UPDATE: Comments on this thread are now closed. The new 2009 thread is available at this link.
I wrote a post on July 16, 2006, entitled “SAUSD corruption coming out with Mijares gone,” and it blew up to over 2,000 posts. However, it exceeded the capacities of our server and has been truncated recently at about 1,529 posts. But one of our readers has stepped up to the plate and painstakingly copied all of the comments into four NEW posts:
- SAUSD-Mijares corruption thread, 2008 Comments
- SAUSD-Temporary Thread (Migration 5/16/2008) Comments
- SAUSD-Mijares corruption thread, 2007 Comments
- SAUSD-Mijares corruption thread, 2006 Comments
Also, don’t forget you can go to the right sidebar of any page page and search for “SAUSD” to get links to ALL of our past SAUSD stories.
I have been honored that this blog has allowed so many people to vent their frustrations with the SAUSD administration and school board. We will continue to shed light on these issues and I hope that our readers will continue to use this blog to communicate about the corruption at SAUSD.
SAUSD does not belong to the administrators or to the school board. It belongs to us. We will have an opportunity this fall to take back the school board, with three seats opening up. I pray that good candidates will emerge so we will be able to do exactly that. Until then, please keep the comments coming! But post them here, to this new thread. Thank you.
http://saeanews.wordpress.com/2008/07/01/tuesday-july-1-2008/
As of 2PM today, nearly 1153 delegates from around California have registered for the NEA-Representative Assembly. Fourteen delegates are representing teachers from the Santa Ana Educators’ Association. These 14 delegates were elected by site representatives throughout the Santa Ana Unified School District.
New delegates Rhonda McKanna, Karisa Botch, Mary Ann Ford and Susan Leyva attended the ‘New Delegate Orientation’ and came away excited about their first RA.
The first two California Caucuses were held and everyone was introduced to the various members of the different committees and boards that direct CTA and help CTA members during the RA.
Delegates are looking forward to attending tonight’s California Night with entertainment provided by Capitol Steps.
There has been some speculation on how the many teachers who had been RIF’ed, then were un-riffed.
There was a meeting before a judge to determine the legality of what the district was attempting to do. Attorney, Ernest Ching was in attendance because some of the teachers had retained his services to attend that meeting. He asks the district’s Chad Hammitt about legal issues surrounding the essential firing of so many teachers. (Lopez hides out on this big meeting. Hey WHY do we need to pay Lopez’ salary when Chad is doing all the heavy lifting?)
Essentially, SAUSD has been receiving title I monies, categorical funding and class size reduction monies. The “leaders” who oversaw the taking of this money from federal and state funding sources cannot just dismiss teachers and counselors who helped students who qualify for these funds.
A break was taken. The school district’s attorney confers with Ol’Chad. The teachers are told to report back to their worksites.
Additional recent OJ threads associated with SAUSD:
(previous board of education member in SAUSD, Nativo Lopez)
1. Nativo Lopez backing Barack Obama. Art Pedroza
2. OC Weekly outs sneaky SAUSD administration’s plot against instructional aides. Art Pedroza
(Current SAUSD Board of Education member, Rosie Avila)
3. Rosie Avila wants you to learn English! Art Pedroza
For outside assistance, I reccomend Ernie Ching. I’ve used him and I am aware of several other employees that have retained his services. He is quite familiar with SAUSD and some of their more notorious practices. He is a good reference to keep in mind. Especially if you are working at one of the “problem” sites that feature unwanted huggers, stalkers, freaks and double dealing union assassins.
Law Offices of Ching and Associates
160 S OLD SPRINGS RD #280 – ANAHEIM, CA92808 0000 714 637-9888 ERNEST F. CHING (OWNER) LAW OFFICE
I forgot to mention the rest of the cast of special characters who are problematic and protected by Juan Lopez-
Well-known screamers, harassers, frauds, liars, untrained incompetents, system cheaters, mentally compromised, bigots and discriminators.
With SAUSD HR, you just never know when you’re going to need real legal assistance to thwart some serious nutjobs who are hired, protected and promoted by Juan.
http://www.ocregister.com/ocregister/homepage/abox/article_2085833.php
Santa Ana’s Youth of the Year works for an ‘Angel’
Candice Price, a 17-year-old who started a school club in memory of a friend, received the city’s first ‘Youth of the Year Award.’
SANTA ANA – The story behind this city’s first-ever Youth of the Year begins with a sleeping baby – a little girl with a shock of dark hair, a big personality and not nearly enough years left to live.
The youth of the year is a quiet 17-year-old named Candice Price who loves hockey and spends her weekends cleaning cages at a nearby animal shelter. She first met Karlie – the baby with that crazy shock of hair – a few years ago, watching over her as she slept.
Their parents were close, and so Candice often found herself babysitting little Karlie. They would play in the sand at the beach, or watch movies at home and dance to the music as the credits rolled.
Karlie called Candice, “Candi.” And Candice called her Angel.
“She was so perfect,” Candice says now. “She was like an angel.”
But Karlie had cancer, a type called neuroblastoma that targets only children. She was still a toddler when she moved into a room at Children’s Hospital of Orange County. She cried the first time Candice visited her there.
After that, Candice almost never saw Karlie out of bed. The little girl with the big personality still smiled on her good days, but she lost the dark hair that she had since she was a baby.
She was so tired the last time Candice saw her that she fell asleep with a slice of pizza in her hand. Her parents tried to move the pizza, but Karlie woke up just enough to tell them, “No.”
As she left that day, Candice put out her hand for a handshake. Karlie lifted herself up, took her hand, and smiled.
Karlie Kijima-Halsne died last spring. She was 3 years old.
Candice learned that her friend had died when she logged onto Karlie’s hospital page during her chemistry class at Segerstrom High School. She made it through the rest of the school day, went home and did her homework, trying her hardest to find comfort in routine.
But that night, as she tried to fall asleep, all Candice could think about was the smiling little girl she called Angel.
Soon, she was filling out paperwork and posting flyers for a new club at her school. Its purpose: To make “cards of inspiration” for the sick children at CHOC – “to help the kids, to motivate them, to give them hope,” in Candice’s words.
Its name: Karlie’s Angels.
Dozens of Segerstrom students have participated in the club since it started last year. They sent more than 100 handmade cards to the children’s hospital for the holidays, and they’re beginning to raise money for the next batch.
Candice is going to be a senior next year. She gets mostly A’s at school, and her parents keep her report cards taped to the wall next to the front door. She wants to attend UC Davis and study to become a veterinarian.
The Santa Ana Youth Commission gave Candice the city’s first Youth of the Year award last month. It’s a glass trophy, etched with the words: “In recognition of your accomplishments and the excellent example you have set for other youth to follow. You make Santa Ana proud!”
The Santa Ana Youth Commission plans to name the next ‘Youth of the Year’ in December. The city will send nomination forms to schools and youth organizations later this year.
Contact the writer: 714-704-3777 or dirving@ocregister.com
The following is an article forwarded to John Palacios’ email group. If you are not currently on his email list (all email addresses are kept private) and you would like to subscribe to it, please contact him directly: jpalacio@pacbell.net
If you live in Santa Ana and you care about the schools and school district, if you are an employee of SAUSD, or if your children attend the SAUSD schools, then you should consider being kept in the informational loop. SAUSD has agenda and transparency issues that affect us all. It’s time to wake up and get organized to thwart these dishonest cuts.
From the email:
Special ed cuts total $7.6 million for Santa Ana
District says reductions are needed to balance budget, but parents and teachers worry about their impact.
By FERMIN LEAL THE ORANGE COUNTY REGISTER
SANTA ANA In the past six months, Santa Ana Unified School District has cut about $7.6 million from special education programs and services.
District officials say the loss of instructional aides, psychologists and other services is needed to balance the budget, but many parents, teachers and others say the deep cuts will hurt the neediest students the most.
The district, with an enrollment of 54,000, has 4,689 special education students. Last school year, it spent $80.8 million on special education, or 16 percent of the budget, according to state and district data.
Trustees approved about $1.3 million in cuts to special education last month. Since December, trustees voted to cut a com- bined $7.6 million from special education primarily by eliminating 177 instructional aide positions.
In addition, the district will stop outsourcing many special education services to save money, including a deaf and hard-of-hearing program that had been operated by Newport-Mesa Unified. Three psychologist positions will also be cut.
Santa Ana Unified trustee John Palacio said cuts in his district are the most severe in the county.
“This district is balancing the budget on the backs of our special education students,” said Palacio, who has repeatedly voted against budget cuts that include cuts to special education.
The instructional aides losing their jobs work with mild to moderately disabled students enrolled in regular classes. The aides provide more personalized support to special education students and help them better understand lesson plans and other concepts, while regular teachers focus on the other students.
District officials will create 208 new instructional aide positions to work with these same students, but the employees will work fewer hours per day, at lower salaries and with no medical benefits. The new aide jobs, which will likely include many of those who lost their jobs and reapplied, will work 3.75 hours daily instead of six hours.
The reduction of hours and loss of benefits will place the district on par with what most other districts across the county offer for similar services, said Doreen Lohnes, the district’s director of special education.
The 205 instructional aides who work with severely disabled students would not be affected by the budget cuts, officials said.
Parent Tomasa Sanchez, whose autistic son attends Valley High, said the cuts to special educations could lead to more lawsuits that will end up costing the district more in the long term.
“If our son’s education suffers, we won’t have many other options,” she said. “We just want what’s best for him.”
But Superintendent Jane Russo has said that all special education students will still receive all the services and resources they are entitled to, regardless of district’s budgetary issues.
Special education at a glance
How many: About 1 0 percent of California’s public school students qualify for some type of services.
The law: Federal and state laws require that all students with disabilities receive a free and appropriate public education in the least-restrictive environment.
Funding decline: In recent years, state and federal funding has decreased for special education, meaning local districts often have to absorb a higher portion of costs.
Hear ye, hear ye — where’s Socorro Baron? A well placed parajito says she’s gone.
Any word on who was tapped to be the new principal at Segerstrom? Villa?
“But Superintendent Jane Russo has said that all special education students will still receive all the services and resources they are entitled to, regardless of district’s budgetary issues.”
Failure is unacceptable…
Instructional assistants and other SAUSD classified employees face deep job cuts. OJ links to the stories as they develop:
SAUSD classified employees target School Board Members. Art Pedroza
SAUSD school board balances the budget by slashing special education. Art Pedroza
Well, the board voted! 3 to 2 to cut classified. And they lied about the seniority ability of employees mattering in the placement of said employees. It’s every man for themselves in this district, unless you are at the district office, which of course means your car allowance is not in jeopardy.
It all seems to come back to CSEA doesn’t it? The district is not honoring negotiations, not honoring seniority rights, and generally not doing much about it either. They had a year to defend the first 177 employees cut to part time and only recently have filed a labor complaint. With that kind of rapid response those laid off this week should hear something in about two years.
It’s a shame that the CSEA president, Ralph Sandoval, only cares about himself and his cronies. Interesting that his position remains untouched. He’s just as shameful as the board and district admin.
Too bad CSEA unit members had to find out at the July 8th Board meeting that their jobs could have been saved had the union been willing to negotiate with the District by choosing the lowest health care option. I heard CSEA did not negotiate whatsoever. Doesn’t sound like the right people are looking out for our best interests.
Putting another positive spin on SAUSD, Fermin “Feelgood” Leal has struck again in the OC Register about what all the measure G money is going to be used for. Right now it’s hidden on the education page and will probably pop up in the Santa Ana section in a few days. You can read it for yourself at this link.
http://www.ocregister.com/articles/district-measure-voters-2090119-santa-officials
What makes this story interesting is another link in it where you can review school by school the work that is to be done with measure G funds. That link is:
http://www.ocregister.com/ocregister/news/education/article_2090104.php
Although this little chart is vague in some areas, the first thing that jumps out at me is at least 1/3 of these schools already had major interior renovation under the measure C funding including wall mounted TV’s and supposedly upgraded technology.
The next part that caught my attention was so many of the newer schools needed work. For example; Esqueda needs upgraded technology and upgraded air conditioning (at least the X is marked there). The school is about 5 years old??
Thorpe is only a few years older and needs new play equipment? Griset, recently built, already needs tech upgrades? Segerstrom, probably in one of the safest parts of towns needs security cameras? Why not the crime ridden schools in mid town?
That is just a quick overlook and I’m sure those who are working on campus can think of things more of a priority than security cameras for Segerstrom. What about Thorpe and Greenville, only several blocks away?
In short this is not a laundry list of mandatory repairs, it is a list of convoluted repairs based on God knows what. All these roof repairs on recently renovated schools? Anyone wonder how many will get a little Henry’s patch and bill the district for a whole new roof? Unbelievable.
#415
Sadly, you’re correct, only God knows what any decision(s) are based on in SAUSD.
I agree, the list looks like a thrown-together “rationale” for using millions of dollars.
Let’s look at just one area: the replacing of playground equipment.
I count eight elementary schools getting new playground equipment. Don’t get me wrong, I fully support safe playground equipment being available for every student. Yet, I share your concern/wonder over why several “newer” schools (like Thorpe, only ten years old) are on the list to get new play equipment when other district schools are DECADES OLDER and haven’t EVER had new equipment. For instance, the staff at Wilson (THIRTY-SIX year old school) have been asking for new/safe playground equipment for years and received nothing.
http://www.kaboom.org/tabid/285/CurrentPlaySpaceID/3136/Default.aspx
Could it be WHERE the school is located in the city that is the primary reason why money is spent there first?
I share your reaction that this list is haphazard and offer that it may also be politically prioritized.
#416
Where a school is located? That seems like a good theory combined with the fact that Joe Dixon was hired from CUSD to oversee the control of the measure G money. (of the CUSD Taj Mahal fame)
This under trained and under qualified new administrator has had since March 4th to learn all about the district and its needs. It appears to me instead he has learned all about the board and superintendents desires. Anyone that would dream up putting money into a school less than 5 years old in preference to a school 35 years old certainly confirms his incompetence; or shall we say he has learned the SAUSD way of doing business. Citizens enjoy your tax bill.
Ralph Sandoval, Hector Vizcaino, David Mendiola, and Ralph Flores.
Here are your Classified bargaining members.. who screwed all of you…
Ralph Sandoval, is a grounds keeper here.. check the grass next time you are around.. he spends more time across the street at the taco place than here..just ask Rankin.
Hector Vizcaino, takes 4 hours to do an hour job as a telephone tech.. out of business services.
David Mendiola, Librarian at Villa, spends 95 percent of his day doing errands for Sandoval. He also spends the rest of his time working on union business… so he says..thats his excuse for not tending to the needs of the students…
Ralph Flores, guard at Santa Ana high..goes around most of the day.. telling classified not to worry because they are still in negotiations..
WHAT NOW, RALPH..are u still negotiating..
So,
next time you are around any of these schools don’t forget to stop by and say thanks.. to your union leadership.. for such a great job…
THESE ARE THE GUYS TO HELPED THE DISTRICT WRITE, PASS AND DISTRIBUTE THE LAY-OFF NOTICES..GREAT JOB GUYS… WAY TO GO
IMPASSE
Ralph Flores is a puppet to the other Ralph..
He told me not to worry dat the district could not fire us until they finished negotiating. I received by layoff notice 4 days later..
every time I looked for Ralph, he was never available. He would always be doing something to stay out of my site.
I got the impression, he was avoiding me..
He was. His buddies told me
I guess dats my fault for listening to someone who thinks Ralph Sandoval is the best thing dat could happen to Santa Ana Unified..
Santa Ana High
I’m not defending CSEA or any of the local leaders because after 3 districts and 20 plus years I’ve seen various levels of effectiveness of the union. SAUSD-CSEA just happens to be the worse I’ve seen.
Ralph is only one of many CSEA people that ran around telling employees that the district has to negotiate before the district can do anything.
Your first clue should have been last year when 177 assistants were layed off. The Union did nothing until recently when they filed an unfair labor practice but only after the district intended to lay off hundreds again this year.
You might want to read the contract under “management rights”. The language is a little confusing but I suspect the district has been acting based on that part of the contract. Of course a judge will have to figure it out, but CSEA has to file a complaint first and they seem mighty slow in that department.
A story about Mr. Hernandez:
SAUSD School Board President fires his aunt, who raised him. Art Pedroza
Speculation involving Carr middle school’s principal, Mr. Patrick:
Will Joe Dunn take out Bustamante – or will it be “Mr. Patrick”? Art Pedroza
Here’s a little blast from the past. Despite many concerns and problems, SAUSD’s Board of Education rehires past Superintendent Mijares. January, 2005
http://articles.latimes.com/2005/jan/26/local/me-mijares26
By Joel Rubin
January 26, 2005
Al Mijares, the longtime superintendent of Santa Ana schools, was given a three-year contract extension Thursday.
In a 4-1 vote at a packed board meeting, Santa Ana Unified School District trustees asked Mijares to remain as district chief.
The decision came despite recent calls by teachers union officials and some parents for his replacement.
“I am grateful and overwhelmed by the kindness that the [trustees] and the public have demonstrated,” said Mijares, 51, who is in his 10th year as superintendent.
His current contract expires at the end of June.
Before the trustees decided Mijares’ fate, they listened to dozens of speakers, most of them parents, addressing his tenure, said Lucy Arajuo-Cook, a spokeswoman for the district. Many who addressed the board favored extending Mijares’ stay, she said.
But the superintendent has faced criticism in recent weeks. Citing mostly fiscal concerns, the district’s teachers union this month withdrew its support for him and pressed trustees not to renew his contract.
Union President Tom Harrison portrayed Mijares as a poor leader who heads a staff that mismanaged several projects and miscalculated student enrollment projections.
The mistakes contributed to a $29-million budget shortfall, Harrison said.
Others have defended Mijares, saying he could not be held solely accountable for the district’s financial problems. County education officials and some trustees have praised him for stabilizing the district’s $500-million annual budget over the past year.
Details of the new contract were not available. Mijares currently receives $200,000 annually.
No one cares, particularly not CSEA. They left the negotiation table, which gives SAUSD the right to go forward. Where was CSEA legal counsel? What were they thinking? ( I wrote to CSEA corporate office several months ago and received no response.)
Board members, don’t start whining when the campus restrooms are dirty, the classrooms are dirty, the garbage piles up, the graffiti takes over, more fights break out, safety officers aren’t available, school police is busy, theft and burglaries increase, and teachers can’t teach because they have no help.
#423 I dont know who told you that about CSEA but its not true. If you didnt get a response its because you wrote to the wrong place, CSEA doesn’t have a corporate office and everybody there returns every phone call, every email and every letter and it never takes months to get a response unless you dont give an address to respond to. In fact the membership in SAUSD has been getting a lot of support from the staff at CSEA.
I do agree with you about the people who are responsible for what has happened to the employees at SAUSD and that is the SAUSD Administration. If the Administration is telling the School Board that they can do this without suffering service shortages to the children and parents of the community then they are lying!
I feel sorry for all the community members who have gone to work for the School District (about the largest employer in the city) over the years and worked above and beyond what the job described and the law required (like being paid for all hours worked) because they wanted to do what the children required. These folks never asked for much, most even refused to be involved in their union because the District would take care of them and treat them fairly.
Now those who were told “organize with us to make the union strong” by the union over the years are complaining because the union isnt stronger than it is. “Its all CSEA’s fault” they say, all the union can say is “I’m sorry, perhaps if we had been better organized together this would not be happening now. So please come join us and help make the union strong.” Unfortunately, its much easier to find fault than to work for change so some of you will only complain. For those that are still willing to work for change I think joining with your CSEA brothers and sisters is the best thing you can do.
#424
Boy have you gulped down the CSEA kool-aid. CSEA is only as strong as the LRR that represents it during negotiations. The LRR currently makes a lot of noise, tells the local chapter what they want to hear and goes home. “They can’t cut us without negotiation”. Wrong! Last year proved that. Only now, a year later, has CSEA acted on behalf of those first 177 with a labor dispute. It finally took hundreds more to be layed off before they got around to the first 177. How long will it be before the LRR gets around to doing something with this latest group losing jobs, or benefits or both?
Your post was funny. CSEA doesn’t have a corporate office, BUT everyone there answers every phone call. Which is it? They do or don’t have a corporate office? They DO have a regional office in Orange. Good luck on a response. I’ve known many that have had non responsive calls or e-mails.
Read the management rights page in the contract. It basically gives away the farm under certain conditions. Read the government code section mentioned on that page, GC 3543.2. You might notice that all those bargaining rights are specifically for CERTIFICATED employees. No where does it mention classified or even confidential employees.
Possibly case law exists that has included classified employees under this section, but I can’t find it anywhere in the Ed code sections that are referenced. But I’m not a lawyer either.
Wake up and smell the coffee. The district agreed to a contract they knew they could break anytime they wanted. SAEA had their lawyers get in there and shove it back down the districts throats.
CSEA so far has made some small noise but is obviously outclassed. Face it. Even if CSEA actually wins a labor charge down the road a year or two, all the fired or reduced employees will be elsewhere or working for no benefits.
The truth is you have an incompetent LRR who thinks she is a lawyer and she isn’t. Look at the results and don’t give me this unite crap. Every employee left standing with a job isn’t going to risk the axe after what the union has failed to do. That is what the LRR is for!
You have some real balls calling for unification without naming yourself and it is obvious why. You are as worried about losing your job as the next classified employee. Don’t bitch about people bitching if that is as much faith as you have in the union. Obviously you don’t or you would have a name on your comment. I know I don’t.
Really? I wrote an email to Rob Feckner. Never received a reply and my return address was readily available.
There is a serious breakdown in communication with CSEA. Part of CSEA’s responsibility is to “organize”. Whine and complain? Damn straight, that’s why I pay dues to CSEA, so that I have a voice. I’ve paid my dues, showed up at meetings and nothing happens. I hear a lot of talk and no action. I pay dues for CSEA to perform the “action” part. If CSEA did everything they could, we haven’t been told about it.
Could CSEA have filed an injunction to prevent positions being decreased to ten and eleven months? I don’t know, nothing was ever communicated. Why isn’t there legal counsel at some of our meetings? Particularly the meetings about cuts and layoffs. Maybe I’m just “out of the loop”, busy doing my job!
#426
You are not out of the loop. Every classified employee is including the local representatives. The LRR, Margie Strike, has not only dropped the ball, she has dumped the district. Unlike some other LRR’s she only has SAUSD to deal with and she can’t handle it.
Local CSEA executives (such as they are) need to go up to the Orange office and talk with the chief executive, Pat Priosio and find out why Margie Strike isn’t doing her job. Since she took over the district representation the classified employees have been getting screwed She is obviously incompetent.
Previous LRR’s, Gates, Leash and others never let it get this bad but one of those clowns agreed to the contract the district is now taking advantage of exploiting. Obviously Strike doesn’t have what it takes to fix it.
I suggest you contact Pat Priosio and push this mess onto him. In fact I suggest you flood his e-mail and see if CSEA wakes up or if it’s time to fire this union.
While I understand that the problems of CSEA are far more severe than those of the SAEA, the one thing you can count on is that the district has figured out that there really isn’t any teeth in anyone’s contract. They know there are no consequences for breaking the contract. If there ARE consequences, they will not occur for years and the consequences will never cost them even close to the amount they saved by ignoring the contract. SAUSD is operating like a little kid with a “What are you going to do if I dont’?” attitude towards its’ employees. They know they have broken the contract with regards to class size for years now, but because contracts are usually written in “good faith” rather than with spelled out consequences, they continue year after year to pack in the classes. They know they have scheduled a 5 hour day for summer school teachers and are paying teachers 4.5 hours, yet they got away with it last year, so they do it again. Until there are clearly delineated consequences in our contracts they will continue to be just a bunch of words.
#424
Unions have grown increasingly soft over the years. The reps survive by catering to the needs of the employer. The bulk of the union fees collected don’t go to help support the local worker. Fees most often go to PAC causes and union bureaucracy at the top of the union- much like what happens at the top of crummy organizations like SAUSD.
Both unions should be ashamed at their lack of representation and their lack of planning. They have cost many employees their jobs. The classified union, in particular, is a sham.
The claim that when you call the union they will call you back – always -is a big lie. Those cowards will sandbag at any given issue and members must be persistent by leaving multiple messages. For the most part, the top union officials are corrupt and unwilling to help.
It’s too bad that we have not found a law group to take a class action suit against the unions. They certainly deserve the poor exposure that a suit would reveal. If you are currently sending in union dues, you are wasting your money. Neither union is worth a damn.
#429
You are dead right. I’ve watched CSEA for 30 years. Back in those days, they were not a “closed shop” so no one had to join. But CSEA was out there doing some pretty good things for the employees. The big whine though was that the non union members were reaping the benefits that the union was obtaining for the membership. The answer? Closed shop. That is always the first indication your union is on the slide because once you have to join them, then they don’t have to do anything but count the union dues.
I haven’t looked into this for years, but their used to be a clause that if you didn’t want to be in the union you still had to pay the dues but you could force them to send the money to your favorite charity and the union didn’t get it. That may no longer be the case but I wonder if it is. If it is I wonder what would happen if most of the union members decided to send their dues to their favorite charity instead of CSEA. I’m sure they probably plugged that hole by now, but if the union lost a half million dollars a year I bet they would take notice.
Union busting is a nasty business. CSEA needs to be busted. When they affiliated with the AFL-CIO that was my clue it was only going to get worse. I take no pleasure in being correct in that opinion because so many in this district alone have suffered. I can only imagine what it is like statewide.
‘I wonder what would happen if most of the union members decided to send their dues to their favorite charity instead of CSEA.’
Um… too late. The union just sold out a huge portion of their membership. Those layoff notices are really rolling in now.
Paying Union dues is a waste of time in so many ways. In the olden days, the union actually held portions of those wage dues in case of a strike, or in the current situation, in case of unemployment. The union, itself, provided some of the members a kind of safety net. Think that CSEA has a war chest like that for their employees- some who have been around for 20+ years – getting laid off?
20 years of paying dues. For what? Certainly not job security.
The cat is out of the bag as far as instructional assistants that have seniority – the union is talking with the district to place displaced IA’s in the Severely Handicapped positions available.
Here’s a suggestion: If you have a good amount of seniority, you have a desire to work with persons who have disabilities and you don’t mind changing a few diapers and feeding a student, you might want to consider making the union place you in those positions.
Many of those IA positions were given out as cherry picked positions by site administrators. The SH IA’s get a larger paycheck and stipend.
Here is the thing you need to know: The district requires NO specialized training for these IA’s. They are required to take a CPR class and some don’t even bother to do that. But there is absolutely NO training difference between regular instructional assistants and those who were generously placed in the protected SH positions.
It is hard to believe that that SH IAs only need a cpr card to deal with SH students. But with SAUSD nothing surprises me. A former SH IA that had the good sense to move to another district last year before all this really hit the fan, said that part of his routine duties (which he was trained and certified for) include cleaning cholostomy bags, clearing and cleaning breathing equipment as well as the diapers and feeding of these kids.
I got lost in all the back and forth. Weren’t these jobs also cut below benefit level hours so in basic terms they do not get benefits or retirement, or am I just confused?
From what I was at least led to understand… a few IA positions to work in severely handicapped classrooms were not getting their hours cut. That would lead a reasonable person to believe it means those positions would be full time with full benefits.
However, if I were an IA in a severely handicapped program I would want some type of assurance that not cutting hours for those jobs did actually mean they would be considered full time positions including benefits.
The way the district has been “interpreting” the contract and the law who knows. All of this goes into the same bucket as the district’s creative accounting.
Another case in point would be the hours teachers are required to teach summer school this summer and the hours for last summers. The union never did give us any answers from last summer as to how the district got away with not paying the teachers for the hours they worked. The union said they would get back to us and that was last September. Never heard from them again on the issue even when inquiries were made throughout the 2007-2008 school year.
When I saw that teachers were not being informed again this summer as to the summer school hours when applications to teach had to be turned in I figured the district was going to pull the same stunt. I did not send in my application to teach summer school for that very reason. I just don’t trust the district or the union at this point. To me, withholding information in this circumstance was the same as lying.
In addition, at least at Willard, the only 2 summer school classes being offered were math and language arts. Mind you, not language arts for ELL students. Teachers who applied for language arts but had taught ELL classes (including last summer’s ELL classes) were told they could not teach this summer because the district was not offering any ELL classes only language arts classes. Aren’t the vast majority of students at Willard ELL students?
Such creative interpretation!
A class action suit would be a welcome event.
Teachers and IA’s (those who are left) should truly join together and ONLY do those duties within their job descriptions and NOTHING at all extra. I am fed up with those “do it because it is for the good of the students” and “be a team player” statements. Sometimes you have to step back and realize if you are the only ones being fair or being dedicated you are being played, swindled, and taken in by a bunch of con artists.
Let the district find out the hard way that the people they let go, made their jobs part time with no benefits or forced into retirement because of the reduced hours and no benefits are actually people who are vital for the good of the students and makeup the core of the team.
#434 said:
Teachers and IA’s (those who are left) should truly join together and ONLY do those duties within their job descriptions and NOTHING at all extra. I am fed up with those “do it because it is for the good of the students” and “be a team player” statements. Sometimes you have to step back and realize if you are the only ones being fair or being dedicated you are being played, swindled, and taken in by a bunch of con artists.
Let the district find out the hard way that the people they let go, made their jobs part time with no benefits or forced into retirement because of the reduced hours and no benefits are actually people who are vital for the good of the students and makeup the core of the team.
I agree. But to be really effective all classified personnel should join in with certificated personnel and limit the performance of their duties to the letter of their job descriptions. If we all stuck together it would make a difference.
You are absolutely right, #435.
I stand corrected. We must all be unified.
OCTA has a union.
UPS has a union.
SAUSD has a union.
I say strike.
No one show up for registration in August. They can ignore 100 people at a board meeting, but they can’t ignore 500+ people striking in front of the D.O. the first day of school registration.
Hit where it will hurt the most.
Summer school hours are in arbitration right now (from last year’s grievance). Apparently the district decided that if they corrected the situation for this year’s summer school, it would be an admission of guilt for the current arbitration. So summer school teachers continue to be paid for 4.5 hours while they work 5.
I guess I am just stupid because I don’t understand what needs to be arbritrated. If you work 5 hours, you get paid 5 hours. What is the district claiming? Unpaid breaks or lunch or what?
Our silly CSEA contract gives us two 15 minute paid breaks and a half hour unpaid lunch. I don’t know what SAEA’s contract says. The obvious question is what the discrepancy over the 30 minutes is all about. Maybe I missed it.
I don’t think they really have an argument other than the fact that they gave us a 20 minute break instead of a 10 minute break because they can’t feed the kids in 10 minutes. I believe, although I’m not sure, that legally for 5 hours we would get a 10 minute paid break. Even if you give them the 10 minutes, they still are not paying for 20 minutes per day. I have no idea why they have decided to continue this grievance and see it all the way through. I really can’t see a situation where they would win on this one. But of course on it goes over one year later.
This is the way the district responds to everything. Even if they have to eventually give teachers back pay, their rationale is that they have the money in the bank earning interest in the meantime.
It’s a shitty way to treat teachers. Just for once, I would like to see the district step up to the plate and treat employees respectfully.
We used to get paid for 4.8 hours for summer school and we actually were scheduled for 4.8 hours. The word is that this bit of sneakiness came from Pat Machado last year and no one knew until they received their paychecks (when summer school was over).
Hmm. Well at least your union is fighting even if it is over 10 or 20 or 30 minutes. As I said I don’t know the SAEA contract. Our contract provides one 15 minute paid break per 4 hour shift and a non paid 30 minute lunch for anyone working 5 hours or more. It almost sounds like the district is trying to apply that 30 minute non paid lunch half hour to the 5 hour summer school teachers. Possibly this is why I didn’t quite understand what the hassle was over.
Can anyone actually verify that Jane Russo is getting a 4% pay raise? I found that comment outrageous, if true. Some details supporting that claim would be great. thanks.
to #443
They initially did call it a 30 minute unpaid lunch which was news to teachers, especially since it was a 20 minute break at 10:00 am. I guess that’s the argument they are sticking to. During the regular school year teachers also receive one 15 minute break and are required to have a 30 minute uninterrupted and unpaid lunch break (although at some schools lunch is longer than that). Since we are on salary, our day is considered 6 hours long. Summer school is now 5 hours and we are being paid 4.5 hours at 5/6 are regular hourly rate.
Anon Teacher
Appreciate the clarification. I can see where the fight is. You are not only getting ripped for your full salary, but another half hour at that.
At the very least you should get your full salary. Since it is only a 5 hour day versus a 6 hour day, maybe the 20 minutes for lunch versus a 30 minute lunch would be reciprocal. I would hope your union would at least try to get your full pay back and make it a 20 minute lunch, but at least I understand now what you are talking about.
Look at the up side. Your union fought for you.
Anonplus, I am happy that the union is fighting this. The 5/6 salary contractual, the district has tried to change it numerous times by offering a flat hourly rate to everyone, but then they wouldn’t be able to find teachers.
Is it true that Cheryl Weaver is the new principal of Villa? If so, that’s wonderful news for Villa.
#408 In answer to your question regarding Socorro Barron, heard that she was assigned to teach at Willard Intermediate.
Any news from Segerstrom regarding their new principal?
I would have to differ about the lunch issue. We teachers only get a 30 min lunch break, but really only 20 min. Some of us have student in the classroom still or come in to ask questions. What are we supose to do, eat in front of them? We should get paid for our lunch time, besides were working. It’s not like we have time to go and get something to eat or if we do it’s very quickly in our cafeteria. Don’t get me wrong, I love to give my students the help they need, but we teacher need a mental break. We need to refresh our brains. I would like to have a full 30 min lunch break without being interupted.