Potentially ending what has to be one of the most hard-fought labor battles in decades, the Hawaii State Teachers Association and the state of Hawaii have come to terms on a contract for the next four years.

Almost as significant, if the deal is ratified, the union has agreed to drop its case before the Hawaii Labor Relations Board, ending a dispute over the way teachers’ employment terms for the last two years had been imposed as the "last, best and final offer."

On balance, the tentative agreement is a hopeful development. It at least signals that Hawaii government and labor leaders can settle on some middle ground, enabling routine budget planning — and special planning, such as the educational reforms resulting from the state’s Race to the Top federal grant — to move forward.

Teachers deserve their raise and, presuming the rank-and-file membership ratifies the pact April 17, they’ll get a fairly nice one. Pay levels in place before the 5 percent cut of the past two years will be restored. In addition, teachers will get annual raises alternating between 3 and 3.2 percent; those already at the top pay scale will get two $1,500 bonuses.

There’s also the restoration of the 40-percent share of the medical insurance premiums that the members had paid before the administration of Gov. Neil Abercrombie, two years ago, bumped up the employee portion to 50 percent.

This element, which may turn out to be the biggest ticket item of all, should raise concerns among the more fiscally conservative taxpayers and elected officials. If the same deal gets extended to other unions — and it’s hard to see how it wouldn’t — lawmakers and administration leaders may be hard-pressed to find the money for it.

For their part, the teachers will enable the development of new job evaluations based at least in part on student performance, provided that they have a place at the table when the policies are drafted.

But the HSTA is also reportedly giving up its labor-board proceeding, and that’s a whopping sacrifice from the union’s perspective. HSTA President Wil Okabe has long defended the decision to pursue the complaint aggressively because it challenged a collective bargaining practice that could handicap the public unions’ position in the future.

The Abercrombie administration surely is relieved to exact that concession in the deal, because it leaves imposition of the "last, best and final offer" in its future negotiations toolkit. It surely strengthens the hand of the executive in the contract talks; although this is a tool best kept in reserve for the most intractable disputes, it’s an option worth having.

The labor board also must be feeling that it dodged a bullet if this case is resolved. A ruling on the dispute had become intolerably delayed, due to the case backlog and other factors. Going forward, the state should give the agency enough staff to handle a reasonable workload. Reforms also might be needed to put some limit on the cases allowed to linger in the HLRB in-box — a project for a future legislative session.

Finally, it’s encouraging to hear Okabe’s resolve to resist repeating the mistake of 2011, when the ratification vote was rushed. Members need to feel they can get their questions fully answered, and time must be allotted to get that done. Spending the next few weeks to meet with members is a good plan.

While the teachers talk, the people wearing the green eyeshades in the state Capitol had better sharpen their pencils and find a way to ratchet back benefit liabilities for the future. In an era of rising health care costs, the price tag on contract deals is going to go up markedly across the board, and the well of taxpayer resources and patience is running very low.