In Alameda, the maintenance and janitorial staff is represented by Local One. The four year contract effective June 30, 2003, was approved in September, 2004.
Under existing law, unions are allowed to distribute updates regarding negotiations using school mail boxes. With assistance from the California Teachers Association, four school districts teacher unions have file suit to expand what can be distribute into mailbox. The union wants to distribute election related materials.
Teacher Negotiations - 2006
June, 2007
on June 15, the District issued a summary of the tentative agreement for the ten day review period prior to the June 26th BOE meeting.
In a Letter to the Editor Lincoln Middle teachers voice their opinion to the Board of Education.
In a Alameda Sun Letter to the Editor Earl Rivard's respond to Paul Mahler letter. The Alameda Sun covered employee reaction to the tentative agreement and publish an editorial titled Teachers Deserve a Living Wage.
On June 11, Earl Rivard, President of AEA, issued a letter to the AUSD Board of Education, Ardella Dailey, Superintendent and Brandon Krueger, Chief Negotiatior titled: Tentative Agreement Ratification.
On June 8, the District issued a Fact Sheet of how the tentative agreement would impact a teacher salary over the term of the contract.
On June 7, the District issued the following communications to its employees:
We are pleased to announce that Alameda Education Association membership voted last night, with an 85% affirmative vote, to ratify a new 3-year employment contract for teachers effective July 1, 2006. The terms of the contract include 0% in the current year (2006-2007), a 2% raise in 2007-2008, (1% raise effective July 1, 2007, and 1% raise effective January 1, 2008) and a 4% raise in 2008-2009 (3% raise effective July 1, 2008, and 1% increase toward Health and Welfare benefits effective December 1, 2008).
The next step in the contract ratification process is final approval by the Board of Education. A summary of the proposed contract terms will be presented at the June 12 meeting and the Board will vote at the June 26 meeting. Updates will be available on our district web site and notification will go out to employee group leadership for further communiciation.
As with all compensation (salary and benefits) increases negotiated, the terms of this new 3-year agreement with regard to raises will be implemented equitably for all Alameda Unified School District employees. Other employee group leaders will be contacted and asked to facilitate a process to determine the distribution of the compensation increases for their membership. The Fiscal Services and Human Resources will work together to provide all employees with a detailed summary of the agreement and how to calculate the impact on individual salaries.
We are very grateful for the hard work and commitment to our employees, by both negotiating teams, AEA members, Board of Education, the AUSD Executive Cabinet, district management, and community, that has brought us to this point in the process.
Alameda Journal reports on the teacher approval of the contract on June 7.
KCBS reports on the ongoing vote by the teachers on June 6, 2007. Alameda Sun also reports on the ongoing teacher vote.
May, 2007
In a Alameda Sun Letter to the Editor Paul Mahler counters Earl Rivard's letter from 5/17. The Alameda Journal covered the announcement of the tentative agreement.
On May 29th, AUSD issued the following communuication to its employees:
As of about 8:00p.m. on Friday, May 25, AUSD and AEA reached a tentative agreement on a three-year contract effective July 1, 2006 and continuing through June 30, 2009. At this point, AEA is making arrangements with its membership to proceed with a ratification process, scheduled to take place within the next week. If the AEA membership ratifies the tentative agreement, the Superintendent would then make a recommendation for approval to the Board of Education.
The Alameda Sun recapped the teacher demonstration at the May 24th BOE meeting. The Alameda Journal also covered the teacher demonstration at the May 24th BOE meeting. In addition, the Alameda Journal published a Guest Commentary by Ann Casper titled: Alameda must provide fair wage to teachers.
The Alameda Sun recapped the first mediation sesson in the May 17th issue. In the same issue, AEA President Earl Rivard sent a letter to the Editor titled: Where's the Support?. President Rivard also sent a Letter to the Editor for the Alameda Journal titled: Money talks, except for AUSD.
On May 16, Brandon Krueger issed the following statement via District Email:
First mediation session with AEA is productive, collaborative
The bargaining teams for the district and the Alameda Education Association (AEA) met with the neutral state mediator for eight hours on Thursday, May 10. The session was productive and collaborative as both parties reviewed their positions and background information with the mediator. A second mediation session has been scheduled for Friday, May 25.
The Alameda Sun and Alameda Journal covered teacher rallies as mediation starts.
The District issues an informational letter on base revenue limit funding.
AEA President Earl Rivard sent a letter to AEA members titled: Complexities and Subtleties that responds to parent concerns about AEA informational practices.
April, 2007
On April 18, the State Mediation and Conciliation Service has appointed Seymour Kramer as Mediator to work with AUSD and AEA in the mediation stage of impasse.
The initial (orientation) meeting with the mediator is set for Thursday, May 10.
On April 13, PERB issued a determination (received by AUSD on April 16) that impasse exists between AUSD and AEA and that a mediator will be assigned to work with the parties.
- PERB has contacted the State Mediation and Conciliation Service (SMCS) to assign a mediator.
- AUSD is looking forward to working with the assigned mediator who will facilitate a process intended to assist in both parties coming to a tentative agreement.
- If a mediator determines that both teams are still unable to reach a tentative agreement, the teams move to a fact finding process. In fact finding, a representative from each negotiating team and a neutral fact finding party work through a process with the intention of reaching a tentative agreement.
On April 5, AEA filed request for impasse from the Public Employees Relations Board (PERB) .
AEA President Earl Rivard sent a letter to the Board of Education titled: A Question of Simple Justice and a letter to Superintendent Dailey titled: Your Three R's.
The Alameda Sun and Alameda Journal published news article about teacher's request for a declaration of impasse. Meanwhile other school districts struggle to meet union demands for salary and benefits increases as this San Francisco Chronicle news article points out. The Alameda Times published news article about the declaration of impasse.
March, 2007
The District issued a press release detailing AEA intent to request impasse from the Public Employees Relations Board (PERB). A ruling is expected in April. In addtion, the District issued its March 2007 update.
The Alameda Sun published a news article about negotiations.
AEA provides its members Negotiations Update dated March 1st. AEA members receive a letter dated March 5th, from their president, Earl Rivard.
February, 2007
AEA provides its members with a funding update as well as a pop quiz and a Negotiations Update.
The District issued its February 2007 update on their website.
January, 2007
The District issued its January 2007 update on their website.
December 2006
District Communications sent December 4, 2006
The District issued its December 06 update on their website.
Representatives from the Alameda Unified School District (AUSD) and the Alameda Education Association (AEA) are in the process of negotiating a new employment contract, retroactive to July 1, 2006. AUSD and AEA negotiating teams have met four times so far during the school year: September 20, October 5, October 20, and November 14.
From now on, following each negotiation session, the District will provide an update on the status of proposals made by the District to the Alameda Education Association.
The first District Negotiations Bulletin begins with November 2006 attached. The November Bulletin includes the District's Core Values, developed by the Board of Education and the Executive Cabinet, in order to provide a guiding foundation for the decision-making process used by the negotiating team.
Negotiations Bulletins will also be availabe on the District website, www.alameda.k12.ca.us under the link, Negotations Updates.
February 2006
Contract negotiations between the District and the Alameda Education Assocation (AEA), begins when each side submits their initial proposals for public input.
At the February 14th Meeting, both sides presented joint openers. This is a dramatic shift from past practice where the opener process was done separately. The Board accepted the openers.
At the April 11th Meeting, the District requested Article 10 - Transfers be added to negotiations. The Board approved the request.
Teacher union seeks mail access
Union wants to use slots provided by districts for endorsements before elections
By Shirley Dang, Hayward Daily Review, November 28, 2006
In a debate that pits electioneering laws against free speech, California's largest union has launched a legal battle to permit political endorsement on public grounds.
State law ensures teachers unions the right to spread the word on contract negotiations and grievances using campus mailboxes. However school districts typically ban partisan politics from the rectangular receptacles, to the chagrin of unions.
"We view that as censorship," said Priscilla Winslow, assistant chief counsel for the California Teacher Association.
In conjunction with local union affiliates, CTA has filed four unfair labor charges with the state Public Employee Relations Board over restrictions on teacher mailboxes, long considered off-limits to election endorsements. In Contra Costa County, the Mt. Diablo Education Association turned in a complaint earlier this month. Teachers in Long Beach and Yuba City schools made similar charges.
A legal complaint stemming from San Leandro has wound its way to the state Court of Appeal, where the case is pending.
If union lawyers successfully reshape the reading of the law surrounding teacher mailboxes, the CTA could gain significant political advantage by creating a legal way to influence its 340,000 members where they work.
But, "when it comes down to it, is this really a proper use of a school mailbox?" said Garry Mathiason, attorney for the San Leandro school district.
The Mt. Diablo Education Association, which is affiliated with CTA, filed a charge with the labor board Nov. 13. The board is a quasi-judicial agency that makes decisions in labor disputes. The Mt. Diablo teachers union claims the district violated the Educational Employment Relations Act when it barred teachers from distributing campaign material into teacher boxes and demanded teachers move cars off campus if they displayed endorsement signs.
Administrators did not object when the union supported passing a school construction bond, said Mark York, executive director of the education association, or endorsed candidates in prior school board elections.
"We're not doing anything different than we've ever done," York said.
Lawyers for the state labor board will review the labor charge to decide whether it has merit. The district has a chance to respond by mid-December.
"We will vigorously oppose the unfair practice charge," said Greg Rolen, in-house lawyer for the Mt. Diablo school district. "The state of the law as it stands is currently in our favor."
The state labor board has historically sided with school districts, citing Education Code statutes that prohibit public school funds, services, supplies or equipment from being used to promote a candidate or measure.
However teachers unions are calling that reading of the law into question by taking its complaints from the labor board to the courtroom.
After the labor board dismissed labor charges by the San Leandro Teachers Association in 2005, CTA petitioned Alameda County Superior Court to review the mailbox complaint through the lens of free speech protections.
In May 2006, Judge Winifred Smith ruled in favor of the union, citing the California Constitution.
"Barring speech simply because it is political is prohibited as a content-based restriction," Smith wrote.
According to Smith, the labor board and school districts have misread the Education Code governing public funds and campaigning. The statute was designed to prevent school districts from using public money on endorsements, Smith argued. If unions produce and distribute partisan fliers on their own time, little to no public money has been spent.
"Here, the 'use' of public funds is nominal, at best," Smith writes. "The mailboxes exist. There is no cost or use of public resources over and above the normal costs of the mailboxes which is incurred by the District on account of SLTA's use of the mailboxes."
Mathiason, lawyer for the San Leandro school district, said since relatively few have access to school mailboxes, the district has a legal right — and obligation — to monitor the contents.
The union contends that labor law grants unions special access to mailboxes, meaning the district cannot call the shots on what messages get through.
"It's our soapbox," Winslow said, "and we maintain that we can say anything on that soapbox."
Send mail to mikemcmahonausd@yahoo.com with
questions or comments about this web site.
Last modified: July 30, 2004
TOP
Disclaimer: This website is the sole responsibility of Mike
McMahon. It does not represent any official opinions, statement of facts or
positions of the Alameda Unified School District. Its sole purpose is to
disseminate information to interested individuals in the Alameda community.