Ridgecrest Teachers Assoc PDF

Preview

Summary

Managing Conflict and Change III COMMGMT 3506 sample negotiation work case study...

Description

RIDGECREST SCHOOL DISPUTE

TEACHERS' ASSOCIATION POSITION You and your teammates are the bargaining team for the Ridgecrest Teachers’ Association. Members of your team may function in any capacity that the team decides upon. For example, you are free to select one or more of your members to serve as chief negotiator(s) representing your side in contract negotiations with the Ridgecrest School District. Try to prepare for the timing and pace of this negotiation—you will have about five hours total during two bargaining sessions, which you can use to caucus with your teammates, negotiate with the other side, etc. Try to use all of that time strategically to get the best possible deal for your side. (Correspondence and/or discussions between bargaining sessions is permitted.) You will probably want to do some serious “number-crunching” as part of your team preparation. (You may want to bring a laptop if you can get access to one; at a minimum, you should always bring a calculator to every negotiation.) If you think of any numbers that you would like to be able to calculate for this negotiation but cannot, first be sure that you cannot calculate the figures directly from the information you already have. If you cannot do so directly, then do your best to come up with a reasonable, defensible formula. In addition, since this is a major negotiation, you may want to do some real-life research at other school districts, etc., both for credibility in the negotiation and for better information. Feel free to use any benchmarking information to make a best-guess calculation for various budget issues, too. This advice applies not only to the initial negotiating session, but also to the concluding session (if you decide you need more data to analyze before returning to the bargaining table). You would be wise to create a comprehensive and integrated spreadsheet in advance and bring a laptop. If you do “crunch the numbers,” then try to focus on those numbers that you think will be most helpful in understanding the possibilities and nuances of the budget; in backing up your side during the negotiation; and in comparing and evaluating various offers. Remember that it is always a good idea, in preparing for any negotiation, to be thorough. Note that, although the school board may suggest that they have already optimized all areas of the budget, you need not take this assertion at face value. Suggested changes to the budget should ideally be supported by research, documentation, and/or benchmarking. As indicated in the background information, the previous contract with the school district has expired. It is now a week before the beginning of the school year. As a result of various community pressures, the Teachers’ Association has agreed to return to work on a day-to-day basis, with the provision that it is free to declare an impasse leading to state intervention (or, truth be told, declare an immediate strike) at any time as long as the contract is not finalized. In this regard, the bargaining team has considered several options ranging from calling in the state to mediate (a move that may be seen by both teachers and the community as a failure on your part) to a system-wide strike to a variety of more limited actions. Information available to you indicates that a majority of the membership prefers to conclude an agreement but is willing, if necessary, to impasse, and even to engage in an immediate strike action. The remainder of the membership is split, in that one subgroup wants to avoid any strike, while a second group is pressing to call one immediately. You, along with the other members of your

677

team, prefer to conclude a contract rather than declare an impasse or strike, but you are ready to engage in either of these two choices if necessary—even if you personally have to spend some symbolic time in jail. You are aware of increasing community pressure on your association and on the school board to conclude an agreement in order to avert state intervention or the closing of the schools. The Teachers’ Association membership is aware of the budget cuts being imposed on the district. However, it has certain demands that it feels are justified and reasonable in light of the increased cost of living and recent gains received by Teachers’ Associations in neighboring communities and throughout New Jersey. In general, the bargaining team wants to avoid a situation where the Teachers’ Association loses benefits that have been gained over the past several years. In this connection, you feel that the Board of Education is essentially trying to reduce staff to meet externally imposed budgetary reductions and, at the same time, obtain a considerable increase in teachers’ workload so the board can “look good” to the community. You feel that the board is attempting to pass the burden of the budget cuts along to teachers rather than apportioning them in an equitable manner. Many members of the association also want salary increases that, at the very least, are sufficient to offset the rise in cost of living. Many teachers are willing to share some responsibility in the cutting of the budget and are willing to make a reasonable contribution to this end. A sizeable portion of the membership is willing to accept an increase in workload, provided that the increases are reasonable and that they have some choice as to how this would be accomplished. However, it is felt that the board is asking teachers to incur most of the costs, make most of the cuts, make most of the sacrifices and seeking to retain its prerogative to make all decisions in these matters. To be clear: the board has discretionary power to transfer funds among budgetary categories if the need arises. That is, the school board has ultimate decisionmaking responsibility for the entire school budget, not just the teacher portion. Like any management team, however, the board operates within legal and other constraints and must be able to support and defend its decisions. As in any negotiation, if you have limited information, you need to make reasonable and defensible assumptions and be able to back them up (based on real-world research or benchmarking, your best guess, the information you do have, etc.). The issues that remain to be settled fall into six general categories: 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6.

Salary Workload Reduction in staff Benefits Evaluation of teachers Binding arbitration of employee grievances

These general categories are ranked (above) in order of importance to the teachers. Following a long and contentious meeting, the membership agreed to this ranking. After years of neglecting the top two issues of salary and workload, the majority of teachers now apparently feel that increasing their salaries and holding the line on workload are even more important this time than concerns about preventing and minimizing staff reductions. The bargaining team’s position on specific issues within

678

these categories is spelled out below. These items within each category are not ranked by importance; i.e., they are listed in no particular order within their category. All of the issues in dispute are negotiable in Ridgecrest. 1.

Salary. The Teachers’ Association wants the following:

1.1

Across-the-board increases in salary schedule: In order to equalize salaries with (and remain competitive with) teachers in surrounding, comparable New Jersey school districts, the membership would prefer adding $6,000-$7,000 to salaries at the lower levels, compared to an additional $12,000-$14,000 at the upper levels of the salary schedule. Information available to the bargaining team suggests that these figures are flexible as long as pronounced inequities are brought into line with those of surrounding districts. For example, the teachers would consider having instead a $10,000 across-the-board increase for every step in the salary schedule. Again, the exact amounts can be flexible.

1.2

Cost-of-living increase: In addition to the increases mentioned in category 1.1, the membership also prefers a cost-of-living increase commensurate with the regional increase in cost of living during the previous year, as determined by official government sources. However, information available to the bargaining team suggests that the membership might be willing to accept either a differential formula or one providing a reasonable percentage of the full increase in cost of living in exchange for concessions on other issues.

2.

Workload. The bargaining team has information indicating that the membership, though somewhat divided, wants the following:

2.1

Workday: The present overall workday, as established in the last contract, is 7 hours and 5 minutes long. Prior to that contract, it had been 8 hours long. Currently, the 7 hours 5 min. includes 5 hours 25 min. (325 min.) for teaching and extra assignments, 50 minutes for prep time, and 50 minutes of duty-free time (see below for details). Although there are strong feelings in the membership against any formal overall increase, the bargaining team feels that it might agree to certain limited increases, particularly where individual teachers voluntarily agree to assume additional responsibilities. The bargaining team wishes to use this option as a lever to gain concessions on other issues. You have heard that, if the board is successful in lengthening the teachers’ workday, then it is considering also lengthening the school day for students by extending each class period. You would have serious reservations about such a change, because it would require more work by teachers and because it would force after-school extracurricular activities to end later in the day for both students and teachers. In any event, you are staunchly opposed to forcing teachers to teach and prepare for more class periods per day, a move which would involve a lot more work for teachers than just slightly longer class periods. You doubt that the board will ask for such a concession, though, because it could seriously harm the quality of student education and would put Ridgecrest too far out of step with neighboring towns.

2.2

“Prep” time: Teachers currently have a 50-minute “prep” time period each workday. Many teachers use this time to provide individual study time for students, grade papers, or prepare lesson plans. Much of the membership feels

679

rather strongly about retaining this period “as is” but the bargaining team feels that it might be able to offer a nominal reduction on a rotational or otherwise “shared” basis. The bargaining team feels that any concession on this issue should yield appropriate concessions in return. 2.3

“Duty-free” time: In the previous contract, the teachers made a concession to the board which called for a reduction in their one-hour lunch period to a 50-minute period. Furthermore, the teachers also agreed to divide this 50-minute period into two parts: 25 minutes for lunch, per se, and 25 minutes of “duty-free” time. The teachers are adamantly opposed to any demands made by the board for additional service during the 25-minute “duty-free” period. “Duty-free” time is essentially the accumulated break time for teachers, since they do not have breaks during the day. Many teachers also use this time to attend meetings, confer with other teachers, or do other preparation activities.

2.4

Emergency assignments and general obligations: The teachers are opposed to any procedure that allows the board to hire or assign whomever it wants, and for as long as it wants, to any duty at any time. These duties include emergency substitute fill-in, bus duty, disciplinary duty, cafeteria duty, playground duty, club advising, coaching athletics, committee service, and monitoring and chaperoning after-school athletic, extra-curricular, and social activities. Some of these duties are for additional pay. The teachers would much prefer a procedure as follows: a) The board must notify the Association and all teachers at least six weeks in advance of any opening, so all interested teachers can apply. b) No one else besides current teachers will be considered for any position until after the six-week (or more) period. c) The board will make every effort to find qualified outside candidates before making any involuntary assignments of current teachers. The board’s determination that no outside qualified person can be found would be subject to challenge by the Association under the grievance procedure. d) No teacher will be involuntarily assigned to any duty for more than one halfyear semester. Among current teachers who are qualified for a particular duty, any involuntary assignments either will be rotated in order to both minimize and equalize such service or will be based on reverse seniority. e) Whenever possible, individual teachers will have a choice in the activities to which they are assigned.

In general, the teachers—especially those fortunate enough to have an aide’s help in the classroom (and it would be great to have the help of many more aides)—are willing to make certain concessions on workload, provided that assignments are not made arbitrarily by the board and that any increases are kept to a minimum and are distributed equitably. The bargaining team is willing to make such proposals in exchange for concessions on other priority issues. 3.

Reduction in Staff. The Teachers’ Association wants the following:

3.1

Minimal and selective reductions in staff, offset wherever possible by activating early retirements, using teachers to fill administrative positions that are currently vacant, and using laid-off teachers to fill vacancies created by teachers on both long- and short-term leave.

680

3.2

Pupil/teacher ratio: The present system-wide ratio is approximately 13.5 to 1. However, this figure is an average, encompassing some smaller and some larger classes, as well as non-classroom teachers, such as reading specialists. All figures here and in the budget include both regular and special education, i.e., these figures are a weighted average of both types of instruction. The membership wants to hold the overall ratio at its present level (or even reduce it), but might be willing to accept an increase in certain types of classes in exchange for concessions on other priority issues.

3.3

Layoffs of individual untenured teachers to be jointly determined on a case-bycase basis by representatives of the Teachers’ Association and the Board of Education.

3.4

Severance pay to any laid-off teachers should last for at least half of the school year (i.e., for five months), since it may be difficult for these teachers to find new jobs at this late date. While instituting such a “safety net” seems to you to be a matter of fairness and basic human decency, you are willing to be flexible, since you know that standard practice in corporations is often to offer only one week’s pay for each year of prior service.

In general, the teachers want to minimize layoffs through placement of teachers in existing administrative vacancies (assuming they have the proper certification, if required), activation of early retirements, and the use of laid-off teachers as substitutes for those on leave. The decision to retire is a voluntary one made by each individual teacher who is eligible, not by the union; i.e., the number of people who will retire is not negotiable—it can only be estimated. Unfortunately, probably none of this year’s returning teachers who are eligible for retirement would be interested in retiring immediately without some sort of additional incentive, and even then, certainly no more than 20 eligible teachers would be willing to retire immediately anyway. In the long term (after these negotiations), the Teachers’ Association would like to work with the school board to repeal the state law barring explicit early retirement incentives, since the bargaining team is very confident that about 10 senior teachers would be willing, even now, to retire immediately if everyone eligible was offered a fairly modest incentive (say, $15,000 per person, for a likely total cost of $150,000) or, alternatively, an additional 10 senior teachers—for a total of 20 in all—would do so if everyone eligible was offered a more generous incentive (say, $30,000 per person, for a likely total cost of $600,000). In the short term, the Teachers’ Association wants representation in layoff decisions and maximization of severance pay to affected teachers. Within these overall membership preferences, however, the bargaining team recognizes a need to remain flexible in order to make trade-offs wherever necessary. 4.

Benefits. The Teachers’ Association wants the following:

4.1

Health insurance: You have heard that the board would like to switch teachers’ coverage from traditional insurance to health maintenance organizations (HMOs). You are opposed to such a switch, because that would mean that teachers would have fewer choices for doctors, medical tests, etc. On the other hand, HMOs seem to be the trend in the U.S., as is making employees pay for a higher share of their health-care coverage. Currently, the board contributes 90% (=$13,940 per teacher) of the total annual cost for health care coverage for

681

teachers, and the teachers have the remaining 10% (=$1,549 per teacher) deducted from their annual salary. 4.2

Accumulated sick leave upon retirement: By statute, all teachers receive 10 days of sick leave per year. Up until now, Ridgecrest has paid full salary for one out of every four accumulated sick days upon retirement, with a maximum of $7,500. In light of the fact that teachers in most surrounding communities still receive comparable payments for unused sick leave upon retirement, the Ridgecrest membership feels it too is entitled to retain such benefits. However, the bargaining team believes that various reductions in the formula can be devised that might be acceptable to the membership if concessions on other priority issues were forthcoming from the board. These might include a lower percentage of accumulated sick leave, a lower maximum amount, payments keyed to years of service, and so on. The bargaining team also sees possibilities of phasing in such benefits over several years.

4.3

Bereavement leave: According to a poll taken by the bargaining team, the membership is seeking up to five days of paid leave in the event of the death of an immediate member of a teacher’s family, including spouse, children, and parents. Also sought are two-day paid bereavement leaves in the event of the death of a spouse’s parent. However, the results of the poll indicate that these preferences are somewhat flexible.

Note that, if a teacher decides to take leave, a substitute teacher will need to be hired and paid for the time the regular teacher is out of work. In addition, the Family Medical Leave Act of 1993 entitles eligible employees to take up to 12 weeks of unpaid, job-protected leave in a 12-month period for specified family and medical reasons, such as the birth and care of a newborn or the adoption of a child. 5.

Evaluation of Teachers. The bargaining team has information indicating that the school board is about to hire a consultant to develop a systematic evaluation procedure to be used by the board in determining individual teachers’ salary increases, assignments to specific schools and duties, and the removal of teachers. The membership is wary of this approach. Additional concerns include:

5.1

Teacher review of evaluations: The Teachers’ Association feels that every teacher should see a written report of his or her evaluation visit or observation within one week of the observation date. Teachers should also receive a copy of their annual performance review at least one week before meeting with their evaluator to discuss it.

5.2

Evaluation conference determination: Every ...