The District and the teachers union, the San Carlos Teachers Association (SCTA), have been unable to reach a mutually-acceptable agreement on contract terms this year. The District needs to reduce costs and/or increase revenues by $2.85 million for the 2010/2011 school year, which begins July 1st. As part of that restructuring, the District has been looking to reduce the cost of the teaching staff by $1 million. Proportional reductions are being sought from all other District employees. In addition, the Board has cut various programs and eliminated a number of district office positions.
The negotiating process has involved direct discussions between the two parties, as well as discussions overseen by a state-appointed mediator. When all of those discussions failed to reach an agreement, a three member fact finding panel was appointed. One panelist was appointed by the District, one was appointed by the SCTA, and a neutral 3rd party chairperson was appointed by the California Public Employment Relations Board.
The fact finding panel held hearings earlier this month, where both the District and the SCTA presented data and arguments. The neutral 3rd party chairperson issued his report on June 22nd, validating the District’s need to improve its financial situation overall by $2.85 million. The report also endorsed the District’s aim of reducing spending on the teaching staff by about $1 million.
You can read more about the District’s and Board’s reaction to the fact finding report at www.sancarlos.k12.ca.us/letter-from-the-board-on-negotiations/. An FAQ on the current state of negotiations is also available at www.sancarlos.k12.ca.us/negot_faq/. A PDF of the neutral 3rd party chairperson’s report is available at www.sancarlos.k12.ca.us/wp-content/uploads/fact-finding2010.pdf.
I sincerely hope that the District and the SCTA are able to come to an agreement. I don’t like the idea of reducing teacher compensation, but as a trustee I must safeguard the District’s financial viability. That’s not to have money in the bank, but rather to avoid losing control of the District. Because a state takeover — which can easily happen if reserves get too low and some unforeseen shock hits us — would severely damage our excellent educational program.