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.