IMPORTANT - IMPORTANT - IMPORTANT
CLICK ON THE LINK BELOW FOR INFORMATION ABOUT RATIFYING THE TENTATIVE AGREEMENT!
|
Important Info about Furlough Days - Click on Link Below!
|
M E M O
May 30, 2009
TO: DSTA EXECUTIVE BOARD
DSTA FACULTY REPRESENTATIVES
FROM: TOM BURBANK, DSTA PRESIDENT
SUBJ: FURLOUGH DAYS
There has been a great deal of discussion about agreeing to “furlough days” as a way to help the Desert Sands Unified School District balance its 2009-10 budget. While it may seem to command consideration by the membership of the Desert Sands Teachers Association, it is first and foremost a bargaining issue.
Article 1 of the current collective bargaining agreement (CBA, or contract) recognizes DSTA/CTA/NEA as “the exclusive representative for purposes of the Rodda Act.” Article 6 establishes hours of employment and working conditions. Article 7 establishes procedures for approving the annual academic year calendar.
The documents governing the operation of DSTA reinforce this representative relationship, beginning with Article II of the DSTA Bylaws. Additionally, Article XI sets forth all procedures pertaining to the bargaining process, while Article XI of the DSTA Standing Rules explains the role of the bargaining support system.
Amendments to the CBA cannot be made unilaterally. Any change that both sides wish to make outside established legal bargaining parameters must be mutually agreed upon via a “Memorandum of Understanding”. Any change that one side wishes to propose to the other must be made via a “demand to bargain”. Likewise, amendments to DSTA’s governance documents can be made only in accordance to language contained within those documents.
California School Employees Association (CSEA) Local #106, the exclusive representative for the District’s classified employees, recently bargained contract language providing for three “floating holidays”, but its membership has yet to ratify the tentative agreement. So far, the District’s bargaining team has not contacted the DSTA Bargaining Team with a demand to bargain.
District administration has attempted to exert influence and/or pressure on its own management and confidential staffs to accept furlough days. It has secured an agreement from management personnel to accept four “discretionary days”, and secured three such days from its confidential employees.
The same kind of influence has been brought to bear on DSTA leaders and members. This may constitute “surface bargaining”, a violation of the Rodda Act which threatens the collective bargaining rights of every member of DSTA, and as such will not be tolerated.
No individual member of DSTA has the authority to establish Association policy on behalf of the entire membership. Policy-making is the function of the democratically elected DSTA Representative Council. Policy is established at monthly meetings whose place and time are decided by the DSTA Executive Board. This Executive Board is responsible for directing all bargaining activities subject to policies set by the Representative Council, to act for the Representative Council when school is not in session, and to exercise all of the business and organizational powers and duties for the Association as prescribed by law and our Bylaws subject to any restrictions imposed by the Representative Council.
In the past three weeks I have had dozens of conversations (email, telephone, and personal) with a variety of DSTA members. The implication seems to be that I should personally determine DSTA policy, at least as it pertains to this particular matter. Citing our Bylaws once again, it is my duty to prepare the agendas and preside over all meetings of the Association, Representative Council, and Executive Board. It is my responsibility to suggest policies, plans and activities but I do not have authority to establish policy.
As president of DSTA I am obligated to represent all members of DSTA, and not any single faction thereof. Further, I am responsible for upholding all provisions set forth in our governance documents that protect the democratic process, and thereby make us a union. Thus, I will not authorize or legitimize any kind of poll, vote, or petition to determine DSTA policy. Nor will I allow the emotions of the moment—however legitimate, heartfelt, and worthy of consideration—to transform our Association in any way that subverts the fundamentals of representative democracy.
What is clear is that opinions regarding the acceptance of furlough days are many and varied. Whether you call them “furlough days”, “floating holidays”, or “discretionary days”, one thing is certain: employees are being asked to surrender a day’s pay for each, whether imposed or voluntary. I have stated publicly that the subject is worthy of discussion, and therefore have placed it on the agenda of our Executive Board and our Representative Council, both of which will meet during the first week of June.
Every member who has an opinion on the matter of furlough days—or any other issue of concern—has an obligation to discuss these with his/her faculty representative, whose responsibility according to our Bylaws is to the active membership of DSTA. Please let the members at your site know that the matter will receive consideration…in the appropriate forum.
Thank you for being a DSTA leader.
79-440 Corporate Centre Drive, Suite #116, La Quinta, CA 92253-7241
Office: 760-564-3376 Fax: 760-564-3396 Website: www.dstaunion.org
|
The Wrong Answer
Among the ideas being considered to balance the District’s budget are pay cuts, furlough days, and insurance plan changes. These cannot be unilaterally imposed upon members of DSTA, rather must be negotiated because “Hours of Employment and Working Conditions” (Article 6) and “Salary & Health & Welfare Benefits” (Article 13) are already parts of our collectively bargained agreement with the District.
Being the compassionate and caring professionals that we are, it is beyond difficult to sit idly by and watch colleagues lose their jobs. Yet the notion that agreeing to take a pay cut will save jobs is fallacious. Here are five compelling reasons why DSTA will not support a pay cut.
1. Impacts salaries now and in the future. A reduction in salary means that every dollar amount listed on the salary schedule accompanying the contract would be reduced. These are amounts DSTA has bargained over the years on behalf of members, and at their direction. In many instances other negotiable items were compromised or sacrificed in exchange for putting additional amounts on the salary schedule. If you’ll forgive the sports analogy, it would be like acquiring the contract of Player A, which expires at the end of the current season, in exchange for a future draft choice. The next year, Player A negotiates a return to his original team, and you are left without the player himself AND without the future draft choice, while his original team gets both. To reduce the amounts bargained on our salary schedule would be equivalent to having conceded contract language and getting nothing in return.
2. Unfair especially to those with more experience and education. A 1% reduction on the current salary schedule would mean the loss of $426.78 to a first-year certificated employee having only a bachelor’s degree (Column A/B, Step 1). A 1% reduction to someone with 18 years’ experience and 90 semester units of continuing education, including a masters’ degree (Column G, Step 18), would be a loss of $847.93, nearly twice as much. A 2% reduction would be $853.56 as compared to $1,695.86, while a 5% reduction would be $2,133.90 vs. $4,239.65. Obviously, a pay cut would hurt those who have had the longest teaching careers and who are the most highly educated. Consider this during a year in which we are seeing no salary increase, having deductions from our paychecks to offset the increase in health insurance premiums, and in light of an inflationary trend that is eroding the value of the dollars with which we are being paid.
3. Reduces retirement income. A similar argument can be made regarding retirement. Certificated employees pay into the State Teachers Retirement System (STRS). For those who have worked over 30 years in California public schools, their retirement income will be 70% of their highest earning year. However, for those who have less than 30 years, their retirement will be calculated on the average of their highest earning years. In either case, a pay cut would impose a punishment in the form of reduced retirement income potential. For those who have seen their supplementary investment plans shrink in light of the Wall Street bailout, or their property values slashed due to the sub-prime mortgage crisis, this compromises a lifetime of retirement planning at precisely the time he or she will no longer be able to work.
4. Sends the wrong signal to the District. If we indicate that members are willing to accept a pay cut whenever the District is short on funds, it may not be long before a pet project, a new facility, or the hiring of non-certificated employees willing to perform classroom functions will provide an excuse to slash salaries again. After all, if we’re willing to do it once, we will be expected to do so again. And again.
5. Some of our members are going to lose their jobs anyway. When personnel costs exceed 80% of an operating budget, it’s logical to look there for cuts. The decision to suspend 3rd grade class size reduction last year cost 38 jobs. The decision to increase K-2 class sizes this year may lead to the loss of 86 more. It’s important to recognize that increases in class sizes are what lead to reductions in personnel. This year, the CSR rules have changed, meaning that instead of losing all the state subsidy for 20:1, districts will only pay a penalty proportional to the increase in the number of students per classroom. In the case of Desert Sands, we will still receive 70% of the available CSR funding while allowing K-2 classes to increase to 24:1.
Nobody can dispute the tragedy inherent in RIFs. However, we must all remember that we are not at fault for the budget mess. We cannot give up salary, benefits, or contract language that others before us fought so hard to secure. Perhaps we can propose solutions. By the time you read this, a subcommittee of the DSTA Executive Board will have met to identify budget items that could be considered for suspension or elimination that could save the jobs of some of our colleagues.
Where’s the sense in continuing to operate programs without the people to run them? What’s the use of keeping a program that isn’t meeting the objective it was established to achieve? Instead of reductions in force, how about reductions in the scope of programs? Maybe some wouldn’t have to be eliminated altogether, only reduced. Perhaps a program could be administered by the very same folks who deliver it, instead of by an administrator.
Last year our District built its budget on “zero growth”, and we wound up with over 200 new students. This year the budget it being built on the assumption that there will be limited growth, but growth nonetheless. Class sizes will grow, but the fact is our students will show up at our doors and will need a teacher to teach them. When we say “Keep the cuts as far away from the classroom as possible”, let it mean more than just empty rhetoric. Cut programs, not people.
|
From the Table
An update from your DSTA Bargaining Team
March 17, 2009
The DSTA Bargaining Team met with the District’s bargaining team and our state-appointed mediator.
After an all-day session DSTA and DSUSD reached an agreement in concept, meaning we agree that payroll deductions covering the costs of increases in health benefits will stop and that there will be a sharing by both the member and the District of the increase in health benefit costs if we have not reached an agreement before July 1st of a given year.
Specifically, both sides have agreed that:
1. Current payroll deductions for health benefits increases will stop and revert to the 2007-2008 level as of March 1, 2009, meaning that NO FURTHER PAYROLL DEDUCTIONS WILL BE MADE FROM PAYCHECKS (except for those previously in place for Blue Cross PPO members).
- In the future, if no agreement is reached on Health and Welfare Benefits before the expiration of the contract in force, ANY INCREASE WILL BE SPLIT 50/50 up to 20% of the total dollar increase. (Once 20% of the increase is reached, the member picks up the increase in premiums.)
- We are exploring the possibility of EXTENDING THE TERM of the eventual agreement. This would enable DSTA to continue bargaining ONLY health & welfare benefits through 2010 and LIMITED REOPENERS through 2011.
Our objectives will be to continue to bargain in the best interests of our members while being able to negotiate the health and benefits increases before the contract expires.
WE HAVE NOT REACHED A TENTATIVE AGREEMENT because contract language still must be finalized. Therefore, DSTA and the District will CONTINUE IN MEDIATION. Our goal is to finalize an agreement on April 3rd. Pending approval by our Executive Board you will be notified of three ratification meetings, at which full details will be presented. You will have ample opportunity to ask questions and will be able to vote either at the meetings or at your site.
“UNITED WE BARGAIN…DIVIDED WE BEG!!”
Your DSTA Bargaining Team
Doug Brown, James Goetz, Bob Holsapple, Tracy Lee, Richard Shepley; and Yvette López, CTA Spokesperson
Additional assistance provided by Rose Luna, CTA Negotiations & Organizational Development Specialist
This message was prepared by DSTA, 79-440 Corporate Centre Dr., Suite #116, La Quinta, CA 92253
Office: 760-564-3376 Fax: 760-564-3396 www.dstaunion.org
|
A Message from Your DSTA President
By Tom Burbank
3/5/09
[NOTE: This is the fifth and final installment in a series of articles whose purpose is to keep DSTA members informed about what DSTA is doing for you.]
DAY #1: “Bargaining” (02/27/09)
DAY #2: “Budget Cuts” (3/2)
DAY #3: “Reductions In Force (RIFs)” (3/3)
DAY #4: “Retirement Incentives” (3/4)
DAY #5: “Evaluations”
EVALUATIONS
More than half of our entire membership is formally evaluated each year. The “Evaluation Procedures” article of our contract is opened during nearly every bargaining cycle. I probably get more questions from members about evaluations than anything else, especially this time of year. For the second time in five years, DSTA and DSUSD collaborated to conduct a workshop for faculty representatives and site administrators, so that both groups would hear the same message at the same time. Here are some common beliefs—some correct, some not—and references to where in our contract you can go for clarification. If you believe your evaluation rights have been violated, report this to your faculty representative immediately so that it can be pursued on your behalf.
“We are formally evaluated every other year.” Probationary unit members and/or unit members who received an unsatisfactory performance evaluation in the prior year are evaluated every year. Permanent unit members are evaluated at least every other year, which means it’s possible to be evaluated more frequently. Some unit members are eligible, with consent of their evaluator, for placement in a five-year evaluation cycle. You may ask to be evaluated at any time. (12.1)
“The first observation must be announced.” One observation—not necessarily the first—must be announced at least 24 hours in advance, while any/all others can be unannounced. (12.12)
“If I haven’t been observed by November 30th, I don’t have to be evaluated this year.” Unfortunately, although timelines and deadlines are clearly spelled out in our contract, so is language that views them as not “of the essence”. However, the purpose of that language is not to allow or encourage delays in the process, only to account for absences and emergencies. The current administration has assured me that the District is committed to adhering to timelines. In fact, in preparation for the workshop mentioned above, it was discovered that site administrators had been given direction that was inconsistent with the contract. The error has been corrected and all parties look forward to more uniform results. (12.18)
“I’m allowed to give my version if I feel that any comments or criticisms made by my evaluator are inaccurate or unjustified.” Absolutely! There is a response section at the bottom of both the observation summary and summative evaluation forms, which have been approved through bargaining by both DSTA and DSUSD. Should you require additional space in which to state your response, you may attach additional pages. (12.12).
“My evaluation can only include what my principal sees in my classroom during a formal observation.” Data for evaluation summaries may include information from many sources. But if it’s something not observable in the classroom, it must be documented and found reliable. Then it must be brought to your attention before it may be included in the final evaluation summary. (12.14, sections 1-4).
“I’ve been teaching for a gazillion years and my evaluations have always been good, so why can’t I just be left alone to teach?” Good news! During the current contract negotiations, DSTA bargained language that allows your evaluator to agree to waive your second observation and proceed straight to the completion of your evaluation cycle. (This is not in our contract—YET—but a “Memorandum of Understanding” was signed by DSTA and DSUSD to put this into effect before the entire contract has been settled.)
“What do I do when my evaluator gives me a “Needs Improvement” or “Unsatisfactory” rating?” First, DON’T PANIC. Nobody’s perfect, including your evaluator. Deficiencies must be noted on the evaluation forms, and your evaluator is responsible for developing a written action plan to assist and support you. (12.6 and 12.9)
“I didn’t deserve the ratings my evaluator gave me, so I want to file a grievance.” With one exception, you cannot grieve the results of an evaluation, only the failure of your evaluator to follow the process. The exception is in the event that unsatisfactory evaluations lead to a denial of incremental movement on the salary schedule. (12.14.4, 12.15, 12.16, and 12.19.1)
This message was prepared by DSTA, 79-440 Corporate Centre Dr., Suite #116, La Quinta, CA 92253-7241
Office: 760-564-3376 Fax: 760-564-3396 www.dstaunion.org
|
A Message from Your DSTA President
By Tom Burbank
3/4/09
[NOTE: This is the fourth in a series of articles whose purpose is to keep DSTA members informed about what DSTA is doing for you.]
DAY #1: “Bargaining” (2/27/09)
DAY #2: “Budget Cuts” (3/2)
DAY #3: “Reductions In Force (RIFs)” (3/3)
DAY #4: “Retirement Incentives”
DAY #5: “Evaluations”
RETIREMENT INCENTIVES
“What would be gained by trying to coax certificated employees into retiring early?” An early retirement incentive would help mitigate the possible number of layoff notices and/or program cuts made necessary by the state’s economic crisis. It would minimize the impact of possible employee Reductions In Force (RIFs). [See yesterday’s article.]
“Will the District offer any king of a retirement incentive?” Yes. The District investigated a number of Supplemental Early Retirement Programs (SERPs) for purchase from private companies. However the administrative cost was prohibitive and they would have required between 70-80 employees for there to have been a cost savings. Programs such as these are usually only cost-effective in large districts. For example, San Diego Unified is offering a SERP for its retirees, and 633 employees will be required in order for the program to fly.
“Is the amount of the incentive like last year’s $3,000?” No. The District’s plan is to provide employees with one of three choices: (1) a one-time lump sum of $10,000, to be paid to the employee on October 31, 2009; (2) a one-time lump sum of $10,000, to be deposited into a Tax Sheltered Annuity (TSA) of the employee’s choice by October 31, 2009; or (3) one additional year of District provided health benefits.
“How is Palm Springs Unified able to offer their retirees $15,000, while DSUSD is only offering $10,000?” PSUSD is facing similar budget shortfalls as DSUSD. However, their governing board has approved a resolution laying off 165 teachers. Our Board is sending preliminary layoff notices to 136 certificated employees, including some administrators. In order to offer retirees a larger incentive, more layoffs would have been necessary.
“Are all DSUSD employees eligible?” No, only certificated employees, and then only under the following conditions: (1) is employed by the District as of 1/1/09; (2) must meet all criteria found in Article 13.3 of our collective bargaining agreement (at least 55 yrs. old, eight or more years of District service and fifteen years in CALSTRS); (3) must retire from CALSTRS and/or CALPERS; (4) have resigned from District employment after the completion of the 2008-09 school year; and (5) must submit an irrevocable retirement letter to Personnel Services by Friday 3/31/09 with an effective date on/before 8/31/09. Furthermore, any employee who has already tendered their letter of retirement to Personnel Services is eligible for the incentive.
“What’s the catch?” The Plan must have sufficient number of participants to meet the District’s fiscal and operational objectives by March 31st in order for the incentive to go into effect. The District may withdraw the Plan provided it notifies employees of their intent to do so no later than May 1st. At this time the District has projected the need for 62 eligible employees to retire in order for the Plan to meet the objectives.
“What if not enough employees retire?” If an unacceptable level of participation is realized, those having already submitted letters of intent to retire may rescind their letters. In that event, Personnel Services will return all retirement letters to employees.
This message was prepared by DSTA, 79-440 Corporate Centre Dr., Suite #116, La Quinta, CA 92253-7241
Office: 760-564-3376 Fax: 760-564-3396 www.dstaunion.org
|
A Message from Your DSTA President
By Tom Burbank
3/3/09
[NOTE: This is the third in a series of articles whose purpose is to keep DSTA members informed about what DSTA is doing for you.]
DAY #1: “Bargaining” (2/27/09)
DAY #2: “Budget Cuts” (3/2)
DAY #3: “Reductions In Force (RIFs)”
DAY #4: “Retirement Incentives”
DAY #5: “Evaluations”
REDUCTIONS IN FORCE (RIFs)
“What is a RIF?” The term “RIF” stands for “Reduction In Force”. Simply stated, it’s balancing an operating budget by laying off employees in order to save money.
“How many teachers will be laid off?” The Board of Education’s preliminary direction to the District administrative team was to notify between 94 and 138 certificated employees that they may not be rehired to work in 2009-10. If you are one of those employees, you are entitled to receive notice no later than March 15th and to request a hearing before being laid off. Final notifications of actual layoff must be sent by May 15th, but additional emergency notifications could still be made as late as August 15th.
“Who decides which teachers are laid off? Seniority, or hire date, is the first consideration when reducing staff. Beginning in December 2008 we were asked to verify or challenge our hire date so the seniority list could be finalized. Put simply, the last hired will be the first to be laid off. Should positions be reinstated, the last laid off will be the first re-hired. As you would expect, I have argued for keeping layoffs to a minimum because our District continues to grow and our students will continue to need teachers in classrooms. I have stressed the importance of sending layoff notices to as few of our members as necessary, to reduce the devastating impact created by the thought of losing one’s job.
“Didn’t the District lay off teachers last year who had more seniority than teachers who were retained?” Yes, and this will happen again this time around. But that’s because it will be necessary to retain the services of certificated employees who possess specific credentials and qualifications needed for specialized subject matters. At the Board of Education meeting on Tuesday 3/3, a resolution will be considered to retain positions in regular Special Ed. and Preschool programs, as well as fully-credentialed single subject teachers of Chemistry, Physics, Earth Science, Geoscience, Physical Science, Mathematics, Music, ROTC, School Nurses, and Introduction to Home Economics. That means those less senior holding these authorizations will be “skipped” when considering layoffs.
“What happens if more than one person was hired on the same date?” An additional Board resolution will establish priority according to credentials held (professional clear, special, preliminary, and intern), special certifications (BCLAD, CLAD, GATE, Advanced Placement, IB, reading), professional preparation (advanced degrees, continuing education in assignment-related subject areas), and total years of teaching experience. In the event that all things remain equal, the District will use a lottery to determine layoffs, per Ed. Code.
“What should I do if I get laid off?” The identities of those certificated employees being laid off will be given to DSTA the day after the Board of Education passes the resolutions to do so. CTA will notify you of the date and time of an orientation meeting, at which you will be advised of your rights to a hearing as well as possible rehire rights. You will be given specific step-by-step instructions by a CTA attorney and staff representative who will represent you in the hearings with the District. This is one of the most important benefits available to you as a member of DSTA/CTA/NEA.
“What if I’m not a member of DSTA/CTA/NEA?” Last week DSTA sent a letter to every certificated employee who was hired since 2005 that is not currently identified as a CTA member. The mailing included an application to join CTA. As soon as the completed application is received in the DSTA office, your membership is active. You will be entitled to all the rights and privileges described above as well as many others. Dues to belong to all three organizations are already being deducted from your paycheck, and we want you to be able to enjoy membership benefits, especially now.
This message was prepared by DSTA, 79-440 Corporate Centre Dr., Suite #116, La Quinta, CA 92253-7241
Office: 760-564-3376 Fax: 760-564-3396 www.dstaunion.org
|
A Message from Your DSTA President
By Tom Burbank
03/02/09
[NOTE: This is the second in a series of articles whose purpose is to keep members of DSTA informed about what DSTA is doing for you.]
DAY #1: “Bargaining” (02/27/09)
DAY #2: “Budget Cuts”
DAY #3: “Reductions In Force (RIFs)”
DAY #4: “Retirement Incentives”
DAY #5: “Evaluations”
BUDGET CUTS
“How much money must Desert Sands cut from its 2009-10 budget?” Now that a state budget has been passed, it appears that Desert Sands must cut $7.9 million from the general fund. The overall economic crisis is real and will be felt on a national as well as state and local level.
“Will anyone be laid off?” Yes. When over 81% of total expenditures goes toward personnel (all categories), it is an area that must be considered in order to balance the budget. At its budget study session on Tuesday 2/24, Board of Education members gave direction to the District’s administrative team to build the budget by reducing or eliminating services that will mean 94 to 133 of our members will receive preliminary layoff notices. Five administrative positions also will be recommended for cutting and classified employees will also be laid off. This direction is not final; in fact, the Board must still find ways to make approximately $2 million in additional cuts in order to meet its financial obligations, achieve a positive budget certification, and avoid state sanctions or takeover. (Last year 118 certificated layoff notices went out, though all but 18 were pulled back before May. Palm Springs Unified School District just announced it would notify 165 certificated employees for layoff.)
“What other cuts are being considered?” A three-tiered program of categorical reductions and flexibility will provide funding while relaxing requirements on how monies may be spent, giving considerable discretion to local Boards of Education. As a result, our Board is looking closely at class size reduction flexibility, transportation “cost avoidance” options, and reducing department budgets and site discretionary funds. At the budget study session, the Board was reluctant but open to increasing class sizes to 24:1 for K-2 but not suspending the program altogether as it did for 3rd grade last year. It will also consider increasing the secondary staffing ratio by .5, modify the clerical formula, and reduce DEC clerical and support personnel. However, it was adamant about not eliminating elementary counselors. Pending a review of program funding, project teachers or facilitators may be reassigned to classroom positions but will not lose their jobs. Consideration of anything such as salary or benefit reductions or furlough days must be negotiated, and DSTA’s position will be “no give-backs”.
“Can DSTA or CTA do anything or is it too late?” DSTA has two representatives on the District’s Finance Committee who are working to make sure the Board of Education keeps cuts as far away from the classroom as possible. Throughout 2008 a coalition of school districts, parents, and community members have exerted influence on legislators and the governor to find new sources of revenue. Mobilizing against public school cuts and more than 14,000 educator pink slips already issued by school districts statewide, the California Teachers Association recently launched a new social networking website where educators are blogging, receiving text message alerts, posting videos and promoting a “Statewide Day of Action” on March 13 to protest against layoffs. Visit www.PinkFriday09.org to find out how to stand up for public schools.
“How can I help?” Stay informed by logging onto www.cta.org and www.dstaunion.org. Attend meetings of the DSUSD Board of Education, including budget study sessions. Let our District administrators and Board of Education members know that you support the position of your professional association, DSTA, in keeping budget cuts as far away from the classroom as possible. Contact your state legislators and the governor and demand that elected officials find new sources of revenues. How much more can possibly be cut from an education budget that ranks 47th in the nation in per pupil spending?
This message was prepared by DSTA, 79-440 Corporate Centre Dr., Suite #116, La Quinta, CA 92253-7241
Office: 760-564-3376 Fax: 760-564-3396 www.dstaunion.org
|
A Message from Your DSTA President
By Tom Burbank
02/27/09
In the February issue of our chapter newsletter, my column entitled “Famous First Words” addressed what I’ve come to recognize is a common misconception: “Our union doesn’t do anything”. Hopefully, the list of twenty-five things bargained by DSTA on behalf of members convinced readers that it simply isn’t so. But in my day-to-day service as your president, I feel compelled to write to you in order to address five pressing concerns facing you, the members of DSTA.
Despite improved regular communication, monthly meetings of our Representative Council, and the work of our sixteen committees, the phone traffic in our office indicates an under-informed membership. There is so much information to provide, so many ways that DSTA is fighting for the best interests of members, that I cannot possibly address all five at one time. So over the next five days I will address them in the following order: bargaining, budget cuts, reductions in force (RIFs), retirement incentives, and evaluations. Please allow me an opportunity to get you “caught up”, because our union is doing A LOT.
BARGAINING
“One, two, three, what are we fightin’ for?” We have surveyed our membership, sat across from the District’s bargaining team a total of sixteen times, and met face-to-face with members at sites. Your overwhelming direction is to eliminate the punitive contract language that allows the District to deduct money from our paychecks to pay for any increases in health insurance premiums. In addition, members report they have “had it” with being required (or coerced) to work beyond the contract day without compensation.
“What does the District expect us to accept?” They refuse to eliminate the punitive contract language. The payroll deductions now impose what equates to a pay cut for each of you in a year in which we have not asked for a raise. After this month, these deductions would represent a profit to the District. Now they insist on imposing these unacceptable conditions on members for three years.
“Why is Mediation taking so long?” The purpose of mediation is to bring in an “outsider” to help the two sides reach an agreement with which both can live. We began mediation in January being relatively close in terms of dollar costs. I will personally vouch for the enormous number of creative ideas that have been discussed. In these difficult economic times, state-appointed mediators are in high demand trying to resolve contract negotiations like ours. They are also subject to the two-Fridays-a-month employee furloughs about which you’ve read.
“Why don’t we go to Fact-Finding?” You have my assurance that there continues to be sufficient optimism over getting a deal done that we have chosen to continue mediation, instead of certifying to fact-finding. Once we abandon that position, the proposal that the District has just placed on the table becomes their “last, best, and final” offer, which they may impose upon us without recourse. Our Bargaining Team and Executive Board believe strongly that the parties will be able to resolve our differences to your satisfaction, which is why we will return to mediation on March 17th.
“How can I help?” Stay informed by logging onto www.cta.org and www.dstaunion.org. Ask questions of, and share your concerns with, your faculty representative(s). Make it your business to attend site meetings whenever they are called. Support any and all organizing efforts and activities, as these are designed to be simple and non-controversial. Let our District administrators and Board of Education members know that you support the position of your professional association, DSTA, in opposing the punitive contract language and being expected to work additional hours beyond the contract day without compensation. Remember…
UNITED WE BARGAIN…DIVIDED WE BEG.
This message was prepared by DSTA, 79-440 Corporate Centre Dr., Suite #116, La Quinta, CA 92253-7241
Office: 760-564-3376 Fax: 760-564-3396 www.dstaunion.org
|
Hello and Happy New Year.
I know that you are back and in the midst of work. I have been as well and wanted to give you an update on the state budget crisis. It changes almost daily. And I want to alert you to a correction to a form that was published in the last California Educator magazine.
State Budget Crisis
It’s certainly been frustrating to watch and follow the state budget negotiations over the last several months – especially as the Governor and the Legislature refuse to work together to find additional resources for our schools. California is losing ground on funding for schools. Just this week, Education Week released its Quality Counts 2009 Report and California fell from 46th to 47th in per pupil spending. The Governor has also released his budget plan. And while it does contain some revenue increases and more borrowing, it also cuts another $5.2 billion from K-14 schools, shorten the school year by 5 days, and slashes the USC and UC budgets by 10 percent.
Read the Quality Counts 2009 Report
Find out more about the Governor’s Proposal
We will find out more in the coming weeks and will share the information with you. In the meantime, make sure to share your budget crisis stories with your friends, family, neighbors and local media. People need to hear the state of our education system. And they need to hear it from you—the classroom teacher, the school bus driver, the school counselor, the college professor.
Correction to NEA Delegate Form in Educator
The Declaration of Candidacy form for State Delegate to the 2009 NEA Convention in San Diego, which appeared in the Dec-Jan issue of California Educator magazine, was printed without some key form guides. The area at the top of the form is missing text regarding name, address and other essential information. We realize that this may prove to be confusing for some of our members and have attached the corrected form here. We’ve also made the form available on the CTA website at www.cta.org/mycta/profession/conferences/cta/Represent+CTA+at+RA.htm (login required). We apologize for this inconvenience and hope this solves any issues you might have.
David A. Sanchez
CTA President
|
12/2/08 Update
Yesterday marked a big day for the State of
California --eleven new senators and 28 new Assembly members took their oath of office. A few hours later Governor Schwarzenegger declared a "fiscal emergency" and called a special session to deal with the growing state budget deficit. Now, you may be thinking, didn't we just have a special session to deal with this crisis? We did, but legislators failed to agree on a solution, and of course, the problem didn't go away. The governor has now called a special session under Prop. 58 to fill a state budget hole that is predicted to reach $28 billion over the next 18 months.
This means the Legislature will be taking another look at the governor’s proposal of midyear cuts and some revenues. CTA and the Education Coalition are projecting that without any additional revenue increases, our schools and community colleges could be looking at cuts of up to $8 billion this year, $7.2 billion of which are cuts to K-12 schools. To find our more about how these cuts are affecting higher education visit www.calfac.org .
It's important to remember that the $3 billion
California schools already suffered in cuts this year are crippling local school systems and threatening the future success of our students . We need your help letting the public know how. How many teaching and education support professional positions have been cut; how much have class sizes risen; how many elective classes have been eliminated. These are the realities of current funding cuts that we must communicate to the public and Legislators. More cuts will only make matters worse for our schools, which already rank 46th in per-student spending.
We've compiled resources online to help your local chapter and local Education Coalition get your important message out to your members and local media. They include:
· What this means for K-14 .
· What this means for K-12 .
· What $7.2 Billion in cuts look like for California schools.
· Sample Press Advisory
· Sample Letter to the Editor
· E-mail Your Lawmaker
We will continue to update this section as new resources are created and new information becomes available. Also be sure and listen to the latest CTA radio ad that is now running on more than 60 stations across the state.
David A. Sanchez
CTA President
|
|
11/18/2008 Update
As CTA warned lawmakers in September when they approved a 2008-09 state budget based on borrowing gimmicks,
California is once again facing a massive state budget deficit.
To deal with this crisis, Governor Schwarzenegger has called a Special Legislative Session and has proposed midyear budget cuts of $4.5 billion, including a $2.5 billion cut to public schools, and a series of revenue increases.
The independent Legislative Analyst's Office is projecting a $27.8 billion hole over the next 20 months. And for the first time, the LAO is recommending that the state include new revenues in a solution.
It seems like the writing is on the wall: NEW REVENUE IS NEEDED NOW. But so far, there has been little action in the Assembly or Senate, and Republican leaders are holding firm on their "no tax" pledge, which could mean billions in education cuts this year.
I don't have to tell you that our schools can't take any more cuts. The pain from last year's cuts is felt all over the state. We'd like to know how the cuts are affecting your schools. These local examples will be important as we share with legislators what their action (or inaction) is really doing to our students and schools. Share your story with us here.
Know that CTA and the Education Coalition are united in opposing these cuts and demanding long-term, stable revenues for our schools.
We've put together the following online resources to keep you and your members informed:
While on cta.org you can also e-mail your legislator and sign up to be a Budget Advocate. I encourage you to use the resources above to plan local events to share with the media and the public how these cuts are affecting your schools.
Thank you for taking the time to read this and share with your members. We are at a critical juncture in fighting for funding for public schools. We will have to work together to save our profession and make sure our students have a chance at a successful future.
David A. Sanchez
CTA President
|
|
Important message from the President of CTA
Members of the Education Coalition, including myself, met with Governor Schwarzenegger yesterday. I wish I could say there was good news.
He came to brief the Ed Coalition on the current state budget situation and to tell us that he would be calling a special legislative session on November 5 – the day after the Election. The Governor said the poor economy and growing budget deficit would necessitate midyear cuts to all programs, including $2 to $4 billion in cuts to public schools (K-14). That would be about $320 to $640 per student. The Governor said that the state is facing a current year revenue shortfall of between $5 billion and $8 billion, and the shortfall could grow to as much as $20 billion next year. The Department of Finance is expected to release more information today.
Unfortunately, with the borrowing budget that was approved by the Legislature, the growing deficit is not surprising. We knew the budget gimmicks would not work and it’s why CTA continues to push for stable, long-term sources of new revenue. I and other members of the Coalition told the Governor how devastating additional cuts to our public schools will be. We told him that the $3 billion that was cut this year has led to class size increases, layoffs of teachers and critical education support professionals, and the elimination of art, music, vocational and physical education classes.
I will give the Governor credit for coming and talking to us and for recognizing that this is a serious problem that needs a serious solution, which includes tax increases. We also told the Governor that we would not engage in any discussion about what cuts should be made, because any cut in the middle of the year will be devastating to students and there must be serious discussions about additional revenues.
The Education Coalition put out a news release to the media. I want you to know that the entire education community is united in this effort, and that the Ed Coalition legislative and communications committees will continue to meet.
Right now, we know we need to do these two things to get our message out to the public and the media.
|
1. |
Remind them that public schools were cut by more than $3 billion and talk about the impact those cuts are having – class size increases, layoffs and program cuts in your schools. Bring it back to how these cuts are impacting your students and your schools. |
| |
2. |
This is a serious budget problem and it is time for serious solutions. The time for budget gimmicks, quick fixes and more borrowing is over. Our public schools need ongoing, stable revenues. Additional cuts to education threaten our students’ future and the economic future of our state. |
As always, thank you for all that you do each day for CTA.
David A. Sanchez
CTA President
|
Update - October 22, 2008
Please accept my humblest and most heartfelt thanks for eveyone who wore red and supported yesterday's flagpole rally. Our CTA primary contact support Yvette Lopez counted over 500 outside the DEC and 380 inside for the meeting.
Special thanks goes to Margot Nitzsche, Organizing Committee chair, whose committee came up with the idea (and who made most of the signs we carried!). When we first put together this committee, it was with the idea that we had to be ready to take action at any time. It worked.
Additional recognition and thanks to Mona Davidson-Murray, Communications Chair, who drafted a press release that resulted in all the media attention. In addition to newspaper coverage, all three local networks did either video-taped interviews or live remote coverage. One station even helped make our case about NCLB by getting our superintendent to do an interview!
I am 100% certain that our show of solidarity and grave concern is the #1 reason that Classified Personnel agenda item #49 was pulled from consideration. Please know that it will come up again, another day (likely November 18th) and in different form. I will do my best to stay on top of this and keep you posted.
After most members left for home, Mrs. Whitlinger openly acknowledged the accuracy of a point I made in my remarks. Specifically, that the District is indeed NOT in declining growth and NOT at zero growth, but indeed is servicing an additional 166 students over last year. This means an increase in ADA funding which the District did NOT include in its budget last spring. This should help members--many of whom have expressed their concern about our appearing to fight for money during an especially lean economic time--understand why we are adamant about having our health benefits fully paid. We're not asking for something that's not there, nor for anything that isn't rightfully ours.
Dr. McGehee also publicly recognized and applauded the interest shown by teachers in showing their concerns, and our ability to conduct ourselves as professionals making this expression much more credible in the eyes of District administration and members of the Board. However, prompted by remarks from the student liaison representing Horizon School, some Board members and staff expressed their disappointment in certain teacher behaviors, such as booing the honor of leading the flag salute bestowed upon Mrs. Whitlinger.
I understand and appreciate that years of frustration, neglect, and disrespect is pouring out of many of our members. I simply want to let you know how that is sometimes perceived as unprofessional and uncalled-for, even by our own members. By and large, the nearly-400 members who packed the boardroom were extremely well-mannered, polite, and professional. Overall, member presence made a clearly positive difference. It remains to be seen whether this "appreciation" is translated into meaningful action. Either way, I was so proud to stand as your spokesperson.
Never allow yourself to consider that your support of activities like yesterday's is pointless or futile. Every member, doing just his or her part, just a little gesture like wearing red, or a more significant one like attending a Board of Education meeting...demonstrates our concern for the students we teach or counsel every day. It also demonstrates our own self-respect and an appropriate regard for our profession.
Please share my appreciation with the members at your site. Those who were unable to attend, we have another activity in which we can all participate tomorrow!
"WE WANT WHAT'S RIGHT...NOT WHAT'S LEFT!!" Beautiful...
In solidarity,
Tom Burbank
|
|
Outrageous Compensation Plan!
A handful of DSTA members have contacted me about a rumor regarding outgoing Deputy Superintendent Charlene Whitlinger. Now that I have had an opportunity to confirm the rumor, I want to share what I know with you.
The "Classified Personnel" agenda for the Board of Education meeting of Tuesday 10/21/08 contains an item labeled, "Recommended Specialist Personnel". The item proposes to pay Mrs. Whitlinger the sum of $745.00 per day "to assist with on-going projects" once she retires on November 1st. Payment would be for 120 days (June 1) and would cost the District a total of $92,993.88. The amount would be taken from "Capital Facilities Fund/Special Reserve Capital Projects Funds".
This is an outrage on so many levels...let me count the ways:
- Mrs. Whitlinger is retiring. I just sat on the interview panel to recommend her replacement, whose name also is being brought forward to the Board at tomorrow night's meeting. Why are we going to pay two individuals to perform the job of one?
- There is absolutely no precedent for doing so. In the past year, we have replaced a superintendent with no overlap, as well as one assistant superintendent also with no overlap. Why do we need overlap in this instance?
- The fact that there are still sixteen former colleagues from 2007-08 without full-time employment makes the expenditure of money to hire one consultant truly disgusting.
- $745/day...hello???? Neither the current deputy superintendent nor her recommended replacement hold a college degree. How much education do you have?
- And to top it all off, taking money from a "facilities" budget to pay for personnel...that means the source of funding is of the unrestricted type. What would the voters of DSUSD think?
- We eliminated positions, cut back hours, and suspended programs that all could be restored from the same funding sources.
It's time we expressed our collective outrage with a District that seems to be able to find money to pay for anything it wants to pay for...while at the same time refuses to pay for something that would benefit students and teachers. If members didn't think they had a reason to wear red, or to gather at the DEC flagpole at 6:30 PM...I hope they have 92,994 of them now.
One final note...this item will not be considered until later in the meeting. It would sure be interesting to watch the reaction of members of the Board of Education--including the three who are running for election in two weeks--if they were to see a room full of teachers watch them take a vote on this matter.
Please inform the members at your site. See you at the rally.
|
WE’VE MOVED!!
The DSTA office is now located at
79-440 Corporate Centre Drive, Suite #116, La Quinta, CA 92253-7241.
The new phone number is 564-3376
(fax is 564-3396).
Regular office hours: Monday-Friday, 8:00 AM - 4:30 PM
|
|
This web site is the official home of the Desert Sands Teachers Association (DSTA). It contains information and links of interest for the teachers and residents of the Desert Sands Unified School District.
|
|