In Grand Forks, an attorney has advised the School Board to negotiate with a limited group of district staff represented by the local teachers union. Rachel Bruner from Pearce Durick LLC has suggested rejecting a negotiation petition from the Grand Forks Education Association (GFEA) for the upcoming bargaining season.
Her recommendation is that the School Board only negotiate with classroom teachers, leaving out roles like librarians, counselors, and therapists. According to state law, school unions must file petitions outlining which employees they represent. Traditionally, the GFEA has included both teachers and other certified staff in their representation.
Superintendent Terry Brenner’s memo supports this approach, suggesting a narrower negotiating focus that would include only those licensed to teach as defined by the state’s Educational Standards and Practice Board.
This change follows a recent state Supreme Court ruling. The ruling determined that certain positions, like school psychologists, do not qualify as “teachers” under state law, affecting their negotiation rights. Grand Forks School Board President Dave Berger acknowledged the need to comply with the law. “When a Supreme Court decision comes down, we have to adapt,” he said.
The Supreme Court’s decision has significant implications for school boards statewide. Many are now reassessing who falls under the term “teacher.” In Fargo, for instance, non-teaching staff, including librarians and counselors, expressed concerns at a recent board meeting, urging to remain under the teacher contract agreement. It’s anticipated that a similar response will occur from the GFEA in Grand Forks.
On Monday, the School Board will discuss whether to accept the GFEA’s current petition. Berger believes the ruling may benefit certified staff with specialized degrees, like psychologists, in negotiating for higher individual salaries. “They have other options and might find better pay outside the classroom,” he explained.
In 2023, the district, in cooperation with the teacher union, introduced a new pay scale aimed at attracting professionals with high-demand credentials. Still, the implications of the new negotiating rules raise questions for non-teaching staff, especially those without specialized degrees. In Grand Forks, positions like paraprofessionals and custodians fall under “classified staff,” who do not have bargaining rights.
Nick Archuleta, president of North Dakota United, argues that this approach could be premature. He pointed out that other districts are still negotiating with their existing bargaining units, including both teaching and non-teaching staff. Meanwhile, the Fargo School Board is considering a petition that continues to represent all employees, regardless of their teaching status.
Aimee Copas, from the North Dakota Council for Educational Leadership, believes that while the Supreme Court’s decision opens the door to excluding non-teaching staff from negotiations, it does not mandate that districts must do so. She noted that most superintendents she has spoken with are not planning to modify their negotiating practices right now, especially during a sensitive legislative session.
“If everything is working well, why change it?” she asked. The ongoing discussions highlight the balancing act school districts are managing as they navigate legal rulings, staff representation, and the interests of their employees.
Check out this related article: Amherst Schools Board Celebrates Arts with $250K Donation to Marion L. Steele High Theatre Company
Source linkWho has bargaining rights in Grand Forks Public Schools?,dave berger grand forks public schools negotiations 2025,nick archuleta grand forks public schools negotiations 2025,rachel bruner grand forks public schools negotiations 2025
