Bargaining Session, November 20, 2008

On November 20th, the District and your bargaining team met in another negotiation session, this time at Abe Lincoln Elementary. Most teachers of the district were in attendance, but since it was difficult for many to hear what was going on, I want to provide a summary of what took place.

The District handed out a document. Todd Bloomquist distributed a hard copy of a “White Paper”he had completed for both sides. This is the same document that was emailed to all of the teachers in the district less than three hours before the negotiation session. However, since the document was emailed to your bargaining team at the same time as everyone else, we were not able to review the information for relevance or factual accuracy prior to the meeting. Therefore, we had no discussions about the document during the negotiation session. If necessary, I will respond to the document at a future time. Todd explained that the state of Oregon expects to experience an economic downturn for the next few years. Todd also explained that the state would probably call for the district to reduce its current budget by about $1.5 million.

The MEA made a distinction between a long-term contract and a short term crisis. Your bargaining team pointed out that both sides were trying to create a contract that would serve as a template for many years to come. The District agreed with this statement. Your bargaining team also pointed out that the current contract has “re-opener” language that permits the District to temporarily renegotiate some portions the contract in order to meet an economic crisis. Once again, the District agreed that the re-opener language gave them the power to temporarily modify whatever contract we agree to. Under questioning by the bargaining team, the District admitted that their proposed changes in insurance and early retirement would not provide them with any short-term savings. Your bargaining team then stated that negotiating this long-term contract, therefore, should not be sidelined by a potential crisis that no one can predict.

The District rejected the MEA’s latest proposal.

The District did not offer a counterproposal. Despite the prior discussion on the separation
between the contract and the possible short term economic crisis, Todd stated that the District could not prepare a counter proposal until it received more information from the state in early December.

Both sides discussed the District’s current budget. The District said that it had budgeted a 2.5%
salary increase for the current year, but that it didn’t have money for either the 4% increase or
the two extra salary steps that we proposed. Your bargaining team asked the District how much the steps would cost, but the District did not have the information at hand, so your bargaining team asked that a calculation be made for the next meeting. Your bargaining team pointed out that the District has an additional, unaccounted $300,000 from the last fiscal year. The District admitted that our claim was correct, but that the money would probably be eaten up by the expected state-mandated budget reduction. Your bargaining team then clarified a few more budgetary issues before the meeting ended.

Both sides agreed to meet again in mid-December.

I realize how important it is for you to receive accurate and timely updates, and I will do my best to continue to provide them. If you have any questions, feel free to contact any member of your
bargaining team. We appreciate you input, and your concerns.

Respectfully,
Robert Young
President, Medford Education Association

MEA Negotiation Talking Points

In an effort to help you better discuss and consider the intricacies of our current negotiations with the district, we have created a document to help with talking points.

MEA Talking Points

Get your own at Scribd or explore others: Education

MEA Counterproposal November 10, 2008

1. Salary Increase

2008-2009 4%

2009-2010 2.5%

2010-2011 2.5%

New steps at level 17 and level 20

Change: MEA original offer called for a 4% increase in each of the three years of the proposed contract.

Comment: these modest increases from the current contract compensate for some of the givebacks that MEA members have volunteered over the last seven years.

2. Inflation Protection

CPI -1

Change: MEA original offer called for CPI +3.

Comment: this reverts back to current contract, which provides minimal protection against sharp increases of inflation, while allowing for a shared risk of cost increases between the district and the MEA.

3. Health Insurance

Keep Current Contract Language

Change: MEA original offer called for the district to provide the lower-deductible insurance to all certified employees for no cost.

Comment: we disagree that the district’s proposed tiered insurance plan is more fair than the current comprehensive insurance plan.

4. Early Retirement

Keep Current Contract Language

Change: MEA original offer called for a district matching program for those teachers who have no early retirement insurance.

Comment: we can approach this issue at the end of the proposed contract cycle – when Oregon’s economic situation is clearer.

5. Other Parts of the Contract

Current Contract unless both sides agree to specific modifications.

Change: there are dozens of changes proposed by both sides – most of which have no economic impact – that have either been agreed upon or can be agreed upon.

Comment: both sides have shown a healthy amount of cooperation in finding common goals and in accommodating each other’s needs, so none of the remaining proposals from either side should threaten an agreement on the “money” issues.

Next Two Negotiation Sessions Set

The next two negotiation sessions have been scheduled: the first is Monday, November 10 at 4:00 in the Hedrick Middle School media center, and the second is on Thursday, November 20th at 4:00 at the OEA office (tentatively) on South Pacific Highway. Both meetings are open to the public and we look forward to seeing you there.

Rally on Wednesday, October 29th

Come one, come all. Show your support for your bargaining team and YOUR contract as we sit across the table from the district's bargaining team. We will meet inside the Hedrick media center from 4:00 to 5:00. Bring your family and wear your MEA shirt. Food and water will be provided. We will be united.

Negotiation Session October 20, 2008

Certified Colleagues of Medford 549C:
On Monday, October 20, your bargaining team met with the district for a scheduled negotiation. The district made a counterproposal, which consisted of five main points:

Salary: in a move away from its original offer of a 0%, 2% and 2% salary increase, the district offered a 2.5% salary increase for the 08/09 school year. Unfortunately, the district wants to wait to negotiate the salary increases for the second and third year of the contract until it knows how much money the state will be giving it for the 09/11 biennium. The problem with this approach is that if we are negotiating only one issue, then we would have absolutely no leverage to reach a fair salary increase.

Health Insurance: the district proposes two changes to our current health insurance: altering the monthly district contribution to our insurance and charging teachers more money for covering family members. With respect to the district contribution, the district proposes to pay the currently-scheduled $1,018 monthly contribution for the 08/09 school year, but to also require in subsequent years that members pay 10% of the monthly contribution, whatever it is, for family members. This employee contribution is in addition to existing co-pays and deductibles. The district’s stated purpose for the change is to save money by increasing employee contributions and by limiting health care usage.

Early Retirement: instead of taking away early retirement health insurance for members with less than 20 years in the district, as it originally proposed, the district now proposes that all employees age 55 and over with 15 years or more in the district will receive eight years of insurance, so long as they retire by 2011. Under the new proposal, anyone with 15 years in the district and who retires between 2011 and 2017 will receive less than eight years of insurance. Anyone retiring after 2018, no matter the number of years in the district, will not receive any early retirement insurance. Also, anyone currently younger than 45 would no longer be eligible for early retirement insurance. At the minimum, this means that another 40% of our members would lose early retirement insurance altogether, joining the 20+% of members hired after 2006. In addition, the district dropped its original proposal to fund an individual savings account alternative for those members who don’t receive early retirement insurance.

Personal Leave: instead of trying to limit when personal days could be used, the district now proposes to encourage members to not use all of their personal days by paying for unused personal days at the end of the school year. Payment would range from $50 for one unused personal day to $300 for three unused personal days.

Sick Leave Bank: the district proposes a new plan for a sick leave bank that the classified employees now enjoy. The sick leave bank would replace the current
practice of donating personal days on a case-by-case basis. Instead, members could donate up to two sick days a year into a “bank” that could be accessed by members who suffer serious illnesses that cannot be completed by their own accrued sick days.

During the session, the district repeatedly reminded us that they have a limited amount of money. We responded that we have given up money every year since 2000. The district also linked its proposal to a potentially sour economy in the future. We replied that we received no extra money when the economy was good. In fact, we gave up money during the last contract cycle, when the economic outlook was quite rosy.

After taking some time for private discussion, your bargaining team asked the district a few clarifying questions. We then informed the district that, based on preliminary tabulations of our recent survey, we are still very far apart on the money issues. Both sides were disappointed, and we ended the meeting.

If you want something better than the salary, insurance, and early retirement offers that the district has proposed, you will need to show your resolve, soon. You will soon hear from our organizing team with an invitation to attend an extremely important event next week. The district needs to see that the teachers of Medford 549C are serious about receiving a fair contract this time. Your attendance will be crucial to future negotiations.

I appreciate all the ways in which you support your bargaining team. Help us help you.

Respectfully,
Robert Young
President, Medford Education Association

October 14th Meeting Cancelled

The district has informed us that they must cancel our October 14th negotiation session. The next negotiation session will be on October 20th at Hedrick Middle School at 4:00 pm.

Bargaining Session for Sept. 29, 2008

Colleagues:

Your bargaining team met with the District’s team on September 29th. Your team believed that the District would be offering some kind of counterproposal, but we were mistaken. Instead, the District provided a graphic summary of their current financial situation, in an attempt to show us that there isn’t enough money to pay for the things that we have requested. After their presentation, we pointed out a few mistakes in their information, and then we alerted them to the fact that the District’s adopted 2008/09 budget has already set aside a 6% increase for certified employee salaries.

The bargaining session lasted about an hour and a half. Before it ended, the District agreed to provide a written counterproposal for us to consider at the next bargaining meeting, scheduled for October 14th. The bargaining team invites you to sit in on that meeting at 4:00 in the Hedrick Middle School media center.

Your team thanks you for your continued support,

Robert Young
President, MEA

Negotiation Session September 16, 2008

Bargaining Update

9/17/08

Colleagues:

Your bargaining team met with the District’s team on Tuesday, September 16. At the beginning of the meeting, I showed the District the same Power Point presentation that I prepared for you a few weeks ago. Your bargaining team felt it was necessary to remind our counterparts that during the last five years, certified employees have given up over $22 million to help the district reach a firmer financial position. The last slide, as before, posed the not-so-rhetorical question “how much more are you willing to sacrifice?” After that, we started talking money.

The district took some time explaining a plan that would apply money gained from a salary freeze toward a defined contribution plan. This tax-free plan would replace the existing early retirement insurance, which they propose to eliminate for most of us. The district also proposed a new “one-time longevity pay” bonus to compensate those teachers who would not receive a step increase during the proposed salary freeze. Your team then spent almost an hour asking specific questions regarding their proposals on salary, insurance, and early retirement. Before taking a break for private caucuses, your team gave each member of the district team an eight page historical summary of both side’s proposals, tentative agreements, questions, and comments. The document also restates the counterproposals that we presented to the district last June. Email me and I’ll send a copy to you.

After each team had a chance to talk privately, we reconvened, and your bargaining team made two proposals in order to start the negotiation on money issues. First, we lowered our salary offer from 4% or CPI + 3, whichever is higher, to 4% or CPI + 2, whichever is higher. Second we proposed that the district’s plan for an early retirement substitute be voluntary for the upcoming contract. This would allow teachers who would rather have a defined contribution plan to opt out of early retirement insurance, while keeping the promise of early retirement insurance to those teachers who have planned their future around it. Both sides then agreed on a framework for the next bargaining session, scheduled for September 29. We informed the District team that would not be bringing any new offers to the table during the next session.

Your team believes in you, and in the the job you do,

Robert Young

President, MEA

Where We Are Now

We wanted to give you an update of where negotiations with the District stand. As you know, we are working without a contract. However, all of the terms of the old contract, except for those dealing with a salary increase, are still in effect until we reach agreement on a new contract. We are scheduled to meet with the District three more times this month.

Here is our account of negotiations so far. In April 2008, your bargaining team met with the District and traded proposals. In an effort to understand the District’s motivations and concerns, we spent more than three hours asking them comprehensive questions about their proposal. The District questioned us for less than 45 minutes.

In May, your bargaining team offered over thirteen solutions that were designed to meet some of the District’s concerns while achieving several of our non-economic priorities. Both sides agreed that our counterproposals were productive and collaborative. For example, we offered to allow the District to post vacancies electronically in exchange for a closed internal transfer process that gives certified employees first crack at newly opened positions. We also offered to give up one of our three personal days if the District agreed to drop any restrictions on the use of the other two, and if the District agreed to create a sick leave bank that teachers can access in emergency situations. All of our counterproposals attempted to find creative solutions that benefitted both sides. The District took our counterproposals under advisement, but didn’t offer any new proposals of their own. With that, we agreed not to meet during the summer.

On September 3, we met with the District again. The District explained why it wanted to eliminate a salary increase for the first year of a new contract. The District wants to use the money to fund a retirement savings account. These individual accounts would partially offset the effects of a separate proposal to eliminate early retirement insurance for a vast majority of us. The amount of money that individuals could receive in their accounts would depend upon how many months they work after the program is set up and upon how many sick days they don’t use over their career. In any case, the District admitted that, under the proposed system, even if a new employee worked over thirty years in the District and used few of his or her sick days, the accrued money in the account would not pay for the same number of years of insurance that the present early retirement insurance program does. For those who have already accrued significant time in the District, the outlook is more dire.

During this meeting, the District also provided us a document that reviewed our original proposal. While the District did not offer anything new, it did tentatively agree to eleven of our non-controversial proposals. The District did, however, inform us that 23 of our 51 proposals were “unacceptable,” and offered no specific suggestions how we can reach a compromise on those issues. Surprisingly, the District ignored every one of the counter-proposals we offered in June. Hopefully, we will collaborate on these issues in the near future.

Your bargaining team met immediately after the September 3rd negotiation. We agreed that we were disappointed in the lack of movement on the part of the District, but we are also hopeful that future negotiations will be mutually productive.

From now on, your bargaining team will send out an update after each our meetings with the district. You deserve to be accurately informed, and we will provide as many facts as we can. You can also check back here for updates.