Sarasota school district, union disagree on contract terms

Friday
Dec 8, 2017 at 6:31 PM Dec 8, 2017 at 6:31 PM

School district offers proposal on merit-based pay, sparking objections from union

Elizabeth Djinis Staff Writer @djinisinabottle

Negotiations between the teachers' union and the Sarasota County School District ended abruptly this week after the district proposed a last-minute addition of merit-based pay, claiming it had not complied with a state law on the issue for three years. Union leaders said they needed time to react to the sudden injection of the merit-pay proposal into negotiations that have been going on for three months and had previously bogged down over other pay issues.

The repeated disagreements have raised the possibility of an impasse and a potential union picket next month.

In its latest proposal to the Sarasota Classified/Teachers Association, the district changed its offer on salary schedules, offering a two-step increase in 2017-18 and a normal step progression in 2018-19, an issue that had been a sticking point last month. Yet district negotiators amended their proposal in two distinct ways: They offered a $450 bonus to senior teachers who have worked at the district for 29 years or longer in 2018, who will not receive a step salary increase, and proposed a $2,300 salary adjustment for teachers found to be highly effective in their evaluations. That compared with a a $1,725 salary adjustment for teachers deemed effective, between a 4.5 and 5.5 percent increase on the new teacher base salary of $42,000.

Both were proposals that sparked union objections. Following introduction of the proposal in talks Thursday, SC/TA president Pat Gardner said leaders felt they needed to take a break and ended negotiations for the day.

The two sides had been aiming for a contract resolution by the district's winter break. But that is looking less likely following the breakdown in talks. The merit pay issue has been a sensitive one for teachers since the state approved a law mandating it a few years ago.

Should one of the two sides declare an impasse, meaning that an agreement cannot be reached, the negotiations would go to a special magistrate, who would recommend an offer thath the School Board could ultimately accept or deny, said SC/TA executive director Barry Dubin. The last time the topic of an impasse arose was in 1993, but an agreement averted the full process.

"I don't think either side really wants that to happen," Dubin said.

Gardner blamed the sudden injection of the merit pay proposal for the sudden halt to talks.

"Once you put that very complex thing of merit pay out, that takes talking with our lawyers again. We had to step back and go back to the processes of a couple of years ago. It's nice to just fly into a county and throw this huge thing on the table, but the rest of us have to think about having a life here," Gardner said. "...They expected me to agree to something in 10 minutes that took us over a year the first time. We just said we needed some time to recoup."

Todd Bowden, who is overseeing his first contract negotiations since becoming superintendent earlier this year, said the merit-based pay proposal goes back to state statute, and is not at the discretion of the district. A state law passed in 2011 said that by July 1, 2014, teachers hired on or after that date who are rated highly effective must have an annual salary adjustment at a higher amount than other employees, and effective teachers must have a salary adjustment at between 50 percent and 75 percent of that amount.

In the past three years, Bowden said, the district has not formally complied with the statute. About two-thirds of Sarasota County's 2,749 teachers are ranked highly effective and one-third are ranked effective, a district spokesman said. Some critics have argued that merit-based pay can be detrimental to successful teachers who work at low-rated schools.

"I would agree that during the evaluation process, it is difficult to draw a clear line that says teachers on one side of the line are highly effective and teachers on the other side of the line are effective, and so to use that distinction to pay teachers is somewhat problematic," Bowden said. "But that is a philosophical conversation — the statute makes clear that we must do that. I can agree or disagree with them but at the end of the day it doesn't matter; the Legislature made that decision on our behalf."

Previously, the district and union had been at odds over salary increase schedules. The process stalled over a disagreement about whether to honor step salary schedules, a pay system frequently used by school districts where teachers and classified employees receive an increment-based salary increase between about 1 and 2 percent for every year that they are at the district, plateauing at the 29th level. In an earlier proposal, the district had removed a step salary schedule, instead offering a raise and bonus combination.

The negotiation process has changed under Bowden. In previous years, board attorney Arthur Hardy had also served as the lead negotiator during bargaining. But last summer, Bowden said, Hardy "elected to have the sole title of counsel to the board." School Board member Eric Robinson, who advocated for Hardy not to represent the district during negotiations, said it was a conflict of interest for Hardy to represent both the district and the board during negotiations. In November, the district hired Tallahassee-based negotiator Leonard Dietzen at $225 an hour.

While Thursday's bargaining session was the last negotiation set before the Dec. 21 start of the winter break, Bowden said the district has offered a number of possible additional bargaining dates to the union. The union has responded with Dec. 21, Gardner said, although that was not scheduled definitively as of Friday afternoon.

Bowden called himself an "eternal optimist" and said he hopes a contract can still be reached before winter break.

"I've always felt like if we stayed at the bargaining table and did the hard work that an agreement that was acceptable to all parties would be reached," Bowden said. "My biggest disappointment in this entire process is that we left the table — it's the table where these issues get resolved. So I understand that there are issues that we disagree on and I understand there are things that are upsetting to them and their members, but where those issues are resolved is at the bargaining table. To commit to doing a full day's worth of bargaining and then to invite our team to leave after less than an hour does not give us the opportunity to resolve those issues."

If the two sides cannot reach an agreement soon, the union has called on teachers and classified employees to picket the Jan. 9 School Board meeting, Gardner said.

"As far as I'm concerned, if we're not settled by then, we're picketing on Jan. 9," Gardner said. "We'll be at the board meeting."

Friday
Dec 8, 2017 at 6:31 PM Dec 8, 2017 at 6:31 PM

School district offers proposal on merit-based pay, sparking objections from union

Elizabeth Djinis Staff Writer @djinisinabottle

Negotiations between the teachers' union and the Sarasota County School District ended abruptly this week after the district proposed a last-minute addition of merit-based pay, claiming it had not complied with a state law on the issue for three years. Union leaders said they needed time to react to the sudden injection of the merit-pay proposal into negotiations that have been going on for three months and had previously bogged down over other pay issues.

The repeated disagreements have raised the possibility of an impasse and a potential union picket next month.

In its latest proposal to the Sarasota Classified/Teachers Association, the district changed its offer on salary schedules, offering a two-step increase in 2017-18 and a normal step progression in 2018-19, an issue that had been a sticking point last month. Yet district negotiators amended their proposal in two distinct ways: They offered a $450 bonus to senior teachers who have worked at the district for 29 years or longer in 2018, who will not receive a step salary increase, and proposed a $2,300 salary adjustment for teachers found to be highly effective in their evaluations. That compared with a a $1,725 salary adjustment for teachers deemed effective, between a 4.5 and 5.5 percent increase on the new teacher base salary of $42,000.

Both were proposals that sparked union objections. Following introduction of the proposal in talks Thursday, SC/TA president Pat Gardner said leaders felt they needed to take a break and ended negotiations for the day.

The two sides had been aiming for a contract resolution by the district's winter break. But that is looking less likely following the breakdown in talks. The merit pay issue has been a sensitive one for teachers since the state approved a law mandating it a few years ago.

Should one of the two sides declare an impasse, meaning that an agreement cannot be reached, the negotiations would go to a special magistrate, who would recommend an offer thath the School Board could ultimately accept or deny, said SC/TA executive director Barry Dubin. The last time the topic of an impasse arose was in 1993, but an agreement averted the full process.

"I don't think either side really wants that to happen," Dubin said.

Gardner blamed the sudden injection of the merit pay proposal for the sudden halt to talks.

"Once you put that very complex thing of merit pay out, that takes talking with our lawyers again. We had to step back and go back to the processes of a couple of years ago. It's nice to just fly into a county and throw this huge thing on the table, but the rest of us have to think about having a life here," Gardner said. "...They expected me to agree to something in 10 minutes that took us over a year the first time. We just said we needed some time to recoup."

Todd Bowden, who is overseeing his first contract negotiations since becoming superintendent earlier this year, said the merit-based pay proposal goes back to state statute, and is not at the discretion of the district. A state law passed in 2011 said that by July 1, 2014, teachers hired on or after that date who are rated highly effective must have an annual salary adjustment at a higher amount than other employees, and effective teachers must have a salary adjustment at between 50 percent and 75 percent of that amount.

In the past three years, Bowden said, the district has not formally complied with the statute. About two-thirds of Sarasota County's 2,749 teachers are ranked highly effective and one-third are ranked effective, a district spokesman said. Some critics have argued that merit-based pay can be detrimental to successful teachers who work at low-rated schools.

"I would agree that during the evaluation process, it is difficult to draw a clear line that says teachers on one side of the line are highly effective and teachers on the other side of the line are effective, and so to use that distinction to pay teachers is somewhat problematic," Bowden said. "But that is a philosophical conversation — the statute makes clear that we must do that. I can agree or disagree with them but at the end of the day it doesn't matter; the Legislature made that decision on our behalf."

Previously, the district and union had been at odds over salary increase schedules. The process stalled over a disagreement about whether to honor step salary schedules, a pay system frequently used by school districts where teachers and classified employees receive an increment-based salary increase between about 1 and 2 percent for every year that they are at the district, plateauing at the 29th level. In an earlier proposal, the district had removed a step salary schedule, instead offering a raise and bonus combination.

The negotiation process has changed under Bowden. In previous years, board attorney Arthur Hardy had also served as the lead negotiator during bargaining. But last summer, Bowden said, Hardy "elected to have the sole title of counsel to the board." School Board member Eric Robinson, who advocated for Hardy not to represent the district during negotiations, said it was a conflict of interest for Hardy to represent both the district and the board during negotiations. In November, the district hired Tallahassee-based negotiator Leonard Dietzen at $225 an hour.

While Thursday's bargaining session was the last negotiation set before the Dec. 21 start of the winter break, Bowden said the district has offered a number of possible additional bargaining dates to the union. The union has responded with Dec. 21, Gardner said, although that was not scheduled definitively as of Friday afternoon.

Bowden called himself an "eternal optimist" and said he hopes a contract can still be reached before winter break.

"I've always felt like if we stayed at the bargaining table and did the hard work that an agreement that was acceptable to all parties would be reached," Bowden said. "My biggest disappointment in this entire process is that we left the table — it's the table where these issues get resolved. So I understand that there are issues that we disagree on and I understand there are things that are upsetting to them and their members, but where those issues are resolved is at the bargaining table. To commit to doing a full day's worth of bargaining and then to invite our team to leave after less than an hour does not give us the opportunity to resolve those issues."

If the two sides cannot reach an agreement soon, the union has called on teachers and classified employees to picket the Jan. 9 School Board meeting, Gardner said.

"As far as I'm concerned, if we're not settled by then, we're picketing on Jan. 9," Gardner said. "We'll be at the board meeting."

Choose the plan that’s right for you. Digital access or digital and print delivery.

Learn More