School Board Notes – 11.15.05

School Board Notes 11.15.05
By Nicole Achs Freeling
GreatSchools.net Correspondent

• District scrambles for eleventh-hour labor agreement
• Board considers closing schools to students in event of strike
• Implications discussed as consent decree ends

Tempers were strained Tuesday as the district scrambled to deal with a strike by classified employees that was threatened to start Thursday and which teachers, bus drivers, and building maintenance workers said they would honor by not crossing picket lines. A proposal to close school to students Thursday and Friday by declaring last-minute "staff development days" led to a heated exchange that all but degenerated into a shouting match. Meanwhile, commissioners worked through the meeting and well into the night to craft a last-minute agreement with union negotiators.

District scrambles for eleventh-hour labor agreement

Even as the Board completed its regular business, Commissioners Norman Yee and Jill Wynns were at City Hall working with top officials of the Mayors Office including City Controller Ed Harrington to negotiate with SEIU Local 790. "This brings this back to more of an informal mediation process," Board President Eric Mar told reporters prior to the meeting. "We are both working to find the middle ground between where there side is and where our side is."

About 20 speakers -- parents, students and district employees-- appeared at the meeting to entreat the district to avoid a strike. "I have 1,000 signatures from students demanding the Board of Education to give SEIU and UESF a contract and avoid a costly strike," Lowell student Jacob Blanc said. "You can be sure we will not cross a picket line." United Transportation union representative Shane Hoff appeared to say that school bus drivers were standing in solidarity with SEIU. "We cannot tell (our members) not to cross picket lines, but they don't cross picket lines of people striking for healthcare coverage for their children."

Meanwhile, teachers union president Dennis Kelly appeared to discuss the status of the teachers' own contract struggles with the district. The union held a meeting last week with about 1,400 in attendance, according to Kelly. By a strong margin, members authorized calling for a second meeting in which they could vote to approve a strike if negotiations with the district reach an impasse.

Board considers closing schools to students

Concerned that there would not be adequate school staff to supervise children in the event of a strike, the board held a special meeting immediately following the regular meeting to discuss whether Thursday and Friday should be declared "staff development days" in which schools would be closed to students. The discussion provoked an angry exchange between several of the commissioners before the board ultimately voted to suspend the meeting until 6 a.m. the following morning to take up a vote on the matter.

The measure would have switched staff development days from their scheduled days on January 27 and March 30, to this Thursday and Friday, a move the district is allowed to do in the event of "extenuating circumstances." In this case, the circumstances were a strike, which district officials said Tuesday night would cause enough chaos and disruption at the schools that it might not be safe for students to attend. After an exhaustive effort to recruit substitutes and retired teachers, the district had only been able to secure 120 substitutes to work in the event of a strike, hundreds less than it would need, according to Deputy Supervisor Gwen Chan,

Afraid closing schools outright would be viewed as a lockout by non-striking labor groups and could invite costly labor action, the district instead proposed declaring two staff development days in the hopes that an agreement with striking workers could be reached by Monday. On Friday, a fact-finding report by an independent review panel will be delivered that makes recommendations for an agreement between the disputing parties.

Commissioners Jill Wynns, Dan Kelly, Eddie Chin and Norman Yee, who supported the move, said the district had little choice. "The reason we were put in this position is that an illegal labor action is planned to take place one day before the fact-finders report is due. If SEIU is going to strike, our response is to do what needs to be done to protect the kids and the schools, and if it means we have to change this calendar, that's what we have to do." Commissioners Mark Sanchez, Sara Lipson and Eric Mar opposed the move, saying it would cause further animosity between the district and school staff. Some believed it was a brass-knuckles bargaining tactic cloaked as an issue of children's safety.

"I'm disgusted by some of these board members. I really am," Sanchez said. When Chin asked Sanchez to refrain from his derogatory comments, Sanchez replied, "I'm not saying your name, but I could." Something of a shouting match ensued, with each calling the other pig-headed and Mar working to restore order.

Commissioner Sara Lipson made a motion, which ultimately passed, that the vote be suspended until the morning. "I'm afraid if we put these professional development days on the calendar, it will escalate the situation." As an agreement with Local 790 was reached during the course of discussions during the night, there is now no need to consider closing schools, according to Mar.

Implications discussed as consent decree ends

District Legal Counsel David Campos addressed the issue of a recent ruling by a federal court judge that will end a desegregation-related court order under which the district has been working since 1983. Campos discussed the effects the ruling would have both on the district's controversial diversity index, through which student assignments to schools are made, and the future of the $40 million in annual funding the district has received from the federal government as part of the consent decree.

The district, he said, had been working under a court order to desegregate schools and insure equal education opportunities for every student. "Anytime the Board took action that would effect those goals, those actions were subject to scrutiny by a federal court," Campos said. "Now the decisions will be made by the Board, subject to the will of the voters." As to the diversity index, the board would be free to keep it as it is, modify it or eliminate it altogether, Campos said.

The consent decree funding should continue, for now, to come to the district from state coffers. According to Campos, the state is now currently obliged to provide the funds, however, the money is subject to the state's budgeting process and could be reduced if lawmakers so decide.