Gilroy
– Teachers and the Gilroy Unified School District are inching
closer to a tentative contract agreement.
After more than 30 meetings between GUSD and the Gilroy Teachers
Association since their contract expired June 30, 2004, both groups
met again Monday to negotiate salary and health benefits in closed
session.
Gilroy – Teachers and the Gilroy Unified School District are inching closer to a tentative contract agreement.
After more than 30 meetings between GUSD and the Gilroy Teachers Association since their contract expired June 30, 2004, both groups met again Monday to negotiate salary and health benefits in closed session.
“We’re kind of at status quo,” said GTA president Michelle Nelson. “We need to decide whether to accept their offer.”
Since last July, the terms of the collective bargaining agreement have carried over until a new contract is ratified by both teachers and the school board.
According to Nelson, the district will only cover a percentage of the premium for Kaiser users, which 40 percent of the teachers have.
“Teachers want better working conditions and they want salary and health benefits comparable to other districts in the area,” Nelson said.
In March, the GTA proposed a 2-percent salary increase for the 2004–05 school year. The district refused the increase. At Monday’s meeting, the district did not budge on providing a salary increase, Nelson said.
The last time teachers received a pay increase was November 2003 after 18 months of bargaining with the district. They were awarded a 3-percent increase by a mediator after both sides failed to come to an agreement.
There are 10 school districts GUSD competes with for jobs including Morgan Hill Unified, Milpitas Unified, Salinas Union and East Side Union, Assistant Superintendent of Human Resources Linda Piceno said.
According to December 2004 data, GUSD ranked last in average teacher salary after adjustments made for out of pocket expenses. East Side was first at $65,939 and GUSD lagged behind by more than $11,000. Morgan Hill was sixth with $57,103.
Piceno was uncertain if additional surveys had been conducted that would affect the results of December’s findings.
The GTA did not quote a desired salary increase, she said.
Both sides are still waiting for state data regarding health care costs to determine the formula used to calculate salaries.
The GTA’s Health and Welfare Committee is meeting June 1 to discuss the data. The next negotiations meeting is scheduled for the following day.
“We’re very hopeful that we can come very close to signing off on a tentative agreement,” Piceno said. “It’s quite possible that June 2 we could reach a tentative agreement.”
Piceno felt Monday’s meeting was productive and that both sides were nearing a settlement.
However, even if both sides agree to the terms of the new contract, both the teachers and school board must vote independently on the agreement.
“I always refer to it as our contract because both sides are represented,” Piceno said. “It’s as much our contract as theirs.”
Another issue for both sides is the wording of some articles within the contract including teacher evaluations.
In future negotiations, the district would like to see substantial changes in sections referencing safety and class size.
Additionally, since the legal opinion from the district’s lawyer was revealed earlier this month regarding the Day of Silence protest April 13, in which teachers participated during class time, wording in articles regarding creative freedom also will be discussed.
But Nelson remains skeptical that changes to the wording will help.
“How can you have a language and then not adhere to it?” she questioned, about the school board’s May 19 vote to implement all day kindergarten at Eliot School despite a vote by Eliot staff against waiving their contract.
“To me, (the language) seemed very black and white,” she said. “When Las Animas voted for a contract waiver it was fine, when Rod Kelley voted for a contract waiver it was fine, when Rucker voted for a contract waiver it was fine. When Eliot votes no, all hell breaks loose. … The trust is gone.”
The GTA still has reservations about the cost of health care premiums and the district’s teacher evaluation policy.
“How can we make sure the intent is just to help each other and not putting teachers in the position of evaluators?” Nelson asked.
Though teacher observations are not supposed to be included in the district’s evaluation procedure, some teachers still believe they are used for this purpose, Nelson said.
The district, however, insists that is not their intent.
“We are not interested in having teachers participate in teacher evaluation,” Piceno said. The goal she explained, is teachers providing feedback to other teachers.
“There is still, I feel, a mistrust in where the checklist goes,” Piceno said. “We don’t want a copy of that. But there is still a feeling that that goes into their evaluations.”
Piceno said she has never seen any evidence or documentation that this occurs.
Currently, the forms used by administrators to evaluate teachers are blank and open–ended. After negotiations, a new form will be used that includes state standards so evaluators have guidelines to follow, Piceno said.
Non–tenured teachers will also have their first evaluation completed by November 1, she said.
“It’s a good thing in terms of teachers getting feedback much sooner,” she explained. If teachers are not meeting state instructional standards they can be notified earlier on than in years past.
Despite some remaining questions by the GTA, Piceno remained optimistic about their next meeting.
“Both sides have kept the goal that both sides can reach an understanding,” she said.
