By JIM BARON

PROVIDENCE — The House Labor Committee will hear from the public later today on a bill that would resolve public school teacher disputes through binding arbitration, but Gov. Donald Carcieri weighed in on Tuesday, calling the concept “a terrible idea” and “an enormous mistake.

“It’s the wrong thing for us to do,” Carcieri told reporters at an impromptu press conference after a Statehouse event Tuesday morning. While he said he is “adamantly opposed” to the concept, the governor stopped short of saying he would veto a binding arbitration.
“I always wait to see what comes (in the form of legislation), then I’ll make a decision,” Carcieri said.
Despite the governor’s protestations, Robert Walsh, executive director of the National Education Association of RI, the state’s largest teachers union, told The Times Tuesday that he believes proponents have lined up enough support among legislators to pass the bill when the General Assembly reconvenes next week. He did not say whether it has enough support to overcome a veto by the governor.
Walsh said binding arbitration would “stop (teachers’) strikes, stop work-to-rule and stop excessive legal fees” that result from extended school contract disputes.
Tim Duffy of the R.I. Association of School Committees said the bill as written “would not ban work-to-rule or teachers strikes,” but it would “drive up the cost to taxpayers.”
Work-to-rule is a labor tactic where employees perform to the letter of a contract, but refuse to do extra duties not specifically mandated. In teacher disputes, it has taken the form of teachers refusing to chaperon school events or oversee extra-curricular activities, or perform functions such as writing college recommendations for students.
The arbitration bill, by Warwick Democrat Rep. Alfred Gemma, has generated support (Walsh said a poll of RI voters by Fleming and Associates showed 70 percent favored binding arbitration) as well as fervent opposition.
The RI Shoreline Coalition (RISC) has taken to the airwaves with radio ads urging listeners to contact their legislators to defeat the Gemma bill. Other reform groups have mounted e-mail campaigns and called talk radio to generate opposition to the measure.
Larry Berman, spokesman for the House of Representatives, said Tuesday that it is likely the committee will not take a vote on the bill today. He said committee members expect a lengthy hearing, with many speakers on both sides, so they scheduled the hearing for today rather than take up that much time during the upcoming two-day return of the General Assembly, Oct. 28 and 29.
Berman said he did not know whether the full House of Representatives would take up the bill next week.
Asked why he opposes binding arbitration, Carcieri answered, “at the end of the day, what you need to do is get at what is in the contracts, not have existing contracts stay forever the way they are and if you can’t come to agreement on something, go to arbitration. Arbitration generally always favors the labor contract. Communities should have the right to decide how much they are willing to put into education and what they are willing to pay. They shouldn’t be bound some state law saying you have to do this. No!”
David Carlin, coordinator for the RI Chamber of Commerce Coalition, which opposes the bill, agreed with the governor.  
“The so-called binding arbitration legislation takes away a fundamental existing right of local government; the right to accept or deny proposed contract terms," Carlin said in a release Tuesday. 
Noting that the chamber coalition does not usually lobby legislators on public sector contract issues, Carlin said, “members feel the issue of expanding binding arbitration to school teacher contracts or other public sector employees is far too important to stay silent on."
He said the legislation would be unaffordable for cities and towns and provide no serious incentive for local teachers' unions to engage in negotiation with school department officials.”