Associated COLT Staff of the University of Maine System v. Board of Trustees of the University of Maine System, MLRB No. 93-21, rev'd, No. CV-93-362 (Me. Super. Ct., Ken. Cty., Apr. 13, 1994), Board decision reversed, Board of Trustees v. Associated COLT Staff and MLRB, 659 A.2d 842(Me. 1995) STATE OF MAINE SUPERIOR COURT KENNEBEC, SS. CIVIL ACTION DOCKET NO. CV-93-362 BOARD OF TRUSTEES OF THE ) UNIVERSITY OF MAINE SYSTEM, ) ) Petitioner ) ) v. ) OPINION AND ORDER ) ASSOCIATED COLT STAFF OF ) THE UNIVERSITY OF MAINE, ) MTA/NEA, and MAINE LABOR ) RELATIONS BOARD, ) ) Respondents ) This matter is before the court on the University of Maine System's appeal of a decision of the Maine Labor Relations Board. By that decision, the Board required the University to grant wage increases to staff employees after expiration of a contract which had included nonuniform step wage increase provisions. In reaching its determination, the Board applied the "dynamic status quo" rule which it had initially adopted in Auburn School Administrators Association v. Auburn School Committee, No. 91-19 (Me.L.R.B. October 8, 1991), appeals dismissed by stipulation, Androscoggin County Superior Court, CV-91-459 and 464, April 24, 1992. This "dynamic status quo" rule superseded a 'static status quo" rule which the Board had previously adopted and applied to public employee contracts in Easton Teachers Association v. Easton School Committee, No. 79-14 (Me.L.R.B. March 13, 1979). The static status quo rule adopted in Easton had governed Maine public employee contracting practices from 1979 until the -1- 1991 decision. It was in effect when the expired contract with University employees was negotiated in 1989. This case presents the legal question of whether the various public employee labor relations laws are more appropriately interpreted as having a "static status quo" or "dynamic status quo" rule applicable to situations where employees are working without a contract and expired contracts have included provision for step wage increases. Under the "static status quo" rule, once contracts expire, public employees are paid at the rate they were paid immediately prior to expiration of the contract until a new contract is negotiated. Under the "dynamic status quo" rule, public employees continue to receive wage increases at rates determined by the Maine Labor Relations Board based on the expired contracts which had included step increases. The "dynamic status quo" rule necessarily requires M.L.R.B. intervention any time, as with the University contract, that there is uncertainty as to the timing or rate of additional pay increases calculated according to the expired contract. Parties that cannot agree on a contract are unlikely to agree on interium increases. The issue is one of extreme importance to local budget makers in times of flat funding and required cutbacks in employees and services due to funding limitations. The dynamic status quo rule requires continued increases in public employee wages, perhaps based on contracts negotiated in good times, in times when economics for many agencies and school districts are most difficult. -2- In Caribou School Department v. Caribou Teachers Association, 402 A.2d 1279 (Me. 1979), the Law Court held, in a different context, that the Maine Labor Relations Board exceeded its authority in imposing upon a school district, against its will, the duty of paying wage increases, where the school district had never, directly or indirectly, agreed to pay the increases. Id. at 1285-1286. This rule was viewed by the Law Court as consistent with doctrines of national labor relations law which allow the Labor Board to supervise the procedure of bargaining, but proscribe any official compulsion over the actual terms of the contract. H.K. Porter Co. v. N.L.R.B., 397 U.S. 99, 108, 90 S.Ct. 821, 826 (1970). Requiring an employer caught in difficult economic times to continue to increase wages at rates agreed to when times were better constitutes exactly such prohibited compulsion over the actual terms of a contract. The University of Maine and its employees agreed to a contract in 1989 which included certain provisions for nonuniform increases in wage rates over the term of the contract. In effect, they agreed to specific rates of wage increases for a specific time, and for no longer. Requiring the University to pay increases after the contract has expired is requiring the University to do something they never agreed to do and, in today's economic times, probably would not or could not agree to do. Accordingly, the court determines that the action of the Maine Labor Relations Board in imposing the "dynamic status quo" -3- rule and requiring the University to continue to give employees wage increases, at rates the Board calculates were agreed to in 1989, is an improper imposition into the substance of collective bargaining processes. Citing Murphy v. Board of Environmental Protection, 615 A.2d 255, 259 (Me. 1992) the Board argues that the court should accord "great deference" to its administrative construction of a statute it enforces. This doctrine develops from judicial recognition that administrative agencies have considerable expertise in their assigned statutes, and their experience is entitled to deference as unresolved questions under the statute are addressed in the agency's day-to-day dealings. Here, however, the Board had an interpretation which stood for nearly 13 years. It came to be relied on by negotiators and public policy planners considering economic issues in expired contract situations. Then, without any apparent motivation from legislative action or judicial decisionmaking, the established agency interpretation was radically changed. Such a change in longstanding policy, based only on the agency's desire to change, is entitled to considerably less deference. After all, if an agency refuses to give deference to its own longstanding interpretations, why should courts give its new interpretations much deference at all. -4- Therefore, the court ORDERS: Appeal SUSTAINED The decision of the Maine Labor Relations Board is VACATED. REMANDED to the Maine Labor Relations Board with direction to continue to apply to this prohibited labor practice complaint the ""static status quo" doctrine as it had been applied since Easton Teachers Association v. Easton School Committee, supra. DATED: April 13, 1994 /s/________________________________ DONALD G. ALEXANDER JUSTICE, SUPERIOR COURT -5-