Sick out
I was talking with one of my son's friends about the rumored "sick out" by SEIU Local 790, explaining that custodians, secretaries, and cafeteria workers may skip work on the first day of school. He noted that it was a heck of a way to welcome the incoming freshmen to his high school. I agree - it's a heck of a way to welcome any student back to school.
It seems like some adults have lost sight of the fact that the primary mission of the San Francisco Unified School District is to educate the kids, not serve as a jobs program for adults. Some blame the district for not "creat(ing) a new contract for these key employees", but a contract by its very nature is a mutually agreed upon document, not something which one side "creates" and then imposes on the other. The purpose of a "sick out" is to demonstrate that the workers are essential to smooth operation and that their absence hurts, but in this case, the "operation" is our schools, and it is our kids who will be hurt.
Particularly troubling is the issue of cafeteria staff taking the day off. If secretaries and custodians fail to show up for work, phones may go unanswered, papers unfiled, floors unswept and bathrooms uncleaned, but these workers will return to their jobs to find most of Monday's undone tasks waiting for them, in addition to all of Tuesday's chores. But cafeteria workers, who serve breakfast and lunch to the over 50% of SFUSD students who qualify for free or reduced price meals, will have turned their backs not on phones or computers or papers or mops or trashcans, but rather on children. The vast majority of students who eat cafeteria meals are in elementary school, some as young as 4 or 5 years old. Any disruption to the meal program hits these kids - hard. Last school year, about 30,000 students qualified for free or reduced price meals, and it is well known that the actual number of needy students is higher, because some families do not fill out the application, fearing it may jeopardize their immigration status (it won't) or put off by the stigma of a perceived "handout." Some children come to school on a Monday morning having not eaten a real meal since their Friday school lunch. Undermining the availability of school meals for these children for even one day is unconscionable.
Meals will be provided every school day, whether the cafeteria workers show up for work or not. Student Nutrition Services will be sending cereal for breakfast and cold sandwiches, raw veggies, and fresh fruit for lunch, for every student at every school. The SFUSD will not allow children (and especially poor children) to go hungry. Too bad the first day back to school, the kids will be eating cold sandwiches instead of the overwhelmingly popular chicken tostada boat, as originally scheduled. SNS had planned to welcome kids back with one of the favorite meals from the previous year, but oh well.
A recent letter to the editor of the Chronicle bemoans "the deplorable meals we serve schoolchildren" and reminds us that "the cafeteria is also important, and must be given enough funding to teach lifelong habits of healthful eating." This writer is right on - there is a connection between the quality of the food served to kids, and the amount of money in the Student Nutrition Services budget to pay for cafeteria workers, and it is a zero sum game. If salaries go up, the food budget must go down. The only way to both improve the food and also have more money for salaries is to increase revenue. Will a "sick out" accomplish that?
Well, no. Nor will a strike. The largest source of revenue for Student Nutrition is from the government reimbursement for meals served to those students who qualify for free or reduced price meals. Volunteers can and will help out in the cafeterias during employee absences, to make sure kids get fed, but because of confidentiality requirements, a student's free or reduced status is known only to the caf workers. Because volunteers have no way of knowing which students qualify for free or reduced meals, SNS will not be able to collect any government reimbursement for meals served while employees "sick out." This means that SNS will be starting the year with a huge financial loss right from the first day. A combination of rising food costs and the highest rate of pay for cafeteria workers in the Bay Area already had SNS running a deficit of about $600,000 for the 05-06 school year. The loss of reimbursement for just one day of "sick out" will not only put employee raises further out of reach, but may also result in cuts to the quality of the food served to the kids for the rest of the school year.
Some union supporters have gone so far as to claim that parents who volunteer at their kids' school during a "sick out" are "scabs." Call me what you want - I know where I will be Monday morning. I will be at my child's school, doing whatever needs doing, and come lunchtime, I will be in the cafeteria making sure that every student who wants a lunch gets one. This isn't about siding with the school district or siding with the union. It is about siding with the kids.
It seems like some adults have lost sight of the fact that the primary mission of the San Francisco Unified School District is to educate the kids, not serve as a jobs program for adults. Some blame the district for not "creat(ing) a new contract for these key employees", but a contract by its very nature is a mutually agreed upon document, not something which one side "creates" and then imposes on the other. The purpose of a "sick out" is to demonstrate that the workers are essential to smooth operation and that their absence hurts, but in this case, the "operation" is our schools, and it is our kids who will be hurt.
Particularly troubling is the issue of cafeteria staff taking the day off. If secretaries and custodians fail to show up for work, phones may go unanswered, papers unfiled, floors unswept and bathrooms uncleaned, but these workers will return to their jobs to find most of Monday's undone tasks waiting for them, in addition to all of Tuesday's chores. But cafeteria workers, who serve breakfast and lunch to the over 50% of SFUSD students who qualify for free or reduced price meals, will have turned their backs not on phones or computers or papers or mops or trashcans, but rather on children. The vast majority of students who eat cafeteria meals are in elementary school, some as young as 4 or 5 years old. Any disruption to the meal program hits these kids - hard. Last school year, about 30,000 students qualified for free or reduced price meals, and it is well known that the actual number of needy students is higher, because some families do not fill out the application, fearing it may jeopardize their immigration status (it won't) or put off by the stigma of a perceived "handout." Some children come to school on a Monday morning having not eaten a real meal since their Friday school lunch. Undermining the availability of school meals for these children for even one day is unconscionable.
Meals will be provided every school day, whether the cafeteria workers show up for work or not. Student Nutrition Services will be sending cereal for breakfast and cold sandwiches, raw veggies, and fresh fruit for lunch, for every student at every school. The SFUSD will not allow children (and especially poor children) to go hungry. Too bad the first day back to school, the kids will be eating cold sandwiches instead of the overwhelmingly popular chicken tostada boat, as originally scheduled. SNS had planned to welcome kids back with one of the favorite meals from the previous year, but oh well.
A recent letter to the editor of the Chronicle bemoans "the deplorable meals we serve schoolchildren" and reminds us that "the cafeteria is also important, and must be given enough funding to teach lifelong habits of healthful eating." This writer is right on - there is a connection between the quality of the food served to kids, and the amount of money in the Student Nutrition Services budget to pay for cafeteria workers, and it is a zero sum game. If salaries go up, the food budget must go down. The only way to both improve the food and also have more money for salaries is to increase revenue. Will a "sick out" accomplish that?
Well, no. Nor will a strike. The largest source of revenue for Student Nutrition is from the government reimbursement for meals served to those students who qualify for free or reduced price meals. Volunteers can and will help out in the cafeterias during employee absences, to make sure kids get fed, but because of confidentiality requirements, a student's free or reduced status is known only to the caf workers. Because volunteers have no way of knowing which students qualify for free or reduced meals, SNS will not be able to collect any government reimbursement for meals served while employees "sick out." This means that SNS will be starting the year with a huge financial loss right from the first day. A combination of rising food costs and the highest rate of pay for cafeteria workers in the Bay Area already had SNS running a deficit of about $600,000 for the 05-06 school year. The loss of reimbursement for just one day of "sick out" will not only put employee raises further out of reach, but may also result in cuts to the quality of the food served to the kids for the rest of the school year.
Some union supporters have gone so far as to claim that parents who volunteer at their kids' school during a "sick out" are "scabs." Call me what you want - I know where I will be Monday morning. I will be at my child's school, doing whatever needs doing, and come lunchtime, I will be in the cafeteria making sure that every student who wants a lunch gets one. This isn't about siding with the school district or siding with the union. It is about siding with the kids.
Labels: Nutrition
2 Comments:
I am not that familiar with unions. Please explain to me the difference between the tactics of the SEIU and other unions and extortion. Why can't the SFUSD simply fire the SEIU members who call in "sick" w/o proper documentation before the 10-day count? It seems that the SEIU members are well-paid as well as unskilled.
Parents should not get involved by doing work normally performed by a Local 790 worker. Any parent that does is setting themselves up for a headache. Parents considering doing "any job that needs to be done" must realize that every employee in a school building is in a Union, even the administrators. All the Unions involved with SFUSD are in full alignment and remain coordinated. Just because an SEIU worker may not see a parent doing their job, one of their brothers or sisters in the other Unions will and that is likely to create animosity that will stick with that parent and possibly their child the entire time they are at the school.
Furthermore, doing these jobs will do nothing more than extend the action or take it to the next level, i.e. full-on strike. Parents need to put pressure on SFUSD to settle the current labor dispute with Local 790 and not let the friction with UESF (teacher's Union) get any worse.
Most of the 790 workers are doing the jobs of two or more people and have not received a raise in years. Given real inflation, each 790 worker has taken a pay cut for each of the last three years. So, they are doing double the work for less pay. Do you want people living in that situation supporting your children?
Furthermore, happy teachers mean better educated students. Do you really want someone who is paid barely at a level of sustenance to be teaching your children? These people are either going to relocate to a better paying district or private school or leave the profession entirely. The ones that stay are ether truly dedicated to teaching our kids and living in quiet desperation or locked into their position because they can't find a better job. In either case does it make you feel good that your children are being taught by people in those situations?
The Unions are not greedy and they are not putting any undue pressure on The District, Parents or Students. They ask no more than respect and a real living wage. It is unfortunate though that our children are caught in the middle. Parents need to get involved! I know that many parents answered "No" to each question I posed above. Those same parents NEED to put pressure on SFUSD to settle their labor disputes NOW. Just sending mail to this list and bemoaning the situation doesn't help.
Parents are a strong force in this district, they just don't know it. Just recently parents at Presidio Childcare Center organized quickly and efficiently and managed to save their school from closure. The same has happened at most schools slated for closure this past year. The schools with the most parents that came to Board meetings and spoke out stayed open. Impassioned parents can accomplish anything! All-talk-and-do-nothing parents do little more than produce carbon dioxide and malaise.
The next Board of Education meeting is on Tuesday September 13th at 7:00. Childcare is always provided and the free parking lot in back of the building is open to the public for meetings. The Board usually takes large groups of people speaking on a single issue first so its unlikely that parents would have to hang around for hours at a boring meeting.
To speak you must contact
Esther V. Casco,
ecasco@muse.sfusd.edu
415-241-6427
I'd be happy to organize a group of parents going before The Board by getting the group taken together and helping to craft a single concise message to be delivered by the entire group. If that interests you, please send me a mail directly to rick@wongo.com
The thing is though, this takes us to the fact that there is no money in the budget to do much for anyone right now. That's why while its also important to push for a parcel tax to increase local school funding. But that's a different story.
Please forward this to other parents who may no be subscribed to this list.
Rick Reynolds...
Post a Comment
<< Home