What middle school are you talking about? Please don’t tell me Willard. That would just be the loser/promotion scam that has been going on for years.

The rewarding of a plum district assignment to a middle school principal for coercing teachers to phone bank for Yes on Measure G is unethical and corrupt. Hey, but that’s the SAUSD way.

If a state takeover is the only way to get out from under this over inflated administration, then so be it. Compton Unified seems to have survived that take over and I don’t read much about problems there anymore. This has gone way beyond test scores and ‘it’s for the kids’. It isn’t for the kids anymore, its for the greedy administration.

#10

Anyone with a right mind will hire outside lawyers instead of counting on the unions. SAEA has done some positive things, but CSEA hasn’t shown me anything. Every legal case I am aware of by an employee was won using a private attorney. One of the real problems is Risk Management. They lose about every case they fight, and they fight them all to the tune of hundreds of thousands of dollars in lawyer fees.

I am extremely disappointed in Jane Russo’s lack of leadership on this. So many employees feel duped and tricked by these shady tactics.

I hear even the Borellis have retained an outside attorney. And they are near the top of the union food chain, as far as reps go.

You’re spot on about the contracts and that’s why a state takeover might be the best “solution” at this time. It’s drastic, but it’s time for CHANGE.

All contracts, the unions and the BoE are dismantled. SAUSD is already a Year 3 Program Improvement District.

In the meantime, the best “solution” is NOT to vote for Richardson or Hernandez this November – they are part of the problem and the not the “solution.” Noji is also a big part of the problem, but she’s not up for re-election this cycle.

I don’t know how far down the administrative command these contracts go, but those not under contract need to be strictly reviewed and eliminated or reduced in pay.

Mijares may have started this mess but it was the boards obligation to review and monitor what was going on. Even during the last big cut Mijares took a 10% pay cut, but obviously this new bunch under Russo don’t have that kind of ethical thinking. They would rather take it out on lowly classified and teacher assistants. Nice bunch.

We can only thank the board for allowing it to happen.

SAUSD’s financial problems are from previous years of mismanagement, fraud, embezzlement, pilfering, theft, etc. It’s finally caught up with them, and unfortunately, the folks responsible are long gone. Yes, the state budget has had an impact, but there are many other districts that are surviving quite well.

The creation of all-encompassing part-time positions is a sign that layoffs are imminent, says Margie Strike, labor representative with the California School Employees Association, which represents the affected employees. The district, she says, has violated state labor laws by not negotiating with employees before proposing to eliminate their positions.

Officials pulled a similar move late last year, she says, when they created two new part-time positions to replace full-time special-education instructional aides. The new part-time jobs resulted in the gradual layoffs of 177 full-time employees. The union filed an unfair-labor charge with the California Department of Labor against the district June 11, protesting the unusual way the layoffs were handled. The charge is still under investigation.

I wonder why CSEA took over 6 months to file an unfair labor charge for those first 177 employees. I’m sure those first 177 will be glad to know CSEA woke up when the numbers went up high enough this time to make it worth the trouble.