HB 3652
Expands the requirement to discuss class size and caseload as mandatory subjects of bargaining for purposes of school district collective bargaining.
Take action
Record your position on this measure.
Sign in to record your position, submit testimony, or contact your legislator.
Sign in to take actionPublic sentiment
Support
97%
Oppose
3%
- Introduced
- Passed House
- Passed Senate
- To Governor
- Became Law
Bill overview
This bill changes Oregon law to strengthen the ability of school districts to bargain collectively with their employees. Specifically, it requires that class size and caseload be included as mandatory subjects of bargaining during collective bargaining negotiations. The bill takes effect 91 days after the end of the legislative session.
Key provisions
- Requires class size and caseload to be mandatory subjects of bargaining in school district collective bargaining agreements.
- Amends ORS 243.650 to clarify definitions related to collective bargaining, including ‘appropriate bargaining unit’ and ‘employment relations’.
- Specifies that ‘employment relations’ includes class size and caseload limits in certain school districts.
- Excludes certain subjects, such as school calendars, performance standards, and personal conduct, from mandatory bargaining.
- Establishes an effective date for the law 91 days after the adjournment sine die of the 83rd Oregon Legislative Assembly.
Who is affected
- School districts
- Teachers and other school employees
- School district bargaining units
- The Employment Relations Board
- Public employers (including school districts)
Notable changes
- Adds class size and caseload as mandatory subjects of bargaining.
- Clarifies the definition of ‘employment relations’ to include these subjects in specific school districts.
Sponsors
Official sponsors from legislative records.
Primary sponsors
Hoa Nguyen
Arguments in favor
Reasons to support this legislation.
Testifiers across various districts and professions consistently emphasize that smaller class sizes and manageable caseloads are essential for providing equitable support to students with special needs, improving student outcomes, and promoting teacher well-being. They argue that excessive class size hinders individualized help, disproportionately affects vulnerable students with acute learning disabilities, and can lead to burnout and educator turnover. Many advocates propose making class size and caseloads a mandatory subject of collective bargaining in Oregon schools to address these challenges and ensure fair compensation for educators. By prioritizing smaller class sizes and lower student-to-teacher ratios, that they can improve student engagement, academic performance, and teacher effectiveness, ultimately leading to better education outcomes and a more sustainable teaching environment.
Source: Testimony Summaries
Arguments opposed
Reasons to oppose this legislation.
Opponents of House Bill 3652 express concerns that mandatory class size caps will divert resources away from students who need them most, as one-size-fits-all solutions are not supported by research. They argue that such a policy could lead to unintended consequences, including increased pay disparities between affluent and disadvantaged schools, where smaller classes may be prioritized over larger ones in Title I schools. Additionally, opponents caution that the bill's implementation could result in teacher strikes and reduced school days, ultimately harming students who rely on these resources for their academic success.