NEWS FROM THE JOURNAL NORTH
Raam Wong, Staff Writer for Journal North published the following article last week
(Albuquerque Journal)
The Santa Fe Public Schools district and the teachers union are at a stalemate over contract negotiations that include SFPS proposals to overhaul employee sick day and grievance processes. SFPS pulled out of the negotiations in May after the National Education Association of Santa Fe distributed copies of the district's opening demands
in teacher lunch rooms around the city.
In initial negotiations, SFPS asked to reopen two parts of the collective bargaining agreement. First, it sought to require teachers to provide notice of their absences in advance of a sick day. Second, the district sought to overhaul the employee grievance process. The so-called reopeners were described to the Journal by the NEA and confirmed by a school board member.
The standoff is one of the most significant disputes between the union and the district in recent memory. It has been marked by union demonstrations outside district headquarters and has led both sides to hire labor attorneys to assist in negotiations.
In a May 26 complaint to the state labor board, the district contends that the union violated ground rules for the negotiations when it revealed aspects of the confidential deliberations. "In the past, negotiations have always been held privately," school board President Mary Ellen Gonzales said. Gonzales said the SFPS reopeners called for more than the district was actually seeking. Doing so gives the SFPS bargaining team flexibility to negotiate, she said.
The proposal for changing the sick leave policy was written "in order to give our negotiators plenty of room to negotiate," Gonzales said. "We never expected that to be made public." SFPS attorney Tony Ortiz added, "If there is exposure of positions (in the public), that can be used to bring pressure down on the negotiating parties."
NEA President Koo Im Tong disagreed. She said the confidentiality rules allow the district to make "outrageous" demands outside of the public eye. Tong said that a previous NEA bargaining team, which has since been dissolved, was mistaken in agreeing to the ground rules. "By agreeing to confidentiality, unions really limit a lot of their power," Tong said.
On Tuesday, SFPS officials declined to return to the bargaining table, saying they would instead await the Public Employee Labor Relations Board hearing on July 10. In its response to the district's complaint, the NEA states that the ground rules were nonbinding, unfair and not required under the Public Employee Bargaining Act.
The union has filed its own complaint alleging that the district is failing to negotiate in good faith by refusing to return to talks. Attorneys for both sides said this week they were prepared to resume negotiations. But neither appeared willing to give in on ground rules. "What we really want is to get back to the bargaining table," said NEA attorney Andrew Lewinter, who opposes the ground rules. Ortiz, the district's attorney, said, "If they want to propose some reasonable guidelines that everyone can live by, then we're all ears."
The current collective bargaining agreement was agreed to in 2003 and will last through June 2009. Each year, both sides are allowed to reopen three areas of the contract for negotiations. The NEA is seeking three changes, while the district is seeking two. The union wants to establish new school-based management teams that would design class schedules, course offerings and other matters important to teachers at individual campuses.
The NEA also is seeking limits on the number of students that employees such as counselors and art teachers are responsible for. Third, the union wants the district to increase support for special education teachers. This would include freeing time for teachers to offer more individual counseling to students.For its part, the district wants to change its sick day policy. Doing so would help schools prepare for days on which large numbers of teachers are going to be absent, officials say. The union opposes the idea. "Most people don't know in advance when they're going to be sick," Tong said. SFPS also wants to overhaul the grievance process. Among the changes would be redefining grievances, placing grievances in an employee's personnel file and requiring employees - instead of the union - to set aside a $3,000 deposit for possible arbitration.
(Albuquerque Journal)
The Santa Fe Public Schools district and the teachers union are at a stalemate over contract negotiations that include SFPS proposals to overhaul employee sick day and grievance processes. SFPS pulled out of the negotiations in May after the National Education Association of Santa Fe distributed copies of the district's opening demands
in teacher lunch rooms around the city.
In initial negotiations, SFPS asked to reopen two parts of the collective bargaining agreement. First, it sought to require teachers to provide notice of their absences in advance of a sick day. Second, the district sought to overhaul the employee grievance process. The so-called reopeners were described to the Journal by the NEA and confirmed by a school board member.
The standoff is one of the most significant disputes between the union and the district in recent memory. It has been marked by union demonstrations outside district headquarters and has led both sides to hire labor attorneys to assist in negotiations.
In a May 26 complaint to the state labor board, the district contends that the union violated ground rules for the negotiations when it revealed aspects of the confidential deliberations. "In the past, negotiations have always been held privately," school board President Mary Ellen Gonzales said. Gonzales said the SFPS reopeners called for more than the district was actually seeking. Doing so gives the SFPS bargaining team flexibility to negotiate, she said.
The proposal for changing the sick leave policy was written "in order to give our negotiators plenty of room to negotiate," Gonzales said. "We never expected that to be made public." SFPS attorney Tony Ortiz added, "If there is exposure of positions (in the public), that can be used to bring pressure down on the negotiating parties."
NEA President Koo Im Tong disagreed. She said the confidentiality rules allow the district to make "outrageous" demands outside of the public eye. Tong said that a previous NEA bargaining team, which has since been dissolved, was mistaken in agreeing to the ground rules. "By agreeing to confidentiality, unions really limit a lot of their power," Tong said.
On Tuesday, SFPS officials declined to return to the bargaining table, saying they would instead await the Public Employee Labor Relations Board hearing on July 10. In its response to the district's complaint, the NEA states that the ground rules were nonbinding, unfair and not required under the Public Employee Bargaining Act.
The union has filed its own complaint alleging that the district is failing to negotiate in good faith by refusing to return to talks. Attorneys for both sides said this week they were prepared to resume negotiations. But neither appeared willing to give in on ground rules. "What we really want is to get back to the bargaining table," said NEA attorney Andrew Lewinter, who opposes the ground rules. Ortiz, the district's attorney, said, "If they want to propose some reasonable guidelines that everyone can live by, then we're all ears."
The current collective bargaining agreement was agreed to in 2003 and will last through June 2009. Each year, both sides are allowed to reopen three areas of the contract for negotiations. The NEA is seeking three changes, while the district is seeking two. The union wants to establish new school-based management teams that would design class schedules, course offerings and other matters important to teachers at individual campuses.
The NEA also is seeking limits on the number of students that employees such as counselors and art teachers are responsible for. Third, the union wants the district to increase support for special education teachers. This would include freeing time for teachers to offer more individual counseling to students.For its part, the district wants to change its sick day policy. Doing so would help schools prepare for days on which large numbers of teachers are going to be absent, officials say. The union opposes the idea. "Most people don't know in advance when they're going to be sick," Tong said. SFPS also wants to overhaul the grievance process. Among the changes would be redefining grievances, placing grievances in an employee's personnel file and requiring employees - instead of the union - to set aside a $3,000 deposit for possible arbitration.
posted by Editor | 2:44 AM
<< Home