave, transfers and reassignment, layoffs, dismissal, and grievance procedures. Bargaining class load or size and evaluation procedures is permitted but not required. Only one topic, management rights, is expressly prohibited from collective bargaining. Nevada law provides that charter schools are exempt from district collective bargaining agreements.
Prior to the Supreme Court’s Janus v. AFSCME decision, Nevada state law prohibited unions from charging agency fees to non-union members of any collective bargaining unit. Therefore, the Supreme Court’s decision did not have any effect on unions in the state. There has not been any reactive legislation enacted.
In Nevada, a public employer has the right to recognize an exclusive representative. An employee organization must present a membership list showing that it represents a majority of employees in the unit. If the Local Government Employee-Management Relations Board doubts the organization’s majority representation, it may conduct a secret ballot election. The law does not provide for the frequency of elections, the content of the ballot, or for a runoff election.

New Hampshire state law requires collective bargaining for non-charter public school teachers. Collective bargaining must cover seven topics: wages, hours, terms and conditions of employment, extracurricular duties, leave, dismissal, and grievance procedures. One topic, class load or size, may be bargained. Only one item, management rights, is expressly excluded from collective bargaining. New Hampshire law does not require charter schools to participate in existing district bargaining agreements. The state charter statute also specifies that any bargaining units at a charter school must be separate from other bargaining units.
Prior to the Supreme Court’s ruling in Janus v. AFSCME, New Hampshire allowed mandatory agency fees. The Supreme Court decision renders that state law unconstitutional. There has not been any reactive legislation enacted.
The Public Employee Labor Relations Board (PELRB) can certify an exclusive representative. To initiate an election, at least 30 percent of the employees in a unit must petition the PELRB for an election (or an employer must allege that a majority of employees no longer support the current representative). The PELRB will hold a hearing to determine the grounds for an election, and if they are met, an election will be held. The ballot must contain an option for non-representation, and the election is decided by majority vote. If no majority vote is reached, a runoff election is held. If a majority of employees vote for no representation, then another election cannot be held for 12 months.

New Jersey law requires collective bargaining for public school teachers. Collective bargaining is required on nine topics: wages, insurance or fringe benefits, hours, terms and conditions of employment, class load or size, extracurricular duties, leave, layoffs, and grievance procedures. State law prohibits collective bargaining on six topics: pension or retirement benefits, length of the school year, management rights, transfers or reassignments, dismissal, and evaluation processes of instruments. New Jersey law provides that start-up schools are exempt from district collective bargaining agreements but also provides that conversion schools are not exempt from district collective bargaining agreements.
Prior to the Supreme Court’s ruling in Janus v. AFSCME, New Jersey allowed mandatory agency fees. The Supreme Court decision renders that state law unconstitutional. In anticipation of the ruling, New Jersey passed a law that provides employee organizations with access to contact information for members of the bargaining unit, which may otherwise be exempt from disclosure requirements.
In New Jersey, the Public Employee Relations Commission (PERC) can certify an exclusive representative. If there is only one organization seeking exclusive representative status, it may choose to be certified by evidence of majority support from employees in the unit (e.g., by signed cards). Otherwise, the PERC will certify the organization by means of an election, which will be decided by majority vote. Details of election are not set in the statute.

New Mexico law requires collective bargaining for non-charter public school teachers. Collective bargaining must address four topics: wages, hours, terms and conditions of employment, and grievance procedures. Four additional topics — management rights, transfers and reassignments, layoffs, and dismissal — may be bargained. No topics are expressly prohibited from collective bargaining. New Mexico law does not require any charter schools to be part of existing collective bargaining agreements.
Prior to the Supreme Court’s ruling in Janus v. AFSCME, New Mexico allowed mandatory agency fees. The Supreme Court decision renders that state law unconstitutional. There has not been any reactive legislation enacted.
Public employers in New Mexico may directly certify a labor organization as an exclusive representative if the labor organization demonstrates support from a majority of employees in the unit. This may be demonstrated by a card check or other measure. However, the employer may request an election. If an election is called for, the labor organization must submit a petition demonstrating at least 30 percent support from employees to the Public Employee Relations Board (PERB). Any labor organization demonstrating at least 30 percent support must be included on the ballot, along with an option for no representation. An election shall only be valid with at least 40 percent turnout from employees. The election is decided by majority vote, with runoff provisions if no majority is achieved. An election may not be held within a year of, or during, an active collective bargaining agreement. If there is a request for decertification, this may only occur between 30 and 90 days before the collective bargaining agreement expires, or after three years.New Mexico law does not require any charter schools to be part of existing collective bargaining agreements.

New York requires collective bargaining for public school teachers on a wide range of issues, including wages, insurance and fringe benefits, hours, lesson preparation periods, terms and conditions of employment, leave, evaluation processes and instruments, and grievance procedures. Collective bargaining may also address class load or size, as well as transfers and reassignments. Four items are expressly excluded from bargaining: pension and retirement benefits, management rights, layoffs, and dismissal.New York state law exempts most public charter schools from existing collective bargaining agreements. However, the law requires that conversion public charter schools are part of district collective bargaining agreements, but it allows such agreements to be modified. The law also provides that if enrollment at a new charter school exceeds 250 students within the first two years of operation, all employees of the school will be considered members of the same union or employee organization that represents like-employees in the school district. Such schools may still apply for one of a limited number of waivers under the law.
Prior to the Supreme Court’s ruling in Janus v. AFSCME, New York allowed mandatory agency fees. The Supreme Court decision renders that state law unconstitutional. In anticipation of the ruling, New York passed a new law in spring 2018 that increased unions’ access to employees and gave unions flexibility to deny services to employees who opt out of union membership (e.g., union representation in grievance proceedings).
In New York, unions’ status as an exclusive representative can be established by the employees’ authorization of dues deductions or other evidence. An election may be held if necessary.New York law exempts most public charter schools from existing collective bargaining agreements. However, the law requires that conversion schools are part of district collective bargaining agreements, but it allows such agreements to be modified. The law also provides that if enrollment at a new charter school exceeds 250 students within the first two years of operation, all employees of the school will be considered members of the same union or employee organization that represents like-employees in the school district. Such schools may still apply for one of a limited number of waivers under the law.

In North Carolina, it is illegal for teachers to engage in collective bargaining. In addition, charter school teachers are not subject to any school district work rules.The law provides that charter school teachers are not subject to school district work rules.

Ohio requires collective bargaining for public school teachers on nine topics: wages, pensions and retirement benefits, hours, length of prep periods, terms and conditions of employment, length of school year, leave, evaluations, and grievance procedures. In addition, five additional topics may be bargained: insurance and fringe benefits, management rights, transfers and reassignments, layoffs, and dismissal. There are no topics that are expressly excluded from bargaining.Ohio exempts start-up charter schools from mandatory participation in any outside collective bargaining agreements.
Conversion charters are, however, subject to a school district's collective bargaining agreement, unless a majority of the charter school’s teachers petition to work independently or form their own unit. Ohio law provides that employees of a conversion charter school sponsored by the board of education of a municipal school district are no longer subject to any future collective bargaining agreement if the mayor submits to the board of education sponsoring the school and to the state employment relations board a statement requesting that all employees of the conversion charter school be removed from a collective bargaining unit.
Prior to the Supreme Court’s ruling in Janus v. AFSCME, Ohio allowed mandatory agency fees. The Supreme Court decision renders that state law unconstitutional. No reactive laws have been enacted.
In Ohio, an organization may become certified as an exclusive representative via election conducted by the state employment relations board or by petitioning a public employer with evidence that the organization represents a majority of employees. An election will be conducted if at least 30 percent of employees wish to be represented by a particular group or if the employer alleges that two or more organizations have petitioned for representation with at least 10 percent support each. An active exclusive representative may not be challenged for the first three years of a collective bargaining agreement. Elections may not be held within one year of each other. Since Janus, three related challenges have been filed by the Buckeye Institute to challenge the constitutionality of Ohio’s exclusive representation statute, alleging that permitting exclusive representation violates individuals’ First Amendment rights.

Collective bargaining is required for non-charter public school teachers in Oklahoma. Only four items must be bargained: wages, insurance and fringe benefits, hours, and terms and conditions of employment. Only one additional item, grievance procedures, may be bargained. Two items are expressly excluded from bargaining: extracurricular duties and management rights.Oklahoma law exempts charter schools from participation in district collective bargaining agreements.
Oklahoma’s state law prohibited unions from charging agency fees to non-union members prior to the Janus v. AFSCME decision, so the Supreme Court’s decision has no effect on unions in the state.
In Oklahoma, local boards of education are empowered to recognize an exclusive representative based on a secret ballot vote or evidence with signed authorization of a majority of employees in the unit. For elections, employees must petition with at least 35 percent support calling for an election. Petitions for decertification must also provide signature evidence of 35 percent support. There are no state boards that can grant certification. Note that in July 2017, the Public Employees Labor Relations Board was terminated, repealing most collective bargaining protections for many classes of public employees, but that repeal excluded public school teachers, among others.Oklahoma law exempts charter schools from participation in district collective bargaining agreements.

Collective bargaining is required for non-charter public school teachers in Oregon and must cover wages, insurance and fringe benefits, pension and retirement benefits, hours, prep periods, terms and conditions of employment, leave, layoffs, and grievance procedures. In addition, Oregon permits the length of school year, class load or size, extracurricular activities, and evaluations to be bargained. No items are expressly excluded from bargaining.Oregon law provides that charter schools are exempt from district collective bargaining agreements and personnel policies, though they may participate in a district bargaining unit by choice or organize separately.
Prior to the Supreme Court’s ruling in Janus v. AFSCME, Oregon allowed mandatory agency fees. The Supreme Court decision renders that state law unconstitutional. No reactive laws have been enacted.
Organizations may be certified directly by public employers to be exclusive representatives. The Employment Relations Board resolves any questions of representation. If a question of representation exists, the board shall investigate and conduct a hearing on a petition from a labor organization with at least 30 percent support, a labor organization alleging at least 30 percent of employees desire alternative representation, a public employer with one or more petitions for representation, or an employee or group of employees asserting at least 30 percent of employees desire other representation. If the board finds majority support, they may certify a representative without an election. No elections are allowed within a 12-month period or during an active agreement, unless the board rules that an election is necessary due to unusual circumstance or representation instability. The attorneys from Janus have threatened further litigation in Oregon suggesting an upcoming challenge to extant union membership and dues agreements, arguing that Janus obviated any prior authorizations that employees may have consented to.

Collective bargaining is required for non-charter public school teachers in Pennsylvania and must cover wages, pension and retirement benefits, hours, terms and conditions of employment, leave, layoffs, and grievance procedures. It may also address insurance or fringe benefits, prep periods, length of the school year, class load or size, extracurricular duties, management rights, transfers and reassignment, and dismissal. No items are explicitly excluded from bargaining.Pennsylvania law provides that a charter school’s teachers may work independently or bargain collectively (but not as part of the school district’s collective bargaining unit).
Prior to the Supreme Court’s ruling in Janus v. AFSCME, Pennsylvania allowed mandatory agency fees. The Supreme Court decision renders that state law unconstitutional. No reactive laws have been enacted.
In Pennsylvania, employers may directly certify an exclusive representative for its employees. The state labor relations board may intercede upon the request of a labor organization, employer, or group of employees, and has significant discretion in how to certify the exclusive representative. A secret ballot election can be requested by the labor organization or the state labor relations board, in which case it must take place within 20 days of the petition. The certification lasts for at least one year.

Collective bargaining is required for non-charter public school teachers in Rhode Island and it must cover wages, hours, and terms and conditions of employment. Extracurricular duties and management rights are expressly excluded from bargaining.Rhode Island law exempts independent charter schools and mayoral academy charter schools from district collective bargaining agreements, although they must identify the sending school district’s rules from which they are seeking variances within the application. The law also provides that district charter schools are bound by the district collective bargaining agreement, unless the parties to the collective bargaining agreement approve variances requested by the school.
Prior to the Supreme Court’s ruling in Janus v. AFSCME, Rhode Island allowed mandatory agency fees. The Supreme Court decision renders that state law unconstitutional. In May 2018, a new state statute was enacted in response to authorize municipal police unions to refrain from representing employees in grievance and arbitration proceedings if those employees were not members of the collective bargaining unit within 90 days of the event precipitating the grievance and arbitration proceedings. This statute does not affect the rights of teachers but may be indicative of the direction of future legislation.
In Rhode Island, employers may directly certify an exclusive representative. If there is a question of representation, the Labor Relations Board shall investigate and hold a hearing, and may conduct an election by secret ballot or other appropriate method to determine the representative. The Labor Relations Board determines eligibility to vote and rules of the election, and no employees hired for a strike or lockout only will be eligible to vote. Elections may not be called solely at the will of the employer, and no elections can be held under the employer’s supervision. Certifications are valid for one year.

In South Carolina, it is illegal for teachers to engage in collective bargaining. In addition, South Carolina law provides that charter schools are exempt from participation in any district personnel policies, except that the provisions of state law concerning employment and dismissal of teachers apply to staff at conversion charter schools that existed at the time of conversion.South Carolina law provides that charter schools are exempt from participation in any district personnel policies, except that the provisions of state law concerning employment and dismissal of teachers apply to staff at conversion charter schools that were there at the time of conversion.

In Tennessee, collective bargaining is permitted (but not required) for public school teachers. Teachers currently engage in bargaining via what is termed “collaborative conferencing.” Wages, insurance or fringe benefits, terms and conditions of employment, leave, management rights, and grievance procedures may be bargained. Bargaining pension and retirement benefits, transfers and reassignments, layoffs, and evaluations is expressly prohibited by state law.The law does not require a charter school to participate in a collective bargaining agreement. However, a charter school’s employees may form a bargaining unit that may elect to represent themselves in negotiations with the charter school’s governing body, or they may elect to be represented by any qualified person or organization, including the local bargaining unit within the school district. A charter school’s bargaining unit can bargain only with the governing board of the charter school and not with the local school board.
Tennessee’s state law prohibited unions from charging agency fees to non-union members prior to the Janus v. AFSCME decision, so the Supreme Court’s decision has no effect on unions in the state.
Tennessee law permits exclusive representation for teachers, but the current “collaborative conferencing” mechanism permits multiple employee representatives to engage in this conferencing according to their proportion of votes received in the most recent election. If 15 percent or more employees petition to conference, the board of education shall appoint a committee of employees and board members to conduct a confidential poll of eligible employees. This two-part poll first asks a yes or no question (whether an employee wants to engage in collaborative conference), then a second question as to which organization the employees wish to represent them. The ballot shall list “the professional employees’ organizations having a presence in the LEA.” Multiple representatives are selected based on proportional representation for any organization with more than 15 percent of the vote, and there must be three years between polls.The law does not require a charter school to participate in a collective bargaining agreement. However, a charter school's employees may form a bargaining unit, which may elect to represent themselves in negotiations with the charter school's governing body or they may elect to be represented by any qualified person or organization, including the local bargaining unit within the school district. A charter school's bargaining unit can bargain only with the governing board of the charter school, and not with the local school board.

In Texas, it is illegal for public school teachers to engage in collective bargaining. Consequently, neither open-enrollment charter schools nor district-authorized charter schools participate in outside collective bargaining agreements. However, Texas law provides that open-enrollment charter schools are exempt from participation in school district personnel policies, but district-authorized charter schools are not exempt from participation in school district personnel policies.

Utah law provides that charter schools are exempt from district collective bargaining agreements.

In Virginia, it is illegal for public school teachers to engage in collective bargaining. However, charter school personnel are considered employees of the local school board granting the charter and are granted the same employment benefits in accordance with the district’s personnel policies (unless the local school board allows charter school personnel to be employees of the charter school governing board).According to the law, charter school personnel are considered employees of the local school board granting the charter and are granted the same employment benefits in accordance with the district’s personnel policies (unless the local school board allows charter school personnel to be employees of the charter school governing board).

Washington requires non-charter public school teachers to collectively bargain wages, hours, terms and conditions of employment, leave, and dismissal. In addition, they may bargain management rights and grievance procedures. No items are expressly excluded from bargaining.State law provides that charter schools are exempt from participation in any outside collective bargaining agreements. Statute indicates that any bargaining units established at a charter school must be limited to employees working in the school and must be separate from other bargaining units in school districts, educational service districts, or institutions of higher education.
Prior to the Supreme Court’s ruling in Janus v. AFSCME, Washington allowed mandatory agency fees. The Supreme Court decision renders that state law unconstitutional. Three reactive statutes have been enacted. The first requires employers to provide exclusive bargaining representatives reasonable access to new employees for the purposes of presenting information about their exclusive bargaining representative. The second requires the office of financial management to maintain a website that is accessible to the public of all agreements collectively bargained with state employees. And the third provides that upon written authorization of an employee within the bargaining unit and after certification or recognition of the union, the employer must deduct from the employee’s dues certified by the secretary of the union and must transmit the amounts to the treasurer of the union. If a collective bargaining agreement includes a union security provision, the employer must enforce the agreement by deducting from the payments to bargaining unit members the dues required for union membership, or, for non-members, a fee equivalent to the dues.
In Washington, any employee organization may file a request to be the exclusive representative. Such a request shall allege that a majority of the employees in an appropriate collective bargaining unit wish to be represented for the purpose of collective bargaining by such an organization, shall describe the grouping of jobs or positions that constitute the unit claimed to be appropriate, and shall be supported by credible evidence demonstrating that at least 30 percent of the employees in the appropriate unit desire the organization requesting recognition as their exclusive representative. The exclusive representative is then determined by secret ballot election. If only one employee organization is seeking certification as exclusive bargaining representative of a bargaining unit for which there is no incumbent exclusive bargaining representative, the commission may, upon the concurrence of the employer and the employee organization, determine the question concerning representation by conducting a cross-check comparing the employee organization’s membership records or bargaining authorization cards against the employment records of the employer, and forgo an election.

West Virginia law provides that charter schools are exempt from participation in any district collective bargaining agreements.

In Wisconsin, non-charter public school teachers are required to collectively bargain, but that bargaining is limited to wages, insurance or fringe benefits, and pension and retirement benefits. All other commonly bargained items are expressly excluded from bargaining.Under Wisconsin law, charter schools authorized by non-local board authorizers and charter schools authorized by local board authorizers that employ their own staff are exempt from participation in any outside collective bargaining agreements, while those authorized by local school boards that don’t employ their own staff are not exempt from participation in district collective bargaining agreements.
Wisconsin state law prohibited unions from charging agency fees to non-union members prior to the Janus v. AFSCME decision, so the Supreme Court’s decision has no effect on unions in the state.
In Wisconsin, a representative chosen for the purposes of collective bargaining by at least 51 percent of the general employees in a collective bargaining unit shall be the exclusive representative of all of the employees. There are a handful of conditions listed in the state labor code that allow employees at another institution and not part of the existing unit to express interest in collective bargaining. The ballot for those employees would ask not about a specific representative but rather if the employees desire to participate in collective bargaining. If 51 percent say yes, they become part of the existing bargaining unit with the existing exclusive representation.Under Wisconsin law, charter schools authorized by non-local board authorizers and charter schools authorized by local board authorizers that employ their own staff are exempt from participation in any outside collective bargaining agreements, while those authorized by local school boards that don’t employ their own staff are not exempt from participation in any district collective bargaining agreements.

In Wyoming, collective bargaining is permitted (but not required) for non-charter public school teachers. This bargaining is limited to wages, and terms and conditions of employment. State law is silent on all other commonly bargained items.Wyoming law provides that charter schools are exempt from district collective bargaining agreements.
Wyoming state law prohibited unions from charging agency fees to non-union members prior to the Janus v. AFSCME decision, so the Supreme Court’s decision has no effect on unions in the state.
Wyoming law protects the rights of public employees to organize but is generally silent on collective bargaining, except for language that identifies the exclusive agent for firefighters — suggesting that the absence of an exclusive representation provision for public school teachers is intentional. Generally, courts have held that in states without laws or without comprehensive laws, public employers have the authority to grant recognition to public sector unions and to enter into legally enforceable collective bargaining agreements covering employees.Wyoming law provides that charter schools are exempt from district collective bargaining agreements.