Dear Colleagues
As mentioned in previous updates, this year we are engaged in “Critical Issues Bargaining” with the District. We decided, after going through the training, that it would be beneficial to schedule our sessions with a federal mediator present to keep us on track with this process so our meetings have been at the Federal Mediation and Conciliation Service office in Independence. At this point the mediator is acting as a facilitator. This is a free service.
In our first two sessions we framed our concerns in general terms and then began to examine them in more detail. Some of our areas of concern have stories behind them and represent wishes and dreams about what could be put into an ideal contract. Some are simple but practical matters that need to be reviewed and, perhaps, changed. For instance, both the District and teachers have concerns around how time is used. We have not worked on this issue yet, but there are sure to be concerns brought to the table from our different perspectives. We might bring up concerns around short notice on assembly schedules or professional development. The Board might want to ensure that teachers are present for all IEP meetings and don’t overuse sick days on Mondays and Fridays. Whatever our different concerns we will listen to each other and try to determine if there are ways of creating proposals that will address the issues.
Once the brainstorming is done, we test the possible solutions under four criteria. First, is the proposal feasible (legal, affordable, and practical)? Second, is it beneficial (satisfy important interests, better than what we have)? Next, we look at if it is acceptable (will it be perceived as fair and equitable and is it something the Board and the Union membership will approve)? Lastly, we added our own criterion – does it advance our desire toward creating a workplace that values social capital? Social capital is the powerful intangible driver that is proven to increase performance when teams of people work well together in focused and committed ways. An on-going discussion about professional capital and the work of the same name by Andy Hargreaves and Michael Fullan was started by the Superintendent in the spring last year at Summit. It seemed natural to bring it into negotiations where everyone has embraced the concepts.
Once proposals go through this test: Feasible, Beneficial, Acceptable, and Social Capital, then we draw up contract language to fit the proposal. If no contract language is needed we may create a consensus statement instead. Consensus statements are new to our team this year. These are concepts that we agree on, but which do not necessarily need to be written into the contract. For instance, we all agreed that teachers should regularly update grades on Infinite Campus. Our Union has always suggested that teachers do these updates every week or two, so it seemed as though creating a consensus statement might help reinforce this idea. In other words, it is a reminder to all that we agree on this issue.
We know that things may not feel as positive when we get to money issues, but right now both teams feel as though we are making progress in these talks. It is a way to get important issues out for discussion in a civil manner, looking for good solutions to issues that cause problems. It feels to me like an extension of the work that our Union leadership does all the time in working with the central administration when problems arise. We have talks all the time about things that need to be addressed. My hope is that we will work through our issues and be able to come to you with a quality product full of proposals that will help us all work better. I know I tend to be optimistic, but it is what keeps us going.
Fraternally,
Ari Klein