Pages

Showing posts with label AAEA. Show all posts
Showing posts with label AAEA. Show all posts

Tuesday, January 26, 2016

Wednesday 1/27/2016: AAEA Press Conference, then AAPS Board Meeting

Ann Arbor teachers have a new evaluation system that involves more testing (of students) and much more paperwork, and they are not happy about it.

Tomorrow, Wednesday, January 27, 2016, the Ann Arbor Education Association (teachers' union) is having a press conference at 6 p.m., at Forsythe Middle School in the Media Center.

After that, the school board meeting will also be at Forsythe Middle School.

The board meeting is supposed to start at 7 p.m., also at Forsythe.

Look at the agenda and board packet here. [The system is not at all intuitive. To see the meeting packet, click on the agenda. The agenda opens up and on the left side of the page, there is a navigation panel that has documents attached. If a document has been uploaded in advance of the meeting.]

Can't be there in person? A nice new feature is that you can live stream the board meetings. Go to this web page and look for the live streaming link.

Want to see what the teachers are talking about? 

What catches my eye is that in a recent survey of over 600 teachers, over 90% of teachers don't believe the administration or school board supports them.

There are lots of links to documents on this web page, and here is an infographic they have shared.




Consider subscribing to Ann Arbor Schools Musings by Email!

Tuesday, January 12, 2016

Thursday, July 9, 2015

Happy to See Mediation Begins

Like me, you may have gotten this press release--I'm quite happy to see it!


Ann Arbor Public Schools
and  
Ann Arbor Education Association:

The Ann Arbor Public Schools and Ann Arbor Education Association have agreed to enter into conversations with a mediator from the Michigan Employment Relations Commission regarding the current dispute.  This was based upon the recommendation of the administrative law judge and state labor mediator. During this time, the parties have agreed to maintain confidentiality and will not be making public statements. In support of the spirit of mediation, we are requesting that the public and press and all stakeholders stand down and refrain from further comments to allow the process to proceed. We appreciate the opportunity the mediation process affords and look forward to a successful outcome.


Consider subscribing to Ann Arbor Schools Musings by Email!

Sunday, July 5, 2015

Guest Post: This is How Our Public Schools Die

Occasionally someone volunteers to write a guest post! I think this post, by Steve Norton, the Executive Director of Michigan Parents for Schools (written in his capacity as a parent, but with the knowledge he brings from MIPFS), is worth your time! He calls it a "companion piece" to the parent letter that was sent to the Ann Arbor school board and teachers' union. (See this post.)

The little embedded video--all of 11 seconds long--is from the movie Independence Day--a movie I've never seen. This holiday should remind us all of our rights and responsibilities as Americans, and that's really what Steve's post is about! (And that's why I've got the text colors set up in red and blue!) --Ruth


By Steve Norton




Everyone who cares about education in our community ought to be paying attention to what is happening right now between the leaders of our school district and the union which represents Ann Arbor teachers. Not to take sides, or to point fingers, but to understand the awful consequences of policies crafted over many years by "think tanks" and lobbying groups who hold tremendous power in Lansing. What we are seeing here today was scripted long ago, by those who hold community governance of education in contempt. Should we continue to follow their script, or should we start writing our own?

As a concerned parent, I definitely want a strong and stable school district which can offer great programs, maintain reasonable class sizes, and avoid constant crises. But as an involved parent, I also know that what matters most for my children is their everyday interaction with the teachers and other professionals who educate and care for them. School is not a place where we send our children to download "facts" and memorize algorithms. A quality education helps teach our children how to think, how to ask the right questions, and how to understand those different from themselves. Together, parents and schools prepare our children to grow into thoughtful citizens and productive members of our community. That's not something which can happen without talented, committed professionals at every level, most especially in the classroom.

So what has our state done to help make this possible? More than twenty years ago, we placed the fate of our local schools largely in the hands of the state legislature, because we gave them control over the funding for our schools. Money isn't everything, but schools are dark and cold without electricity and gas, buses don't run without fuel, and programs don't exist without the people to implement them.

Since that time, districts like Ann Arbor have seen their per-pupil funding lag behind inflation nearly every year, to the point where the real spending power of our funding is  over 21% below where it was in 1995, even before retirement costs are subtracted. Overall state spending on K-12 education has stagnated over the last decade and more, and when the mandatory payments to the state retirement system are taken out, real state per-pupil spending is down 21% since 2002. Perhaps more important, the share of our state's economic product that we use to pay for education has gone steadily down over the last decade: in good times or bad, we are committing less and less of our income to support K-12 schools.

In response, local school districts have been cutting programs, laying off teachers, insisting on pay concessions from employees, and privatizing any services which can legally be contracted out. Class sizes have risen, offerings have narrowed, and teachers have not only had their pay cut but their resources slashed. The rise of high-stakes testing has pushed quality education aside for the sake of test prep. The system, and everyone it it, has been under more and more stress as the years pass by. For background on how this has played out in Ann Arbor, please see the presentation here: https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B3W0G8KNKLfLempCX1BoUTJVMUU/view?usp=sharing

Make no mistake: this was intentional. Having restricted itself to a funding bucket that was no longer adequate for our schools, our Legislature alternated between years when they pompously announced that we "need to live within our resources" and others where they patted themselves on the back for increases which were really illusions. But the consequences of these choices, and the pain, played out at the local rather than state level as school boards were forced to oversee the dismantling of their local schools.

To add fuel to the fire, our elected state officials passed laws to ensure greater conflict at the local level. Starting in 2011, the Legislature made topics which had traditionally been worked out between teachers and school boards into "prohibited subjects" that could not be subject to bargaining and instead are under the sole control of the school board. Sensitive matters to teachers, such as staffing and placement, evaluation, layoff and rehiring priority, and the minimum standards for firing, were handed to beleaguered school boards as a replacement for adequate funding. "You won't get any more funding, but you can use these as leverage to whip things into shape." Already backed into a corner, is it any wonder that school boards were willing to use those new powers?

Furthermore, faced with constant pressure for financial concessions, rising health insurance and retirement costs, and now a real threat to their working conditions, is it any wonder that many teachers and their unions chose to fight back?

But why set this in motion? Well, if you believe - as many influentials in Lansing currently do - that "government" can never to anything as well as the private sector, and that it should be as small as possible, you want "public" education to be placed into private hands. The easiest way to do this is to get families to vote with their feet, and abandon local public schools rather than try to save them. The money follows the children - all of it. After all, who wants to stay on a sinking ship?

It is not necessary to get into the details of what has happened in Ann Arbor to recognize the pattern (for more, see the Parent Letter here [http://a2schoolsmuse.blogspot.com/2015/07/parents-ask-aaps-board-teachers-union.html]). We are being forced to fight over a shrinking pie. As the pressure continues, and the fights accumulate, our local public schools will be undermined, public confidence in them eroded, and talented educators driven away. This is how our community-governed public schools will die.

When you are in the middle of the fight, it can be hard to step back and look at the big picture. But for our community, it is essential. These kinds of battles will lead nowhere good - and the people who set the stage for this struggle know that. It's time we took it to heart ourselves.

Our school leaders and educators need to set aside their legal weaponry, and quite literally beat their swords into plowshares. All the resources being used to further this standoff, the legal and organizational effort involved, would be better used to secure a settlement among stakeholders locally and to find allies across the state for political action. Those of us on the outside, parents and members of the community, have a job to do as well: we need to do what we can to plug the financial holes for now, and add our energies to the effort to force our lawmakers to do right by our children and our schools. It may seem trite to say "Fight Lansing," but if we do not, our future is clear - and it will play out just as they intended.


Consider subscribing to Ann Arbor Schools Musings by Email!

Tuesday, June 16, 2015

Unveiled: The MERC Unfair Labor Practices Complaints--Plus a Reception for PERA

At the end of May I wrote about the unfair labor practice complaints that the Ann Arbor Education Association was filing against the Ann Arbor Public Schools, and the Ann Arbor Public Schools complaint that was being filed against the Ann Arbor Education Association. That post can be found here, and primarily addresses the process of unfair labor complaints.

And here are the complaints!

Ann Arbor Education Association (the union) complaint against the Board of Education of the Ann Arbor Public Schools

The complaint lays out a lot of detail. There are attachments that support the AAEA claim.

I'm lazy and it's in pdf form so I would have to retype stuff and...well, just go read it already!

The attorney is Jeffrey Donahue from the firm of White, Schneider, Young & Chiodini, P.C.


Ann Arbor Public Schools Board of Education complaint against the Ann Arbor Education Association

The complaint lays out detail and a timeline, but it does not have a lot of attachments, unlike the other complaint.

Read this one too, it won't take too much of your time.

The attorney is Barbara Ruga from the firm of Clark Hill, but the AAPS representative signing the complaint is David Comsa, who is the legal point person/human resources point person for the school district.


********************

And as it happens, the Public Employment Relations Act (the Act which both sides are alleging the other violated) is having its 50th anniversary this year!  So guess what is on the web site of the state's department of Licensing And Regulatory Affairs (LARA)?  An invitation to an event celebrating the Public Employment Relations Act!

Public Employment Relations Act 50th Anniversary Open House
Tuesday, July 21, 2015
1-4 PM Strolling Reception

MERC Detroit Office – Cadillac Place
3026 W. Grand Blvd, Ste. 2-750
Detroit, MI 48202
 
Light Snacks -- Photos and Memorabilia -- Public Welcome

RSVPs requested to LARA-MERC-PERA50@michigan.gov 


Hey, the public is welcome! So if you want to go, you should RSVP. 

Yes, folks, that is Republican Governor George Romney signing PERA on July 23, 1965.
How times have changed, eh? Photo taken from the LARA flyer


Consider subscribing to Ann Arbor Schools Musings by Email!

Monday, June 8, 2015

Letter from an Ann Arbor Teacher: Remembering Our Agreements

I received this as an email from an AAPS high school teacher--who also happens to live in Ann Arbor--so she's a community member and voter--and parent!

Oh, and in case it's not clear--this is clearly a partisan (teacher's) point of view. Just FYI, I thought I would start out by acknowledging that. Also--I described some (not all) of this in a previous post, Confused? Just When Exactly Does the Teachers' Contract End?

From my teacher friend:

Discussions about the Ann Arbor teachers’ contract are confusing: the MOAs (memorandums of agreement), TAs (tentative agreements), durations of agreement, ratifications of agreement. It all sounds agreeable but hard to follow. As an AAPS teacher, I realize that if I’m feeling confused about these agreements, others in our community may be feeling equally—if not more--confused. I decided to go back and look at the agreements that the district and the union signed, and I’ve tried to summarize key elements here. Until 2015 the district and union’s statements and actions seemed to be consistent with the agreements. But in the spring of this year, the district started to issue statements and make decisions that seemed to ignore them. Has the district forgotten the agreements it signed? Do we need a new term: forgetting our agreements (FOA)? Since we may be experiencing this FOA, I’d like to introduce another term: remembering our agreements (ROA). Here is my attempt at ROA.
Since I don’t always trust my memory, I’ve been re-reading the documents. All of these agreements are available on the AAEA website (http://www.a2ea.org/) and on the AAPS district website. I’ve included links to the district website throughout. Quoted language from the various documents is in bold. (I haven’t been able to open these documents on the new AAPS website at a2schools.org so the links are to the old website at www.aaps.k12.mi.us.) I hope you will take my ROA as a starting point and then examine these documents for yourself.
In June 2010, the teachers agreed to loan the district money by deducting 2.2% from each teacher’s contract amount. The district agreed to pay us back using a complicated formula. This is in “AAEA June 10. 2010 Tentative Agreement” (Tentative Agreement between AAEA and AAPS For a Successor Agreement Extending the 2009-2011 Master Agreement June 14, 2010) http://www.aaps.k12.mi.us/hrs.home/files/june_14_aaea_ta.pdf  Basically, as revenues increase, a portion will be shared with the teachers. In the same document, the district agreed upon an expiration date for our contract tied to this sharing of revenue:
SECTION VIII. Duration of Agreement
Where ever the phrase “duration of agreement” is used it refers to June 30 of the school year in which Section II above is satisfied. That is the year in which the shared revenue increases total $4,500,000 or more. That date will be known in November when the official audited report is received. Negotiations for a successor agreement should begin by March 1 of that school year per section 1.223 of the Master Agreement.
This is a clear--though complicated--formula for determining the contract’s expiration date: June 30 of the school year in which the shared revenue increases total $4,500.000 or more.
The district has not paid the teachers back the money specified in 2010. In fact, we have given up more money since that loan was made. In March of 2013, at the district’s request, we voted to take a 3% pay cut. This reduction was for one year. The reality of a pay cut would make it hard for anyone to imagine that the district had paid us back or that the contract could now expire. I remember no such suggestion that either of these things had happened. This agreement is in “AAEA March 18, 2013 Tentative Agreement” (http://www.aaps.k12.mi.us/hrs.home/files/aaea_ta_2013.pdf)
Despite the fact that the 3% pay reduction was scheduled to end in June 2014, teachers voted to continue the pay cut (with step freezes) through the next school year, 2014 - 2015. See “AAEA June 20, 2014 Tentative Agreement.” (http://www.aaps.k12.mi.us/hrs.home/files/aaea_ta_2014.pdf) We took this vote in June 2014 in response to a letter sent to us by the Board of Education, saying they would terminate our contract if we did not vote to continue the 3% cut and step freeze for the next year. The grounds for this was the clause in our contract that says:
In the event there are major (exceeding .5% of projected annual revenue) reductions in local, state or federal revenues, or an unforeseen financial crisis which adversely affects the funding of schools, the Master Agreement shall terminate at the time such changes go into effect, except as the contract is extended by mutual agreement. (from article 10.118 of the Master Agreement (http://www.aaps.k12.mi.us/hrs.home/files/tma_for_printer.pdf)
Teachers voted for the pay freeze rather than lose the protections in our contract. The district’s actions and statements certainly seemed to indicate that they thought this was a valid contract. This agreement also included the following provision: “Problem solving to meet in March 2015 to discuss finances and the impact of 10.118.” Some have suggested that is an expiration date, but I don’t see anything about the contract expiring in that line.
Recently, the district has said that our contract needs updating. In her email of May 4, 2015, the superintendent wrote: “we will need to align the teacher contract with the 2011 and 2012 Michigan school reform legislation.” It is true that, under recent Michigan laws, some of the provisions in our contract are now “prohibited subjects” in new teacher contracts. The prohibited subjects are those items that the union may no longer bargain—items such as teacher evaluations, placement, discipline, and layoffs. The laws do take away the union’s right to have a say in how these important matters are worked out. Unfortunately, that is how “right to work” works. But these laws do not require our district to get rid of the provisions, nor do they dictate how the district handles these matters. The requirement is that the union may not bring them up or have a say.
Michigan law also states that a contract containing those prohibited subjects may remain in place until that contract expires. Remember the loan we made in 2010? The district agreed that our contract would not expire until “June 30 of the school year in which Section II above is satisfied. That is the year in which the shared revenue increases total $4,500,000 or 
more.” It seems to me that according to the agreement signed by the district, the contract has not expired because the district has not shared the agreed upon revenue increases with us.
One more point of confusion is the claim I’ve heard that our contract expires in June 30, 2016. This is a deadline found in “AAEA March 18, 2013 Tentative Agreement” (http://www.aaps.k12.mi.us/hrs.home/files/aaea_ta_2013.pdf). It does not refer to the contract’s expiration; it refers to our Association Rights amendment that “shall continue in effect through June 30, 2016.” This has to do with how the union functions and how dues are collected--not the contract’s expiration.
I am having a hard time understanding how the district interprets any of this to mean that the contract is about to expire or that they must remove protections from the contract. How do they explain this FOA (forgetting our agreements)? One explanation the district has offered is that when we voted to take the 3% pay cut (2013) and the pay freeze (2014) to help the district through the financial crisis, we technically opened up our contract which then caused it to expire. I realize that there are many legal details here that are way beyond my pay grade, but common sense tells me that the district should not use our vote agreeing to take a pay cut and a pay freeze (both at their request) as the grounds for terminating our contract.
When I see the signature of our district representative at the bottom of these agreements, I wonder how they are making sense of their current claims. Even if they now regret those decisions, the signatures attest to their agreement. Apparently, the concessions we have made, working cooperatively with the district to get through difficult financial times, have not been good enough for the superintendent and the Board. They now seem intent on undermining our bargained agreements in order to impose an “agreement” on us.




Consider subscribing to Ann Arbor Schools Musings by Email!

Sunday, May 31, 2015

Labor Update: Unfair Labor Practices and the Michigan Employment Relations Commission Process

But first--one important PSA--the Ann Arbor schools updated their web site this weekend. It was long planned because the web site has been rather hard to navigate and I hope this improves things. But also, I've been made aware that many of my blog links have been lost. This includes recent links I put up about negotiations. Boo. I am sorry, and I hope to recover some of them.

Now, back to negotiations:

1. The Ann Arbor Education Association (teachers' union) filed an unfair labor practices charge against the school district. Per their press release:
The AAEA is filing three charges against the district: 
1. The superintendent interfered and coerced AAEA members by communicating with them directly concerning the contract dispute.
2. The superintendent interfered with the administration of the AAEA by directly communicating with AAEA members concerning her interpretation of the actions taken by AAEA leadership.
3. The District repudiated the AAEA contract by maintaining that some sections are unenforceable or invalid, additionally claiming that the contract will expire June 30, 2015, and refusing to bargain over the International Baccalaureate Programme.

2. The school district responded by filing an unfair labor practice charge against the AAEA. I haven't seen the charges.

3. I asked a friend who is a labor lawyer what happens, generally speaking, with these unfair labor practices that go to the Michigan Employment Relations Commission. My friend wrote:

Generally, the case will be assigned to an administrative law judge. The respondent [the district, for the AAEA's charge, and vice versa] could file a motion to dismiss the charge. The ALJ, if he or she doesn't grant the motion would then hold a hearing. The hearing could last several days. The parties would present testimony and exhibits, which would be subject to cross examination. In addition the ALJ may ask questions. In lieu of closing statements, parties typically file a post hearing brief and submit them several weeks after the hearing. It could take months, and sometimes up to a year to get a ruling from the ALJ. That is, briefly, the process.  
So then I asked: So in the meantime does that halt the termination of contract timeline? Assuming that is one of the charges being contested... 

I don't believe the filing of a ULP can halt the proceedings in any way. Either party could file for a preliminary injunction, to maintain the status quo until the ULP is heard and decided. It is a pretty high standard. Whether a preliminary injunction should be issued is determined by a four-factor analysis: 1. harm to the public interest if an injunction issues; 2. whether harm to the applicant in the absence of a stay outweighs the harm to the opposing party if a stay is granted; 3. the strength of the applicant’s demonstration that the applicant is likely to prevail on the merits; and 4. demonstration that the applicant will suffer irreparable injury if a preliminary injunction is not granted.

4. So as things stand now, the district will implement as if the contract has terminated on June 30th. That means wages will stay the same as now (which is part of what the district has been after--they were scheduled to rise July 1). I guess (not sure about this) if the district loses, they would be responsible for paying the teachers back. I guess that's a risk they are willing to take. Since my labor lawyer friend says these things move kind of slowly, that could potentially be months of back pay...




5. See these signs? These are in support of Ann Arbor teachers and the union. They are not just for teachers! You can get one too.

UPDATE 6/1/2015: Get the signs at the Michigan Education Credit Union, 4141 Jackson Rd.


Consider subscribing to Ann Arbor Schools Musings by Email!

Wednesday, May 27, 2015

AAEA To File Unfair Labor Practice Charge, Asks for Parent/Citizen Support

Tonight, while I was on my way to the Community High School Communicator banquet (follow the link to see their great work), the Ann Arbor Education Association was setting up for a press conference, where they announced that they are going to file an Unfair Labor Practice charge against the Ann Arbor schools.

Linda Carter, AAEA President, began her remarks (as distributed to the press), like this:

I stand here today with my fellow teachers, gathered in unity to voice our shared concern about the future of the Ann Arbor Public Schools. We believe the superintendent and the Board of Education have embarked upon a path which will at the very least damage, if not destroy, this school district.  We will file an Unfair Labor Practice charge on behalf of our students who deserve professional, high quality, fairly compensated teachers in their classrooms.
After taking several pay cuts in recent years to keep the district afloat, teachers were shocked and saddened when our Superintendent, Dr. Jeanice Swift, and the Board of Education threatened to terminate our contract if we failed to bargain a new one in 60 days.
Making matters worse, the Board introduced three new policies at last week’s board meeting that align with our State Legislature in Lansing—policies that are out-of-step with our community’s values and remove job protections critical to teacher success and strong educational outcomes.
Teachers don’t understand why our Superintendent and board are taking such aggressive actions against us, especially in light of the sacrifices we have made in recent years.

Carter also asserted, "We have been in continuous, collaborative problem solving conversations every month of this school year.  And in the past two weeks, district officials have met twice at our invitation--in our union offices--to discuss our contract.  We even met last Thursday, May 21st--the same day the Superintendent sent an email claiming we weren’t willing to meet."

You can read the full text of Carter's remarks here.
You can read the AAEA's press release here.

[And if you are looking for the "other side," the district has an FAQ page about negotiations here.]

If you want to read actual contracts language of the various contracts, you can read it here.

The teachers' union is asking supporters to write letters to the school board and superintendent (boe@aaps.k12.mi.us).

My friend Bev Davidson offered her letter as a template if you are looking to write a letter. It's long! So I am pasting part of it in below, and then I link to the entire letter. You should feel free to borrow from this letter, or to write your own, with your own thoughts.

To the Board of Education and Dr. Swift,
I am a parent of two children in the Ann Arbor Public Schools.  I am grateful that we have the opportunity to live and work in such a rich community, and that our children can be educated by dedicated and hard-working teachers in our school system.  Our school district has a solid reputation of providing innovative educational opportunities, and of having exemplary teachers.  I am concerned that the recent discussions between the Superintendent and the Board of Education and the teachers is creating a negative climate that will ultimately only hurt our children.  

Much has been reported to the media by the Superintendent about the need to be fiscally responsible and protect and manage the school budget, and that there is a need to open the teachers contract and negotiate even more pay cuts.  I find this tactic by the Superintendent to be disingenuous.  Teachers in our district have agreed to take pay cuts in 2010, 2013, and 2014 for the sake of the school district.  Since 2010, the teachers have given the AAPS over $10 million through these major concessions.  The District made a promise to the teachers in 2010 to provide $4.5 million to the salary schedule for agreed upon concessions.  Until that promise is fulfilled, the contract remains in effect and enforceable.  The District has not made part or all of that payment to the teachers.

Our teachers have more than fulfilled their end of the agreements with integrity, fidelity, and transparency. Further, the DIstrict has not honored the last 2 one-year Memorandum of Agreements.  Instead they have threatened the teachers with "the nuclear clause" (10.118) to get out of promises they made to restore the concessions to the teachers in 2013 and again in 2014.  Since the district has increased revenue this school year, they cannot use the "nuclear clause," rather, the District is now engaging in anti-teacher and anti-union rhetoric and propaganda to shape public opinion and bully teachers into bargaining.   

We all know that public schools are hurting due to budget issues, and this is not because of union contracts and teachers salaries.  We all know that the way our state funds public schools is archaic and unfair, and that the state legislature and our Governor is on a mission to dismantle public schools.  I am saddened and disheartened that our elected board members and Superintendent are engaging in such similar tactics and trying to impinge on worker's rights and effectively destroy our beloved school district by blasting our teachers and their lack of commitment to our children.  I also find it disrespectful that our Superintendent sends an email to parents which blames the teacher's union for not coming to the bargaining table and pitting parents against teachers.  There is no need for that kind of information, true or not true, to be sent to parents.  Bargaining rights and union-administration negotiations should be kept at the bargaining table.

The letter continues here.
Citizens of Ann Arbor--I encourage you to get educated and stay engaged!

Consider subscribing to Ann Arbor Schools Musings by Email!

Tuesday, May 26, 2015

Confused? Just When Exactly Does the Ann Arbor Teachers' Contract End?

If you've been paying attention to the dispute over the Ann Arbor Education Association--Ann Arbor Public Schools teacher contract, then you might be as confused as I was regarding when the contract actually ends. 

On the one hand, the school district is saying that the contract ends this June 30, 2015

And on the other hand, the teachers' union is saying that no, the contract does not end this year! 

And I was left wondering--how can something like a contract end date be in dispute? Well, here's how.

Which of these things do you believe?

A. When the teachers signed a one-year agreement  about their financial compensation last year, they were agreeing to an end date of June 30, 2015 for the contract. [Note: If you follow the link you will see that the agreement does call for meeting in March 2015 for "problem-solving to discuss finances" but does not have a specified end date.]

B. When the teachers "gave back" 4.5 million dollars to the district in 2010, and wrote in the contract that the contract would not end until the money was paid back, the contract became an "evergreen" clause (non-terminating) until the money is paid back. [Note: If you follow the link you can read item "Salary Scale IIE" in the "Tentative Agreement between AAEA and AAPS For a Successor Agreement Extending the 2009-2011 Master Agreement." Also note, the money has not been paid back.]

C. A contract without an end date can be terminated by either party with 60-days notice. [Note: Around April 30, 2015, the district sent a letter to the AAEA saying that they believe that a "perpetual contract" can be terminated with sixty days notice.]

D. The current contract runs through the 2015-2016 fiscal year (ending June 30, 2016). [Note: This is specified in the agreement from March of 2013: http://www.a2schools.org/hrs.home/files/aaea_ta_2013.pdf]

If you agree with A. or C., you are taking, effectively, the position of the district.

If you agree with B. or D., you are taking, effectively, the position of the AAEA.

I'm not an attorney (and I don't even play one on t.v.), but I understand that both sides think that they are right.

And in fact, what makes this so important is not simply, as you might think, financial compensation--but rather, the effect of "right-to-work" and several other anti-teachers/anti-union bills that have passed our state legislature in the past two years.

I've talked to quite a few people about the negotiations now (all of them knowledgeable, and all of them asked to be "off the record,") and--no surprise really--there are some other things in dispute as well. 

For example: 

The teachers and the district were negotiating a Memorandum of Agreement about staffing for the International Baccalaureate programs...one of the parties--or both of the parties--pulled out when the MOA was nearly final. Who? and Why?

The "prohibited subject policies" were put on the school board agenda for a first briefing in the middle of May (here is the link to them, read the comments for an explanation of what they are). Were they put on the agenda because the state requires it? Because the school board can (but doesn't have to) do it? Because the administration and school board were mad at the AAEA for asserting that the contract doesn't end in June and the AAEA doesn't have to negotiate?

No, don't bother writing your opinion on those in the comments--I can say that there is more than one opinion about each of these.

With negotiations, you can't always see what's going on, but you always get to hear the pronouncements of both sides. Which reminds me of shadow puppets. You might (or might not--my husband says, not so much) think that this shadow looks like a duck. (My shadow puppets are a bit rusty.)

Yup, my "duck." Photo by Michael Appel.

And if it walks like a duck, and it quacks like a duck...but no, it's really a hand after all.

Yup, my hand. Photo by Michael Appel.

Pay attention to the hand, not the shadow.




Consider subscribing to Ann Arbor Schools Musings by Email!

AddThis