BFT Response to BUSD
Dear Berkeley Schools Community,
Over the last few weeks the Superintendent and Board of Education have been delivering their perspective on negotiations via postal mail and email to thousands of Berkeley homes and they have denied us the same opportunity. School district funds have now been used to postal mail a letter on Feb 28 from the Superintendent to Berkeley families regarding negotiations and then another letter on March 7 from the Board of Education President to Berkeley families regarding negotiations. In addition, a “Negotiations Update”along with teacher salary and benefits comparison data, all solely from the BUSD negotiations team’s perspective, have been emailed to thousands of Berkeley homes via Berkeley PTA e-trees.
BFT does not have a quarrel with the District’s right to communicate its negotiations perspectives with the Berkeley community but we do feel that it is highly unfair that they have tried to deny us the same opportunity. We recently requested from the District a list of all Berkeley family mailing addresses who received the Supt’s and Board President’s letters and we were denied. BFT has now filed an Unfair Labor Practice charge with the Public Employment Relations Board over what we claim is our equal access rights to the mailing addresses of families who have thus far only heard the District’s side of the story on negotiations. The problem is that an Unfair Labor Practice process could take months before a ruling is made forcing the District to turn over the mailing addresses.
In addition to our equal access rights being denied by District officials, most PTA e-trees have not been allowing Berkeley teachers to post our perspectives alongside of the District’s perspectives. This policy may now be changing though it is not clear whether PTA e-trees will allow us to somehow make up for all of the District’s letters, statistics, and statements that have already been sent over these last few weeks. BFT members will of course do what we can with leaf-letting off school grounds after our duty day but we are limited in that we do not want to (and cannot legally) send leaflets or letters to parents via our students.
So Berkeley teachers are asking for your help! We of course would love for the Berkeley community to support us in our struggle to get a fair contract settlement but we know that we cannot ask for parents’ and community members’ support until they have at least heard the main issues from our perspective and until they have heard our response to the District’s claims. So right now all we are really asking of you is to just help us get the teachers perspectives out to the rest of the community. We have only a few Berkeley parents and school community members email addresses and we are therefore asking the few of you to please just forward our information and perspectives that we email you over these next few weeks to other Berkeley parents and school community members.
Below is a critical response from BFT to statements made by the District recently regarding negotiations. Thanks so much for forwarding it to all Berkeley parents and school community members you know. Berkeley teachers greatly appreciate it!
Barry Fike
BFT’s Response to District’s “Negotiations Update” Be-Mail 3/16/05
The Berkeley Federation of Teachers makes the following statements in response to the District’s “Negotiations Update” email sent by the Board and Superintendent to all Berkeley Unified employees via be-mail on March 16. Nevertheless, BFT continues to negotiate on these critical issues in good faith and with confidentiality.
BUSD: “On March 15, the District made an offer to the Berkeley Federation of Teachers.”BFT: It is a misnomer to refer to a proposal that would ultimately force a comprehensive reduction in teachers’ overall compensation levels as an “offer”.
BUSD: “The offer increases all teachers salaries despite the need to cut the budget in order to do so.”
BFT: The District’s latest proposal does nothing to reverse Berkeley’s plummeting teacher compensation level rankings and keep our salaries competitive in either the short or long term. The District claims that cuts in the budget are necessary. This contradicts their acknowledgment that they expect to receive over 4% increased revenues next year from the State. BFT’s most recent salary proposal is more fiscally responsible as it, unlike the District’s proposal, provides a mechanism to protect BUSD in the event that some of this increased State funding BUSD will be receiving next year is later shifted into new mandatory costs.
BUSD: “The district offered an additional amount to provide a higher salary for those veteran teachers who have not had an opportunity to advance on the salary schedule.”
BFT: That offer mysteriously appeared out of nowhere for the first time at the end of the day last Tuesday. In the two years that we’ve been negotiating, neither BFT nor BUSD had ever identified a need to restructure our salary schedule in a way that would only benefit a handful of teachers. The District’s offer is a thinly veiled attempt to try to divide teachers by offering larger salary increases to just a few of us; this strategy won’t work. Teachers are united in our position that ALL should receive fair cost of living adjustments so as to maintain competitive compensation levels.
BUSD: “The district offered additional amounts for stipends for counselors and speech pathologists.”
BFT: BFT first identified and proposed solutions in these areas, and we will continue to insist that any District fiscal problems created by counselor stipend inequities or the District’s high costs of contracting out for speech pathologists be solved. However, this does not mean that we will agree to lower the entire bargaining unit’s overall compensation levels in exchange for the District’s offer to improve stipend levels for a few. Once again, teachers are united in our position that ALL should receive fair cost of living adjustments so as to maintain competitive compensation levels.
BUSD: “The district offered to increase its monetary contribution to medical benefits...”
BFT: This is simply not true. What really happened is the District began the day with a a hard cap benefits proposal that would have the District share a portion of increased benefits premiums for one year only. This means teachers would, for the first time, bear the full burden of all increased premium rates in future years. By the end of the day, the District’s proposal had worsened so that an even larger portion of increased premiums would be deducted out of teachers’ paychecks next year, while they continued to refuse to share any of the burden of increased premium rates in future years.
BUSD: “... and offered to provide dental coverage for many hourly teachers who are currently without dental coverage.”
BFT: The offer of improved dental coverage for hourly teachers is an attempt by BUSD to divert us from the primary issues identified by BFT – hourly teacher working condition and compensation. In the case of Independent Study hourly teachers, BUSD budget documents demonstrate a large surplus in program revenue which should pay for far more than a minimal increase in dental coverage. In the case of the Adult School hourly teachers, BFT has proposed to shift the same sum of money offered for dental coverage into an area that would be of more value to Adult School teacher compensation and working conditions. BUSD has refused to respond.
BUSD: “The district reaffirmed the promise made to the community through Measure B to adhere to the class size averages written into the measure.”
BFT: The District’s promise to continue with only class size averages and not class size limits is exactly what teachers fear. As a result of the District’s current commitment to only class size averages and not class size limits, Berkeley teachers, students, and families have seen class sizes escalate dramatically in recent years. BUSD’s refusal to agree to class size limits sends teachers and Berkeley taxpayers a clear message that the District wants to maintain the option to dramatically increase class sizes once again in the future.
BUSD: The Board and Superintendent believe they moved as far as they can without jeopardizing the solvency of the district or cutting critical programs. The union has not accepted the district’s offer. Another mediation session is scheduled for Monday, March 21.
BFT: It is BFT’s opinion that the Board and Superintendent’s decision to go public with their most recent proposals is counterproductive and dangerous. When the District goes public with proposals in the midst of highly sensitive mediation sessions, they can’t help but paint themselves into a corner and reduce opportunities for flexible solutions at the table. It may be that the District’s negotiations team just momentarily lost their cool in releasing this information or it may be that their misguided strategy is to try to end mediation and push for a strike.