With dozens of teachers’ jobs on the chopping block, the
teachers union is looking for ways to strengthen their contract and
save the district money.
With dozens of teachers’ jobs on the chopping block, the teachers union is looking for ways to strengthen their contract and save the district money.
After escaping layoffs for the current school year, teachers are bracing themselves for unpleasant news next year, Gilroy Teachers Association President Michelle Nelson said.
“I am anticipating layoffs for next year,” Nelson said. “We’re hoping for the best and preparing ourselves for the worst.”
During past discussions, trustees hinted at eliminating small class sizes in lower grades to close next year’s budget gap, which could be anywhere from $1.5 to 4.5 million; larger classes mean fewer teachers. Trustees will discuss the issue further after the governor’s proposed budget comes out in January.
Currently, the district receives $1,071 from the state for every kindergarten through third grade student enrolled in a class of 20 or fewer students. Reorganizing those nearly 3,500 students into classes of 25 could help the district cut 35 teaching positions. Boosting the class sizes to 30 students would slash nearly 60 positions.
But even if trustees increased kindergarten through third grade class sizes from 20 to 26 students per teacher – effectively eliminating 40 teaching positions – the district would only save $521,000, according to district figures, because it would lose out on the state incentive for small class sizes, Superintendent Deborah Flores said.
“The savings don’t end up being as much as it initially appears,” she said.
Boosting class sizes by only two students per class at higher grades could produce savings of $232,000 in fourth and fifth grades and $348,000 at both the middle and high school levels, according to district data. However, that could mean as many as 36 students per class in high school.
“We’d like to have limits,” Nelson said of class sizes.
The only grades with limits in the teachers’ contract are fourth and fifth grades. If the district adds a 33rd student to one of those classrooms, it owes that teacher an extra day’s pay per quarter, Nelson said. The district also can’t add a 35th student to a class unless that teacher gives his or her permission.
“When you get past 35, it gets a little hairy,” said Nelson, adding that some instructors teach as many as 40 students at a time. “We think 32 is a reasonable number.”
If the district hands out pink slips this year, which is likely, they will go to the district’s beginning teachers, Flores said.
Teachers also want better health benefits. Historically, the district has been low in terms of salary but “middle-of-the-road” when it comes to benefits, Nelson said. A Gilroy teacher starts off with an annual salary of about $44,000 compared to first-year teachers in Los Altos, who earn close to $60,000, Nelson said. However, Gilroy’s cost of living is one of the lowest in the county, with a median home price of $352,638, compared to $1,373,724 in Los Altos, according to RealtyTrac.
“We don’t want to lose ground,” Nelson said. “Because we have trouble attracting people because of low salaries, one of the reasons (prospective teachers) like Gilroy is because our benefits aren’t bad.”
The union has requested the district kick in about $42,000 toward reducing teachers’ out-of-pocket expenses – “a very modest proposal,” Flores agreed – which increased 165 percent this year for the Kaiser plan, Nelson said. Last year, teachers paid $76.38 monthly for family coverage. This year, before negotiations, a Kaiser family plan costs $202.84 each month.
“Maintaining the status quo in this budget climate would be a win,” Nelson said.
Ninety percent of the district’s general fund budget pays teachers’ salary and benefits, Flores said.
“That’s why we always end up talking about cuts that affect people’s positions,” she said.
While the district awaits a budget from the state, Nelson is working to negotiate a contract with few monetary impacts. Even though salaries are “always on the table,” the teachers union is asking the district to take a closer look at several items that are relatively inexpensive, including the terms surrounding after-school programs and the district’s early college academy, technology, the district’s student assessment measure, the school calendar, class sizes, health benefits and co-teaching.
Although the union and district haven’t broached the topics of after-school programs and the Dr. T.J. Owens Gilroy Early College Academy, Nelson said teachers simply want to firm up the responsibilities and duties expected of those teachers. For instance, if a student damages any property in a teacher’s classroom that’s being used by another teacher for an after-school program, teachers want it spelled out in the contract who is responsible for fixing the damage, Nelson said.
Solidifying next year’s school calendar is another non-monetary item that needs more attention, Nelson said.
As for technology, teachers want to be able to access information on the Internet for lectures or class projects that is sometimes blocked because of the district’s Internet-use policy.
One of the most hotly contested topics is the district’s student assessment measure, which led to a line of teachers taking the microphone at a recent board meeting to oppose the program. Earlier this year, the school board approved a $26,190 contract with Intel-Assess to access that company’s Web-based student assessments.
“If the district doesn’t have enough money to give us more toward benefits, why are they spending tens of thousands on this program?” Nelson said Tuesday.
Nelson said the books the district recently adopted have adequate tests incorporated into the lessons. Scrapping the contract with Intel-Assess would save $26,000 annually.
“We’re all after the same thing: What is the best test for the money?” she said. “We shouldn’t have to pay an arm and a leg when you can just get it for an arm.”
Flores said the district is looking into teachers’ concerns about the assessment measure and will present an update to the school board Jan. 7.
Finally, the union and district are taking a closer look at co-teaching, a practice piloted at Christopher High School this year. True co-teaching – when general and special education teachers split duties with the intent of integrating special education students into the general population – is “too expensive” when considering the extra time and effort that goes into preparing for class, Nelson said. If the model being piloted at CHS goes districtwide, “there’s no way we could afford it,” she said. If the district adopts a less costly model, Nelson said teachers want the duties of each teacher written into the contract.
