Teacher contract negotiations can be a hot button issue in any community, especially during the past few years as many in Boone County continue to feel the effects of the severe recession. Many people are struggling to make ends meet and deal with the realities of less work to go around, and the last thing that anyone wants to hear about is a self-involved group of people who won’t settle for a fair offer. Thus, the BEA feels it is necessary to inform the public of District 100 of the real reasons we have not yet reached an agreement with the district.
Many people in the community of Belvidere heard about our contract negotiations once again last Tuesday, September 23rd, whether through social media or the local news. A large part of this news was that the BEA had turned down an 11.85% raise (12% depending on the source).
Quite frankly, the negotiations on Tuesday did fall apart after only three hours.The district representatives chose to abruptly end negotiations by having the mediator inform our bargaining team that the alarms would be turned on and our team had fifteen minutes to vacate the premises. This came as a shock to the members of the negotiating team, who were prepared to work late into the night, as usual, in order to make progress towards an agreement. It was also disappointing to see the news coverage in which salary was the major focus. The truth is that our reasons for denying the district’s latest offer had very little to do with the proposed raise over three years. Instead, our continued struggle is a result of remaining committed to adding contract language that will enhance and protect the learning environment of our students.
What Superintendent Houselog failed to inform the media and the public after the September 23rd mediation is that this purported raise (which incidentally was noticeably lower than the percentage reported to news outlets) was part of a package deal. If we had accepted that raise, we would have had to abandon all of our language proposals that we believe will improve the working and learning environments for our students.
Before we continue, let us explain that there are two ways that contract negotiations can proceed. The first method is to negotiate on an issue by issue basis. This means that the two sides would move through and discuss one issue at a time until agreement is reached. This allows positive momentum to build, as a long list of agreed upon points grows and the list of disagreements dwindles.
The second way is to negotiate the entire contract as a package deal. This means that no agreement can truly be reached on anything until it’s been reached on everything. This is what the district has chosen to do in this situation. The BEA has repeatedly attempted to negotiate issue by issue, and has been rebuffed every time - being told that we must take all or nothing.
The BEA is not willing, as a Union, to give up on our fair, good sense proposals that will greatly improve the culture of Belvidere schools and protect our students. Unfortunately, our history in dealing with the district over the past several years has shown that we need to add language to our contract in order to hold the district to sound educational policy. This is why, no matter how enticing the current offer sounds in terms of proposed salary, the BEA cannot simply accept any raise offered by the District.
Not a single teacher in the BEA wants a strike to happen. We are all here to work to improve our students’ lives and better the environment in Belvidere schools; and because the contract is the teachers’ only true leverage for holding the district accountable for changes we feel are necessary, we are willing to put into action the only option we have left to protect our schools, our students, and our collective future as residents and employees of the city of Belvidere.
The following are the areas in which the BEA is continuing to demand language to hold the district accountable for your students’ well-being:
1. Improving Student Services
Throughout negotiations, we have consistently asked for more student services staff to help support our students, who are currently woefully underserved in our secondary schools.The district has moved on this issue over time, and they have verbally committed to hiring two more counselors for next year, which we would agree to; however, we are demanding the district place a Memorandum of Understanding, in writing, which would be attached to the contract, confirming that the district will indeed hire two secondary counselors for the duration of the contract. The district has not agreed to do this as of yet. Again, this Memorandum is necessary based upon past district practice. Unless we get confirmation in writing, we cannot trust the district to live up to their word.
2. Appropriate Class Size
In our Science, Family and Consumer Science, and Vocational Arts lab classes, lab spaces were built for 24 students. These classes often deal with hazardous, dangerous materials, and need fewer students and lab stations to help the teacher maintain an active supervision of the students’ difficult labwork. Even North, which opened only eight short years ago, was built with 24 stations in their lab classes, obviously with safety in mind. For the first year of the existence of two high schools, those lab classes were filled with only 24 students, as is appropriate for the safety of those labs. Then, ever since, the district has filled these classes with 30 students, citing that the only contract language that exists is that classes must be capped at 30 students. Thus, since the district has again proven that they only follow existing contract language, the BEA is demanding long-overdue language that returns these hazardous, possibly dangerous learning environments to a safer, more appropriate class size.
3. Special Education Issues
From the beginning of negotiations, the BEA has been arguing for language to uphold the current law that states that no regular education classroom may have more than 30% of the students in the room with an Individualized Education Plan (IEP). For years, we have been arguing the lack of compliance with this law in the district; last year, the district was notified that it was out of compliance with state law in high school classrooms, but they did nothing until parent pressure convinced them to apply for waivers and work on fixing the issue in these classes. In total, 18 classrooms were out of compliance with education law. We are now asking for language saying the district will not exceed ISBE class sizes. We are also, to protect our students, asking for language to be in place that caps the number of students with IEPs in regular education rooms at a similar number in case the state law ever changes to protect sound educational practice. The district has not agreed to this language, despite the fact that it should already be following said law, and it does not cost the district any more money.
Also, within special education, the BEA has proposed language to standardize special education caseloads. Special education teachers have multiple, unique demands for each student on their caseload. They are responsible for consulting with and managing the learning and class-by-class progress of each of their students, as well as preparing paperwork, scheduling IEPs, and various other staff conferences regarding students, on top of teaching and/or co-teaching a full schedule of classes. The practice in district 100 has been to determine the number of students on a teacher’s caseload by the number of special education teachers currently hired in the building.
This practice creates a large variance in caseloads from building to building, depending on the number of students with IEPs in the building. When caseloads are too high, the individual students cannot receive the adequate intensity of individual support they are required by law. Individual teachers and the BEA have attempted to go through the proper channels to alleviate this problem but have been met with resistance; thus, the BEA is proposing language that will standardize the caseloads of all the various special education educators at various levels in order to meet the legal and deserved needs of every student.
4. Attracting and Retaining Quality Educators
The current school board has stated that its top priority is to attract and retain quality educators; however, two recent practices in the district have in effect done exactly the opposite.
First, the evaluation plan that District 100 has recently adopted has been billed as a tool to better assess and foster valid and appropriate teaching. Teachers were told that the evaluation system was not to be feared, because any teacher who received a poor evaluation would have a systematic chance to improve the perceived weaknesses of their teaching before being released. Recently, long-standing veteran teachers in the district with a history of proficient to excellent evaluations were released under a Reduction in Force (RIF) after evaluations which placed them in what we call “group 2.” The timing of these evaluation reviews were so close to the RIF date that these teachers were never given the chance to complete their “remediation plan” and continue service in the district. Also, these teachers had no grievance policy in place to fight their release.
As a result of this practice, those long-tenured teachers lost their jobs, and the remaining teachers have developed a paralyzing sense of fear and lack of confidence in their teaching due to fear of losing their job.
Also, at the beginning of the great recession, teachers agreed to a contract that stopped their salary-lane progress. Knowing that money truly was an issue, teachers willingly accepted the step freeze. Now, five years later, teachers who have been loyal to the district are currently four steps behind their normal earned pay rate. For instance, a teacher who has been in the district eight years is currently being paid as a 4th year teacher. This problem is compounded by the district’s policy of giving new teachers from other districts their years of service upon entering the district. Thus, an 8th year teacher who got their previous seven years in another district will be paid four steps higher than the employee that earned all of those years loyally serving this district. This sends a message from the district that we do not value retaining and developing our teachers.
Both of these instances practically beg teachers to leave, and not surprisingly have created an unprecedented mass exodus from District 100. Not counting retirees (which have been numerous), over the past two years, District 100 has lost 92 (17%) of their teachers to resignations/other districts/other professions. Teachers clearly do not feel safe, respected, or valued in District 100, and when so many teachers are scared, frustrated, and unwilling to develop in our educational system and our community, the students suffer. How can we expect the students to learn and grow when so many of their teachers are understandably afraid and unwilling to develop long-lasting relationships with them and the community?
We cannot expect the type of fostering environment we desire for our students when we do not maintain an environment that fosters, values, and enhances the teachers who educate them; thus, the BEA is demanding language that creates an appeals process for any teacher who receives an evaluation lower than their previous rating. This appeals process would cost the district $0, and would go a long way to rebuilding teachers’ lost confidence in the evaluation process. And finally, the BEA is proposing a compensation package that rectifies the current issues with step pay and will also go a long way to foster an environment of ownership and loyalty in the teachers that will trickle down to your students.
Despite what the district and their lawyer would like the public to believe, the BEA is not simply grabbing for more money in a tight economy. All of our sticking points are based entirely upon language demands that will improve the environment of District 100 schools. Many of our proposals do not cost the district any money, and the district currently is in a place financially where we can collectively spend some prudent money to enact systems that improve the environment for your children and our students.
The BEA is asking for public support, for your support, to improve our schools. The BEA is asking for more mediation sessions, as the district has not agreed to meet again until October 14, a date all too close to a possible strike date for anyone’s comfort. We are and have been willing to negotiate as long and hard as is necessary to avoid this strike, but we have been met time and time again with district and, more directly, district lawyer constraints. Consistently over the course of these negotiations, any halt in meetings or delay in mediation dates have come from the District, not from the BEA, mostly so they could wait for their lawyer to be present. We are asking you to write to your board members and urge them to continue working to avoid this strike. Demand that the board and the district continue to negotiate, regardless of the availability of the expensive attorney. Write to Superintendent Houselog and inform him of your frustrations that we cannot work together to avoid this unenviable situation. Put signs in your car windows and yards offering support for the BEA and our schools’ environments. Join us as we practice picketing in the event that we cannot reach a deal. Make it clear that you support the BEA in their reasonable efforts to reach a deal that we can all be proud of moving forward.
Remember, these are our schools and our students. Let’s work together to make their future as bright as it can be. Thank you.
Here is some important information for any concerned people who would like to help out:
How to reach your board members:
Michael Rathbun-President mrathbun2@district100.com
Karla Maville-Vice-President kmaville2@district100.com
Robert Torbert-Secretary rtorber@district100.com
Jason Colson jcolson@district100.com
Kelly Diamond kdiamond@district100.com
Stacy McGowan smcgowan@district100.com
Dan Wilson dwilson@district100.com
Dan Wilson dwilson@district100.com
How to reach Superintendent Houselog:
email: mhouselog@district100.com phone: 815-544-0301
BE SURE TO FIND AND LIKE the BEA (Belvidere Education Association) & PASS (Parents Advocating for Students and Staff) pages on FACEBOOK. Updates and important calls to action can be found there daily. Please especially help our PASS parents; they have been SO supportive to the BEA, and they are always looking for more parents to help hold the district accountable.
No comments:
Post a Comment