State might settle with substitutes
More than 9,000 subs and part-time teachers won in court in 2005
State lawmakers are debating whether to pay $65 million to settle lawsuits by Hawaii public school substitute teachers who claim they were underpaid.
A Circuit Court judge ruled in December 2005 that the state Department of Education did not follow a 1996 law requiring it to pay more than 9,000 substitute teachers the same daily rate as certain full-time employees.
The state appealed in April 2006, and the case is in the Intermediate Court of Appeals. But a bill moving through the Legislature would have the state appropriate money to settle the three class-action lawsuits.
There is some disagreement between the House and Senate.
House Finance Chairman Marcus Oshiro said lawmakers need to hear the legal opinion of the state's chief attorney. Attorney General Mark Bennett said he believes the state will win on appeal.
Senate Education Chairman Norman Sakamoto, who introduced the Senate version of the bill, said he hopes the state and the teachers can reach a compromise soon. He said the bill is an option for legislators in case they need to step in.
"We need to resolve this issue that's been ongoing for several years," said Sakamoto (D, Salt Lake-Foster Village). "Teachers are an important issue, but certainly, substitute teachers to fill the gap are important as well."
Attorneys representing thousands of Hawaii public school substitute and part-time teachers who claim they were underpaid by the state want lawmakers to set aside $65 million to settle pending class-action lawsuits.
The fight by more than 9,000 teachers has been dragging since December 2005, when Circuit Court Judge Karen Ahn ruled that the state Department of Education did not follow a 1996 law requiring it to pay substitutes the same daily rate as certain full-time employees.
The state appealed in April 2006, and the case is in the Intermediate Court of Appeals, said attorney Paul Alston, who is representing the teachers in three lawsuits.
Originally, Alston estimated the back pay -- covering five years from November 2000 to June 2005 -- would be about $22 million. But he said that figure has since reached $65 million because of another lawsuit filed for part-time teachers and to consider lost benefits such as social security and Medicare.
"Obviously, there has also been two years of underpayments," Alston added.
One of two bills introduced this session asking the state to appropriate money and clear the lawsuits remains alive. House Bill 1009 unanimously passed joint Senate committees on education, the Judiciary and labor last week and moved to the Ways and Means committee.
Senate Education Chairman Norman Sakamoto (D, Salt Lake-Foster Village) introduced the Senate version and said he hopes the state and the teachers can reach a compromise soon.
Similar proposals have been shot down in the past two sessions.
State Rep. Marcus Oshiro, chairman of the House Finance Committee, said he might support a settlement as long as it prevented similar lawsuits from being filed by other teachers. But the state's chances to win its appeal should also be considered, he said.
"That's a legal decision we need to receive from the attorney general's office," said Oshiro (D, Wahiawa-Poamoho).
Attorney General Mark Bennett would not expand on the state's appeal, saying the judge's decision was "legally incorrect."
"We don't believe the substitute teachers have a legally cognizable claim against the state," Bennett said.
The 1996 law in question pegged substitutes' salaries to those of full-time teachers with four years of college but no special training, known as Class II teachers.
Lawyers have argued the state owes the substitutes money because their salaries rose only about 11 percent from 1996 to 2005. Meanwhile, the pay for some full-time teachers went up more than 40 percent during that time.
