ESTA UPDATE

East Side Teachers Association/CTA/NEA 888 So. Capitol Ave San Jose, Ca 95127 March 4, 2003

Don McKell, President Julie Pratico, Vice Pres Carla Holtzclaw, Secretary Ralph Giannini, Treasurer

mckelld@esuhsd.org fax: (408) 272-7569 voice: (408) 272-0601 x213

DISTRICT BUDGET REPORT

Superintendent Joe Coto gave a 20-minute report to the February 13 meeting of the East Side Board of Trustees in which he outlined in broad strokes his plan for coping with the impending budget reductions.

Coto began by admitting the difficulty in anticipating the exact amount or precise targets of the cuts that will eventually emerge from Sacramento, and then estimated that East Side will have to trim its 03/04 budget by an amount between $5.5m and $8m compared to the district’s current 02/03 budget. Key savings amounts in Coto’s budget cutting plan were:

� Summer School (less prep time,

fewer admin and support personnel) $2,800,000

‚ Administrative/Classified reductions $1,600,000

ƒ Categorical cuts/shifts $ 200,000

„ Current year savings $1,000,000

… Non-personnel cutbacks

Travel $ 50,000

Dues/Memberships $ 25,000

Energy Efficiencies $ 200,000

Herrera money $ 200,000

† Certificated staffing allocation

reduction (from 26.1 to 28.4) $2,160,000

Total proposed reductions: $8,235,000

If each of these savings measures is implemented, item † in the list above will have the most profound impact on ESTA members and students. In essence, it calls for increasing most class sizes next year by as many as two students, which is certainly a bargainable issue. Increasing class sizes, of course, does not in itself cut costs. Assuming for the sake of discussion that ESTA goes along with this plan, one result of this change will be a reduction of 39 certificated FTE.

The best news coming from the superintendent’s presentation was a public reiteration of the district’s unwillingness to issue March 15 "pink slips" to staff. Under current Ed Code, a district must notify both permanent and probationary certificated employees in writing on or before that date if it intends to release them for budgetary purposes or program curtailment. No such Ed Code protection exists for the nearly 200 Temporary teachers in the East Side. However, based upon Coto’s comments that: (a) student enrollment is expected to increase by 240 next year, and (b) normal annual attrition (retirement, resignation, non-renewal) from the certificated ranks will bring about a reduction of at least 80 staff members, it appears as if nearly all of the 198 Temporary Teachers in the district will be offered contract renewals by the end of this year. In fact, the district will likely hire scores of new teachers.

Coto did mention that 26 current employees will not be offered renewal contracts, citing "performance-based concerns". This is a slightly elevated number from recent years, but does not seem to be the result of any cost-saving motivation.

SUPERINTENDENT SEARCH

In a previous Update, I wrote a description of the process that had been outlined at the February 6 school board meeting for selecting a successor chief executive officer of the district. My opinion was that the selected secretive process would have essentially disenfranchised most employees in the district from playing a meaningful role in the search for a new boss, in addition to introducing other concerns.

The most compelling rationale for moving forward with the secretive process was its ability to provide absolute confidentiality to potential candidates. The principals in the search firm asserted that it was their practice to seek out sitting superintendents in well-managed school districts who might not actively be seeking a job change. From a pool of such persons, it was argued, would come the best candidates, but many would be reluctant to have it become known in their present districts that they were being recruited to relocate. As persuasive as that argument is, it still left too unpleasant a resonance of secrecy for comfort.

I spoke with the presidents of the other bargaining units in the district and discovered that each had the same misgivings. Then, at a meeting of the ESTA Assembly on February 12, that body directed me by a unanimous vote to inform the Board that ESTA would not participate in the process unless it was altered. Thus, on the evening of February 13, I joined with representatives of nearly every labor group in the district to address the Board in protest. In an historic moment, four individuals rose together to voice their concerns to the Board. I, speaking on behalf of ESTA, was joined by John Molina, the President of the local chapter of CSEA (classified), Bernie Olmos, President of the local ACSA charter (administration), and Forrest Nixon, President of the SJFT (Adult Ed).

Members of the Board were torn, and it was clear that most believed that the process being protested was a good one – perhaps the best. But the massed concerns from such a diverse and significant selection of speakers ultimately brought about a compromise in the selection process. After much discussion, Craig Mann made a motion that a committee of six delegates (ESTA, CSEA, ACSA, AFT, parent, student) be formed to interview the group of four to six finalists brought forward by the search firm. The motion passed by a 5-0 vote.

Issues of confidentiality still must be worked out. In addition, Board President Manuel Herrera stated that he had been assured by the existing search firm that it would withdraw from the process if its fundamental tenet of secrecy were not agreed to. Thus, the entire process will likely be delayed as a new search firm is sought out. As we see it, a delay of several weeks may not be a bad thing, but it was certainly not the goal of what we were seeking. I applaud the entire Board for its willingness to back away from its previous position, and look forward to the job ahead.

CERTIFICATED ABSENCES

For just about as long as we can remember, teacher absences have been accounted in 0.2 day increments. Miss a period? Cost you 0.2 sick leave days. Miss two periods? Cost 0.4 days. Miss all five of your periods? Cost you 5 x 0.2 = 1.0 days.

In the days when all schools’ schedules were for six period days, and all teachers taught five classes, such an accounting process made pretty good sense. But these days, an increasing number of schools have adopted seven period days, and even those that haven’t have a wide variety of hybrid bell schedules to accommodate collaboration, testing, assemblies, class blocking, meetings and so forth. Over the past year, ESTA began seeing a larger number of what we found to be inequitable treatment of member absences. One example was a part-time teacher at a block-schedule school who was charged 1.2 sick days for missing one day of work, but only 0.8 sick days for missing the next day. Another example was the teacher who was charged 0.2 sick leave days for missing a 30-minute class on a special testing schedule day. As we looked into the problem, it became apparent that policies seemed to be different at various sites, and the beleaguered principal’s secretaries had became the final arbiters of how to do teacher attendance accounting.

In an effort to make the system more equitable, we undertook to meet with the district and cobble together a solution that could at least be consistent from school to school. We began by asserting that "a day is a day", and no one should lose more than 1.0 sick leave days for missing a day of work. We then started to look at the teacher workday as being seven hours long, not five teaching periods long. After some negotiating, we arrived at an accounting system for tracking certificated absences based on fractions and multiples of 0.14 days (1/7) rather than 0.2 days (1/5) that looks like this:

 

 

This accounting system will not be retroactive, but will be tried on a pilot basis for the duration of the current contract. If bugs show up, we’ll either fix them or agree to revert to the current system.

There will be no changes for full-day absences, or for final exam days, or in the amount of compensation that members receive for in-house substituting. We also anticipate no changes in local policies dealing with teachers who either miss their prep periods while on school business, or miss collaboration meetings. And of course, your lunch period is still yours to spend anywhere. The biggest changes that most members will see from this pilot program will be a reduction in the sick leave dock for missing a single period, and a bunch of strange decimal fractions showing up in sick leave balances.

MARCH 20 RALLY

March 15 carries profound legal significance for most California school employees. If a teacher is either Permanent or Probationary and is in danger of losing his/her job due to either budget cutbacks or elimination of certain programs, the school district must serve notice, in writing, on or before March 15. This protection does not cover Temporary teachers, who work one-year contracts from year to year.

In a recent report to the East Side school board, Joe Coto flatly stated that this district will be issuing 26 non-renewal notices, arising out of "performance con-cerns" and not budgetary reasons. However, by some accounts many of the other 32 school districts in this county will be issuing "pink slips" or "layoff notices" to perhaps a thousand teachers before March 15.

If true, this will be largely a callous political maneuver as much designed to influence ongoing bargaining in those districts than being a response to actual events. In response, CTA is planning an outdoor rally at 4:00 p.m. at Cesar Chavez Plaza in downtown San Jose for the afternoon of Thursday, March 20. Concerned teachers, parents, and students are all encouraged to come to rally in support of a legislative agenda that preserves the four CTA cornerstones of education finance we have been lobbying for these past few months: � preservation of the Base Revenue Limit, ‚ full funding for Special Education, ƒ full funding for schools of greatest needs, and „ a continuation of class size reduction programs.

Whether your job is secure or not, I urge you to plan to attend the rally. Support our most vulnerable colleagues from largely K-8 districts in their time of need. All of the major news outlets will be there, and a strong showing of support will go out on the 5:00 news to a million households in northern California. Our lobbying efforts are having an effect, but we’ve got to nail the lid on the coffin of the Gray Gov’s across-the-board education spending cuts and there’s no better way to do it than getting political in public.

COTO BID FOR STATE ASSEMBLY

Superintendent Joe Coto has informed the board that he will not seek an extension to his contract with this district beyond May of this year, thus bringing an end to his 14-year term with East Side. The search for Coto’s successor is underway.

Meanwhile, Coto has announced that his plans for the future include seeking election to the California State Assembly in 2006 as a representative from District 23. That post is now held by Assemblyman Manny Diaz, who will be barred from seeking reelection at that time due to term limits.

As I see it, Coto should be a natural for Sacramento. He has always been a politician of sorts, and is well connected into the pathways of power that rise from this city and county. Since California is obligated to spend at least 40% of its funding on K-14 public schools, it makes great sense to send a representative to the Capitol who has spent his entire career in the education system. I can think of no individual who would be a better ally in budget matters than Coto.

A motion to support his candidacy was brought to the ESTA Assembly last month, but was tabled until after the filing deadline. It is my hope that we reconsider that action this month, and make a decision to give our unqualified early support to the Coto candidacy.