ASK ME! An MEA Ad Featuring a Local Teacher

I don't usually enjoy ads, but this one--I did. The theme?

ASK ME.

 Local teacher Patti Smith is featured. See if you can catch her!




 

Consider subscribing to Ann Arbor Schools Musings by Email!

Key Updates--And A Survey

1. Have you liked Monet Tiedeman's live blogging of the school board meetings?
Find her work again tonight (the meeting is at Huron High School, by  the way):

https://annarbivore.wordpress.com/

Bookmark it!

2. Congratulations to Scott Westerman, for getting the Ann Arbor Preschool named after him. Dr. Westerman was Superintendent of the Ann Arbor Public Schools for many years and has stayed active in the community. (Yes, even now! He's still on the AAPS Blue Ribbon Advisory Group.)

3. Regarding the rumor that TAs might be outsourced, the school district would like to put that rumor to rest. Here's a comment from David Comsa, the Deputy Superintendent for Human Resources and Legal Services:

There is no chance of AAPS outsourcing teaching assistants. First, the district is actively bargaining with the Paraeducator unit, which includes teaching assistants. Second, state case law considers most teaching assistants to be protected from outsourcing. 

4. Lieutenant Governor Brian Calley has been doing a lot of work on the needs of kids who qualify for special education services in this state.

He has had meetings around the state, and now he has got a survey going, and he's hoping for a better response.

Find the survey at michigan.gov/calley.

I think most parents who have kids with special education needs have been impressed by Lt. Gov. Calley's work on this issue, so...help him out!

5. Need shots? The Regional Alliance for Healthy Schools is offering free immunizations:

Student Immunization Clinics

Walk-ins available from 9 am - 1 pm     

July 29th, 30th  &  August 5th, 6th, 12th, 13th

RAHS - Scarlett Middle School

You do not need to be a registered student at these schools to receive services. RAHS accepts insured and uninsured patients, regardless of ability to pay.

Washtenaw County Public Health staff bringing in polio vaccines.
In the 1950s. From Old News at the Ann Arbor District Library.

Consider subscribing to Ann Arbor Schools Musings by Email!

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 50^th 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!

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!

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!

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!

Dear Dr. Swift, The Honeymoon Is Over

For the first year and a half of Dr. Swift's employment as the Ann Arbor Public Schools Superintendent, I heard almost entirely positive reviews. She had her "Listen & Learn" tour, she learned a lot from that, and she proposed new programs and ideas. Some notable successes--she got the principals of Roberto Clemente and Ann Arbor Tech to work together; turned Northside into Ann Arbor STEAM; got the school board to open seats to schools of choice, and also attracted a lot of Ann Arbor residents back into the schools. The number of students in the district grew significantly, and that allowed the budget to grow as well. If the custodians' jobs were cut along the way, I think the thought went, that was just a casualty of the times.

All this was in stark contrast to her predecessor, Pat Green, whose honeymoon lasted about 3 months, and whose focus in budget cycles was to thumb her nose at parents, propose cuts that managed to tick off a lot of people without likely saving any money (remember the idea of cutting middle school Athletic Directors), and generally share a negative vibe.

Recently though, while going back through other things that I had written, I was startled to see the headline of a piece I wrote in February 2014 for the Ann Arbor Chronicle. Titled Good Ideas, Flawed Process, the subheading said: "New superintendent brings positive proposals, but Ann Arbor Public Schools board violates its own policies, undermines public process." 

At the time I thought that this had a lot to do with her newness on the job and to the community, and hey--good ideas make all the difference, right? Well, maybe not.

And now I think I can say, with full confidence: "Dear Dr. Swift, the honeymoon is over."

Let's look at three areas, all of which concern me--as well as a lot of other parents and teachers.

1. Testing: in particular, M-STEP Testing.
As you know, the M-STEP (or, as I prefer to call it, the MIS-Step) is the state-mandated test that robs teaching time, robs computer lab time, and does not replace any of the other tests that are already being given (NWEA MAP, SRI, ACT, WorkKeys, regular final exams, to name just a few...). It's quite a bit longer than the MEAP that it replaced. For those of us who already thought there was too much testing, well, this doesn't help matters.

Parents have the right to refuse this test for their children, but administrators have been nervous about potential implications for the district (at least for this year and next, likely none).

An email from the Superintendent implying that parents don't have the right to refuse this test, when they do, got a lot of parents hot under the collar--even parents who were happy to have their kids take the tests.

For myself, I wasn't surprised that the Superintendent was supporting the test (that's her job), but I was disappointed that she wasn't following the lead of Rod Rock, the Clarkston Superintendent who (with the chair of the Clarkston PTA, Ariana Bokas) wrote a wonderful op-ed in Bridge magazine about better ways to approach testing. Read it here.

2. International Baccalaureate schools: Huron, Scarlett, Mitchell

In the coming years, the Scarlett, Mitchell, and Huron schools are supposed to become International Baccalaureate schools. This is one of the ideas that came out of the first round of the Listen and Learn tour. To teach in an IB school, you need a certain type of training--and the whole "teach in an IB school" thing is really not for every teacher.

Past magnets and school openings have developed teacher staffing in different ways. Skyline's staffing plan was developed through a Memorandum of Agreement (MOA) with the teachers' union; A2Steam's staffing was developed as a "pilot," which means that teachers there don't have certain union work rules or protections for a certain period of time.

And let's note that A2Steam is a much smaller program than the combined programming of Mitchell, Scarlett, and Huron (together well over 2000 students).

According to my sources, the teachers' union and the Superintendent's representatives were meeting monthly all of this year to develop an MOA around the IB staffing, and the union apparently thought that MOA was going to go to the board for approval. At the last minute, they found out that the Superintendent was ignoring the MOA, and bringing a proposal for a pilot program to the school board. The pilot proposal passed the school board unanimously, and I have no idea whether the school board knew in advance of the vote (I'm sure they know now) that the AAEA felt they had been dealt with duplicitously...that they had been bamboozled. And part of the teachers' question was, "Why act as if you were going to bring the MOA forward...why waste our time over the past year...if you never planned to do that."

3. Teachers as Professionals

All of that sets the tone for some additional conflict.
Last year, teachers agreed to take a "one-time" pay rollback. [Although why anybody thought things would be better financially this year, with our current legislature, is a bit beyond me.]
So now this year, the district would like to reopen the contract (so they can extend these pay savings) and the union has just said no, thank you.

And that's at least partly because of the issues with the IB pilot, above.
And a refusal to negotiate over pay will likely threaten the school budget solvency, and that's not good.

But there's another issue, and it's one that concerns me a bit more.
Several teachers that I have spoken with have told me that they--or other teachers they work with--have been implicitly threatened, in both subtle and not-so-subtle ways, for speaking out at school board meetings, for speaking to school board members, for writing on social media, and even for sharing their opinions about testing in meetings where there were only teachers and administrators.

This does not sit well with me at all.

If teachers are professionals, let's treat teachers like professionals.

In a recent letter to teachers, the Superintendent wrote:

Unlike what has been stated in the media, the teachers of this district are respected and affirmed both by the district leadership and the families of Ann Arbor.  Unfortunately, the state leadership continues to devalue public education and as a result, each of us must continue to call for changes in legislation and leadership to reflect the funding that is needed and deserved to adequately support our schools.  At the same time, we do not create good will for public education with hostile attacks on the district. Public attacks on the new programs that our community values and that our teachers have so competently developed ultimately harms everyone.  (Emphases added.)

While some people might read this as relatively innocuous, many teachers don't feel respected or affirmed by the district leadership right now. And in the context of the subtle and not-so-subtle threats that teachers have experienced or heard about, many of them are reading this as a warning not to criticize the IB program or any other new programs. And the irony is, for the most part the criticisms are not about the programs themselves, but about the way the program will be staffed, and about why and how teachers will have to reapply for jobs...for the teachers that I've talked to, this did not feel like much of a Teacher Appreciation Week.

4. Tonight's Board Meeting

Tonight's Board meeting (Wed. 5/13/2015) starts at 7 p.m. and has been moved to Forsythe Middle School because a crowd is expected. It should be interesting.


5. Process Matters

Dear Dr. Swift--

There is still time to turn this around. You are rightfully concerned about the district's finances. You are rightfully developing new and exciting programs.

But you have to see parents and teachers, and teachers' aides, and secretaries, and principals--all of them, all of us--as partners.

The end does not justify the means. We need transparency and we need good will.

Process matters. I mean that both ways--process does matter, and also--let's discuss matters of process.

And now, please read the coda to this post (think of it as part II), which I wrote on 5/16/2015.

Consider subscribing to Ann Arbor Schools Musings by Email!

When the Custodians Were Cut, Where Were We?

Those of you who know me outside of my blog may have heard that my daughter Lior, a sophomore at Tufts University in Boston, is the president of the Tufts Labor Coalition. The Tufts Labor Coalition (TLC) has spent most of this year working on the unionization of adjunct faculty, and the preservation of custodial positions as the University switches contractors and decides to have fewer custodians (approximately 1 in 6 custodians' jobs would be cut) to cover an expanding number of university buildings.

TLC has been working with the custodians' union, the SEIU. In the past week TLC and the SEIU held a rally and a protest where several students were (intentionally) arrested in an act of civil disobedience. This week, students are hunger striking. I'm not a big fan of hunger strikes, but there have been articles in the Boston Globe, New York Times, In These Times, television, radio programs like Democracy Now, Huffington Post, and more.

[You can follow them on twitter @tuftslabor or on Facebook at the Tufts Labor Coalition page.]

Lior is on the administrative liaison team. Here she is (bottom right)
going in to meet with the administration. Note the banner the students
have hung at the top of the stairs. Photo from @tuftslabor.

I like this picture, because it names how many families
and lives will be affected. Photo from @tuftslabor. 

All of which brings me back to what I was thinking.

Last year at this time, the Ann Arbor school district was outsourcing and eliminating custodians' jobs.

[Read: Here and here.]

Where were we?

When my older son was in second grade, he and his friend decided to have a contest to see who could drink the most water. Not surprisingly, they drank a little too much, with predictable results. The custodian cleaned up their vomit--and though we made them apologize to the custodian then, I don't really think that's the thanks, or the apology, the custodians needed.

Where were we, parents?
Where were we, teachers?
Where were we, students?
Where were we, principals & secretaries?

Where were we, citizens?

And this plagues me now, as I have heard recently that several custodians are dealing with foreclosures and evictions.

Why is it that a relatively small group of students at Tufts can make a big deal about 35 lives, and we couldn't even lift a finger?



OK...I did lift a finger. Ten, actually, but only on my keyboard.

June 2014 story

April 2010 story





Consider subscribing to Ann Arbor Schools Musings by Email!

4 Reasons Why You Will Mostly See New Custodians in the Ann Arbor Schools Next Year

With the rapid privatization and outsourcing of custodial services in the Ann Arbor schools to GCA (assuming that goes through), you can expect that most of us will not see the same custodians in our schools in the fall.

Here are 4 reasons why.

1. Some of them will retire.

2. Some of them are very angry at the way they have been treated by the school system, particularly given the fact that they have taken pay cuts over the last few years, and they were given very very little notice that this would happen. Some of them would therefore prefer to take unemployment and look for other jobs.

I spoke to someone in that situation. She said to me, "I bought a house in Ann Arbor, I pay Ann Arbor school taxes, and now I'm treated this way?"

3. Most custodians would have their pay cut if they go to GCA Services--not to mention that they will lose their retirement benefits in any case.

4. It is not in GCA's interest to hire the majority of the custodians back. One person told me--I have not verified this yet--that if they hired more than 50% of the custodians back they would need to recognize the AFSCME union. (Even if this is not true, though, it is obviously true that if the custodians were happy with their union, the more custodians they hire from the union shop the more likely the custodians are to try and organize. GCA is recognized as fairly negative to unions, so that is not something they will want to do.)

[See, for instance:  GCA Services Enters Federal Consent Decree to Remedy Wide Ranging Accusations of Labor Law Violations]

Wednesday, June 25th, 2014, some of the labor groups held a press conference before the school board meeting. You can listen to what custodian Toni Lemons had to say here.

[I think you will have to download it. This was my first try at embedding an audio file but I am not yet wholly successful.]

Consider subscribing to Ann Arbor Schools Musings by Email!

Why Play Nice, Play Fair? No Need In Right-to-Work (For Less) Michigan

Last week, a lot of bad stuff happened at the Ann Arbor school board meeting.

The two most disturbing actions?

1. The school board voted to outsource the custodians' positions to GCA Services (owned by the private equity firm Blackstone) effective July 1, 2014. Yup, that's a fortnight from now. (Trustees Lightfoot and Baskett voted against this.)

2. The school board voted that if the teachers didn't accept a salary freeze through a Memorandum of Agreement (union/board) by July 23, 2014 (that's Monday), the school board would terminate the union contract. This would have the effect of freezing the current wages and at the same time, when the contract was (presumably) renegotiated, many of the terms and conditions in the would not be allowed under the new work rules in Michigan--in particular, tenure and seniority rules. This measure was approved unanimously.

Welcome to the brave new world of school funding cuts and more cuts.
Welcome to the brave new world of a right-to-work state and union busting.
Welcome to the brave new world of taking our tax dollars and using them to fund for-profit, private firms.

State Funding

In better news: at the board meeting, Christine Stead did a nice job of explaining the vagaries of state funding (the conference committee budget basically hobbles Ann Arbor, Dexter, Saline, Ypsilanti Community Schools, and some others) and helps a few local school districts (the lowest-funded districts, like Milan, Whitmore Lake, and I believe Manchester). The state budget also sends a lot of money to for-profit charters and virtual schools, which get $175 in additional funding per pupil vs. $50 for Ann Arbor. [On Stead's blog, you can read about the AAPS presentation this week to the State Board of Education as well as some proposals for ways to improve school funding.] Their ideas--good ideas--are to have charter schools also have to pay state retirement, and to allow local school districts to ask for local tax levies for operations--currently that is not allowed under state law. And the district did join the superintendents of other districts in a press conference that day. Ann Arbor is a huge donor district (most of the taxes we raise go to support other districts) and yet we are getting the lowest increases in funding.

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

Anyway--back to the custodians.

In 2010, during another round of privatization discussions (we've been through this with food service and transportation, remember) I posted this on this blog:

At the budget meeting that I went to, several people at my table raised concerns about privatization. They wondered what the actual (not projected) savings were when the food service was privatized (the facilitator didn't know). They talked about how satisfaction (on the part of people who eat the lunches) had gone down. And they wondered about the effects on the "lunch ladies."
"Well," our facilitator said, "I believe that the new company hired everyone who wanted to be hired, for the same wages, and the only thing they lost was retirement benefits."

It's more than a little bit troubling to hear someone who makes more than $100,000/year (the facilitator referred to above is an AAPS administrator) talk about someone who is living on $25,000/year and say "they only lost retirement benefits." I'm pretty sure if I talked about yanking her retirement, she would be pretty upset, and she's not living near the poverty level.

Retirement costs, in fact, are the main reason for privatizing (since the custodians already gave major concessions a couple of years ago). Basically, if somebody is an AAPS employee, AAPS has to pay their retirement costs (state law)--and if they are not, they don't.

I found Jeanice Swift's letter to Ann Arbor parents about the custodian privatization to be disingenuous. [Read it here--with my comments.] I'm still not clear why she felt she needed to respond to the emails she and the board were getting about custodians losing their jobs and face pay cuts with "everyone gets an interview" and "pay cuts will not be as significant as perceived." An interview is not a job, and if you only make $25,000 a year and you get a 10% pay cut plus lose your retirement? I think that's pretty significant. Saying, "all the other districts are doing it too?" My parents didn't take that as a good reason to do or not do something. Speaking for myself, I'd prefer the honesty of  a letter that said simply, "this sucks and it's because of the state legislature's decisions, and we are trying to keep the cuts away from the classroom."

The other very disturbing piece of this has to do with the timing. The outsourcing was approved by the board as a special briefing. Any time you see the words "special briefing" you know that means that they are not following their own approved process. They are rushing things through. While I feel O.K. about that for ordering the Huron High School band uniforms, which would be done anyway and for which the money was already set aside (another item on the agenda), I'm not O.K. with that for decisions like outsourcing custodians. [I've written about this before in the Ann Arbor Chronicle. I'm starting to see a pattern here.]

The custodians had come to the school board with a proposal for a worker-owned co-op, and the board--with straight faces--tried to tell them that if they had only proposed that a little earlier...oh gee they really wished they could do it but their counsel told them that since the RFP had closed they couldn't...

Since it's a special briefing item, though, you know the board was working on a ridiculously short timeline. The union was told about the RFP and the agenda item less than a week before the RFP made it on the agenda.  The RFP was posted for only a week. How long do you think the top 3 companies knew that the RFP was coming? A different timeline could have led to a different result.

[By the way, teacher Chloe Root has started a petition out asking the board to reconsider. Sign it here.]

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

How about those teachers? 

We might describe the resolution passed by the school board as a Faustian bargain--on the part of the district.

Last year, with Superintendent Pat Green, the AAEA (teachers' union) agreed to a salary freeze, advertised as "one year only." At the time, I wondered about that--figuring that the state's school aid fund probably wasn't going to look better next year, so why make a one-year only plan? But Pat Green was on her way out, and I believe she only cared about getting the budget out the door, whatever it looked like. I don't know what the teachers' union was thinking.

In any case, Jeanice Swift walked into a situation where now she had to ask the teachers to again take a salary freeze, and my guess is that the teachers' union was not too happy about that. There is, really, an alternative to a salary freeze though--and it's having larger class sizes. Parents wouldn't be too happy about that, we already know it is one reason people have left the school district, but it exists.

Apparently, the teachers' union has not been all that willing to concede the salary freeze again. And yes, it's true that the teachers have had many types of cutbacks for many years. So after going into executive session, the school board came out and voted--unanimously--to terminate the teacher contract unless the teachers agree to having a total wage freeze, as agreed to by a Memorandum of Agreement by this Monday, June 23d. Under termination, teachers still get the a wage freeze, but lose some of the items in the contract.

And here's where Faust comes in--maybe. Several things have changed in state law in the past couple of years, including right-to-work and some changes in the teacher tenure law. There are items in the contract that cannot be retained if the teachers' union loses this contract and starts a new contract--primarily around tenure, seniority, and right to work/union dues.

So the school board--and the Superintendent--are essentially bullying the teachers and forcing the teachers to say "uncle." But that's at the risk of having much worse relations with the teachers in the future. Could this have been avoided?

Maybe it's not such a risk. I have a perception that the teachers' union is dispirited and disorganized. Expect the number of retirements to rise...

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

Let's Privatize the Teachers

Now if you are wondering: why don't they just privatize the teachers? Could they privatize the teachers? That's what the charter schools do. Retirement costs are the main driver of the reason to privatize, right? The districts  have already outsourced the substitute teachers, the food service workers, the school bus drivers... Everybody knows the "first they came for the Socialists" passage by Pastor Martin Niemoller, right?

They would, probably, if they could--and maybe soon they will be able to.

But for now, they can't. I had to ask Steve Norton of Michigan Parents for Schools about this--and it turns out that he had been wondering too, and had looked it up (thank you Steve for being an education policy wonk!!). This is an excerpt from his email, and my takeaway is that "the devil is in the details."

Under current law, school districts must hire teachers directly - i.e., teachers must be direct employees of the school district. The language is a consequence of this part of the revised school code:
380.1231 Hiring of teachers; teachers' contracts generally.Sec. 1231.
(1) The board of a school district shall hire and contract with qualified teachers....
Unlike other sections that cover background checks, etc, this section does not mention or include public school academies (charters). In the sections that create charters, they are given explicit permission to hire outside individuals or firms to provide comprehensive services to and operate the charter. Thus, outside management companies may be hired by charters to run the schools, including hiring teachers. 

In an attorney general opinion from 1997 (? I think), the AG determined that direct employees of any school board, including the boards of charter schools, MUST participate in MPSERS. However, contract employees MAY NOT participate in MPSERS. 

Since charters are allowed to contract out instructional services, they can avoid paying into MPSERS on those employees. Local school districts are not allowed to do that, and so they must therefore pay into MPSERS for teachers and all direct employees. 

This is the reason that even "self-managed" charters like Ann Arbor Learning Community technically "lease" their employees from a private firm, which allows them to classify teachers as contract employees and thus avoid paying into MPSERS on their behalf. Very, very, few charters participate in MPSERS. 

By the way, the original version of the charter uncapping bill, SB 618 of 2011, included a new section (section 1231A), which would have allowed local school districts to contract out for teachers. That provision was not removed until the bill got to the Senate floor, as part of a compromise to get it passed. (Emphasis added.)

*******

Dreaming

I dream a world, where those same cuts need to happen, but the district shares the possibility with the custodians that this might happen three months in advance. Then the custodians have time to organize the employee-owned co-op. They lose their retirement, but they get to maintain their dignity. We get to keep our money from going to fund yet another for-profit business. That requires the timing to be different, and I believe it could have been different.

I dream a world, where the district asks the teachers' union to find those same cuts as a salary freeze or in some other way, and gives the union time to figure that out.

I dream a world where the district's timelines for working with employees are more reasonable, and where the district doesn't try to hide things from the public, or push important items through on special briefings...

Wait--that's not my REAL dream.

In my REAL dreams, all schools are adequately funded, Michigan is not a right-to-work-for-less state, AND the school board uses reasonable timelines.

That first set of dreams? They could be a reality, if the school board and the superintendent would decide to treat their employees with respect, and not as commodities.

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

Lingering Question

Was this a conscious choice on Jeanice Swift's part, to shorten timelines in order to keep the public and the employees out of the process? Or did everything take longer than she thought it would and with a new finance person and her first budget, everything got done at the last possible minute?



Consider subscribing to Ann Arbor Schools Musings by Email!

Why Did the WCC Faculty Take a No-Confidence Vote In the School President Last Week?

Last week, Washtenaw Community College's faculty took a no-confidence vote in the President of the school. WCC, you may know, is funded in large part by our tax dollars.

Why did they do this? And why did the vote pass by a huge margin? I asked the WCC faculty to explain.

Read on to get their point of view, and also to find the link to their blog.

For those outside of Washtenaw Community College, I'm sure that the most recent press about the vote of no confidence in President Bellanca's leadership could be alarming, confusing, or even amusing. 

From the inside, issues with Dr. Bellanca's leadership have been building for some time. Faculty were prepared for change when former president, Larry Whitworth, retired in 2011. However, instead of getting a progressive leader interested in using the expertise of the staff and faculty, we were faced with a growing executive administration, staff and mid-level manager turnover, and a distinct shift in how conversations could take place on campus: marketing became the name of the game. 

About 18 months ago, it became more than obvious to the WCCEA union leadership that relationships were not improving and that seeking help from the Board of Trustees was needed. Quietly, requests for help were made by the WCCEA but ignored by the Board. 

After the unprofessional handling of Vice President Blacklaw's firing in March 2013, a united faculty sought help from the Board of Trustees again, but we were essentially told that we were afraid of "change." Bewildered, we took time to regroup, hoping for a shift in what was becoming a hostile work environment with a president who wanted to dictate instead of lead, with the Board co-signing every step. 

The growing number of executive administrators, recent resignations of three of our five academic deans, along with resignations of key staff throughout the college left us little choice but to bring forth a vote of no confidence to the faculty. With nearly 88% of the faculty supporting this vote, our issues are not imagined or vague as some on the Board want to believe. Now that the vote has occured, the WCCEA is ready to find a way through this and get back to what we do very well: teaching and learning. 

Please follow our blog at http://wccea.wordpress.com/.

Julie M. Kissel
Professional Faculty - English Department

WCCEA Representative

Following the vote of no confidence, the president of the WCCEA wrote this, in part, in a press release: 

Often,  faculties come to the point of calling for No Confidence Votes when their salaries or job security is on the line.  That is not the case here. What we are doing here is, I think, unique.  We are not focused on increasing our compensation from the school, and we are not asking for more time off.  We are asking for accountability from an administration that has failed to instill confidence and trust with the faculty.  People, whether they are faculty or not, are NOT comfortable speaking up.  People do Fear retribution.  Because of this, as faculty members at WCC, we are concerned about the health and future of the school… a school that many of us have served for decades.  

(Respectful) thoughts about the vote of no confidence and the situation at WCC are welcome in the comments.

Also--if you are thinking about running for the WCC Board of Trustees, now would be a good time to collect petitions!


Consider subscribing to Ann Arbor Schools Musings by Email!

Education Achievement Authority Discussion Tuesday

The Ann Arbor Education Association is sponsoring a forum on Governor Snyder's failed experiment - the Education Achievement Authority. 

When: Tuesday, February 11th from 7:30 to 9:30 p.m. at Pioneer High School in the Little Theater.

From the press release:

Scheduled speakers include State Representative Jeff Irwin along with other members of the Washtenaw County delegation, Tom Pedroni—Associate Professor of Education at Wayne State University, Christopher Robbins—Associate Professor of Social Foundations at the Education School of Eastern Michigan University, Chris Savage-owner of Eclectablog, and other local public educators and concerned citizens.

**Speaking of the Education Achievement Authority, People Who Know believe the new (mostly the same) EAA bill will be fast-tracked through our state legislature this week.

From Vickie Markavitch of the Oakland Intermediate School District:

URGENT ACTION on EAA NEEDED by 11:00 am Wednesday 2/12

February 11, 2014 at 9:54pm

Here is the new version of the EAA legislation. House members have been told they have 24 hours to review and then will vote on it tomorrow.  We believe that vote may be as early as NOON. 
PLEASE call your state representatives and senators to express your opinion on this newest version.  

Here are the key discussion points for your call. 

Consider subscribing to Ann Arbor Schools Musings by Email!

Top Ann Arbor Schools Musings Posts of 2013

Starting with the most popular post from 2013, and working my way down the list...

1. Who is the Broad Foundation and Why Do We in Ann Arbor Care? (May 6, 2013)

In which I explain the association between then-superintendent Pat Green and the Broad Foundation.

2. The (financial) costs of (NWEA) testing in Ann Arbor (Sept. 22, 2013)

In which I discuss the hard costs, and soft costs, of NWEA testing--to the tune of hundreds of thousands of dollars a year. Plus there are a lot of great links to other information about the NWEA test.

3. Principal Principles, Perspectives, and Publicity (Nov. 24, 2013)

Sulura Jackson at Skyline High School graduation.
Photo from a2schools.org.

Why did Cindy Leaman leave Pioneer High School for the new Ann Arbor Virtual Academy? Did Sulura Jackson, former principal of Skyline High School, plagiarize?

4. Superintendent Background Research: Richard Faidley (July 9, 2013)

I think this was the first profile I did for superintendent background research during the recent hiring of the AAPS Superintendent. Richard Faidley didn't make it to the next round.

5. State Board of Ed Roadshow Gives (A Lot of) Food for Thought (March 12, 2013)

Julie Roth wrote an excellent guest column for me using the perspective of a "non-teacher, non-educator, non-union Parent Stakeholder."

6. Ypsilanti Community Schools: Meditations on Employment (June 10, 2013)

Willow Run Flyers logo (old)

Ypsilanti High School Phoenix logo (old)

In 2013, we said goodbye to Ypsilanti and Willow Run school districts, and hello to the consolidated Ypsilanti Community Schools. The Ypsilanti and Willow Run consolidation of schools led to the loss of some staff positions, the loss of some staff compensation, and the loss of both the Ypsilanti and Willow Run teachers' unions. Plus I tell a fun family story.


7. AAPS Superintendent Pat Green Resigns. What Do You Think Of That? (April 11, 2013)

When AAPS Superintendent Pat Green resigned, I did a survey. The links to the results are in this post.

8. Finalist for Superintendent Background Research: Brian Osborne (July 9, 2013)

Brian Osborne was offered the AAPS Superintendent position. He didn't take it, and we got runner-up Jeanice Swift. So far, she appears to have embraced the position.

9. Funny Common Core Video Raises Serious Questions (June 8, 2013)

I like this video so much (and I need some pictures in this post) that I'm putting it right in here!



10. Are You Following the NWEA MAP Controversy In Seattle? (Feb. 6, 2013)

In Seattle, teachers refused to administer the NWEA MAP test. Read more recent updates at the Scrap the Map web site.




Consider subscribing to Ann Arbor Schools Musings by Email!