Well, we are in a New Year and we need to close up our 2008 SAUSD corruption thread before it becomes overwhelmed with comments. Consider this to be our new 2009 SAUSD corruption thread.
Click here to read our 2008 thread. And here are links to all our previous SAUSD corruption threads:
- 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
The results of last year’s SAUSD School Board elections were disappointing. The incumbents were re-elected. Shame on the teacher’s union for supporting them! And the one new Trustee, Roman Reyna, is not likely to make a difference.
The SAUSD budget is a mess and our Governor, Arnold Schwarzenegger, appears primed to make it worse. So this is going to be a very tough year. As always, this forum will be here to allow you to vent about what is going on at the SAUSD!
Al Mijares is long gone, but the corruption at the SAUSD continues unabated…
RV- I really don’t know much about other forums, but I am a regular at the IHB. Would you like me to ask one of the moderators a few questions and see if there is someone that could help or would that be premature? Let me know.
ant,
I think that would be great if you would do that. Art most likely is working today and will respond when he gets a chance. In my experience he’s always been agreeable to suggestions and assistance.
It would be nice to have a little mini-forum feature here. but I am not completely convinced that it is extremely necessary. I kind of go back and forth on it. Sometimes it is good to keep things simple.
I will check it out this week, I think you would be surprised at how much more involved people would get in a forum type of set up. It is possible to start very simply and let the categories expand as the need arises. As people become more involved you could invite those with specialties in various areas to become moderators and the task wouldn’t be so great. I think parents would be far more likely to become involved (and stay involved) if they had their own space to express their feelings and opinions. I think they get lost among all of the union talk as well as the seasonal talk (RIF’s in particular).
And we could avoid all of the wasted time waiting for the comments to load and then scrolling down. I have found myself wanting to find a particular post here but being unable to do so, it could be that this would actually simplify, rather than complicate things.
another anon teacher,
You make some excellent points. I hope that a solution can be found for a forum set up attached to this blog. Let’s see what Art’s ideas are because of this discussion. These threads have grown quite a bit in breadth since he first started them and it might be time for a change. Art?
😉
Another anon teacher,
Red and I are looking into the forum idea. Not sure if this is going to work with our software.
However, if any of you want us to put up a new post on a specific topic, you have but to ask!
And if any of you want to join our blog team, let us know. Then you can put up posts yourselves.
Thanks,
Art Pedroza
Editor
Orange Juice Blog
Maybe a few categories for comment under SAUSD like parent issues, elementary, middle school, high school. Just a suggestion, but a few general categories might help things become a bit more organized for the readers.
407…Good suggestion. Hey Art how about adding a section for Classified and Certificated. That way visitors can be able to filter out some things.
I 2nd that 408!good idea
We’re definitely getting some good ideas that will encourage more discussion and enable people to be more organized as they work for their own causes in the district. BTW, the union reps ratified the contract and it will be up for vote on Apr. 24th. Given the current climate, I think they did a good job of negotiating. No step/column freezes, no pay cut or increase and a small increase in benefits. We will be switching to Blue Shield from Blue Cross,how this works out remains to be seen, but I say good riddance to Blue Cross anyway.
Best wishes to all who were RIF’d, we are all hoping things will work out and not be as bad as it seems it could be. If anyone has questions about any details of the new contract, I believe I could answer them correctly here.
http://orangejuiceblog.com/2009/03/new-sausd-threads-debuting-on-the-orange-juice/
Thanks Art for posting new threads. I really appreciate the effort you put in for us.
Hello,
I love the idea of the new thread, but can it be posted on the right under the SAUSD Logo. There so far is no link there except the 2008,2009, and SAUSD news. Thanks a bunch.
#413,
Our webmaster is working on this. Thanks for your patience!
SAUSD teacher’s complaints to Obama about layoffs hits the AP wire
http://orangejuiceblog.com/2009/04/sausd-teachers-complaints-to-obama-about-layoffs-hits-the-ap-wire/#comments
Music program donations by the Mcleod Project:
http://themcleodproject.blogspot.com/2009/04/couple-of-friends.html
about a month ago i helped my internet famous friend, ian beckman, shoot a little music video for a thesis project this year. the project is titled couple of friends and the idea behind it is to create a fictional competition between music artists to stimulate the importance of creative education.
all the proceeds go directly to the santa ana unified school district who currently plans to dismantle their music program by 2010. so please, check out the page and vote for your favorite artist at:
http://www.coupleoffriends.com/
Layoff notices for 535 teachers were rescinded b/c the city is using a “rainy day fund” to stave off the RIFs. Too bad Santa Ana doesn’t have that kind of financial savvy and planning to do the same:
http://www.kcbs.com/San-Francisco-School-District-Rescinds-Layoff-Noti/2145607
The future retirees will not be so lucky if this new contract is ratified. The Future Retirees will be Eligible for benefits. Does that mean eligible to purchase.? Anyone hired after 10 years from the date of the ratification will be out the benefits that teachers prior to that date will get. Medicare will kick in and you won’t be covered until age 70 as the current contract read. This is becoming a two and three tier system district. Hope is does not go through back to negotiations.
Older teachers are not happy with the summer school and the after school program contract language either.Let’s hope we get a no vote and go back to negotiations. Too many variables in the future retiree Medicare is not being picked up by many doctors. It is silly to bargain away benefits when people are at their most vulnerable (Older age) ‘when they need the coverage the most. Also maybe it is time to get a professional negotiator instead of teachers.
Teachers who retire and have less than ten years as of ratification date WILL receive the same benefits until the date of medicare eligibility (currently 65), they will not have to purchase benefits.
So we’re losing 5 years of benefits, ages 65-70 if you were hired after 2000. With many doctors not accepting Medicare, that leaves a retiring teacher only two choices: Continue working, or purchase some kind of insurance to have alongside Medicare.
The district will be saving at least 5,000-8,000 dollars per year for those who are 65-70 years of age. Right now, you get retirement medical benefits until 70.
I’m sure the district will be saving a lot of money, however this cost savings is actually not measurable since it is a future cost savings measure. There are very few districts in the state that have any type of retiree benefit after Medicare eligibility. In fact, there are many district that only offer a cash amount to their employees and then let the employees find their own benefits. I’m not saying that this is a good thing, it was just on of the concessions that hurt the least. I’d like to know what everyone things we should have given up? We are not receiving a pay cut (aside from the possibility of losing 3 staff development days) and the step and column freezes have been dropped by the district. I honestly feel that by the time anyone is affected by this, our country will have made sweeping changes to all health care and this will not even be an issue. Employer paid benefits and medicare will have to change because they are bankrupting the country and employers.
What may happen is that teachers stay on working past traditional retirement age–past 64/65 in order to continue the more comprehensive medical insurance. What might also be a good point to consider is if the Union and District can go back 10 years on this (insurance) is that not setting a precedent. What will be the next topic of negotiating away after 10 years or less of employment. If you think about what we should have given up, we already have given up over a 4 % COLA one year ago, plus the .68 COLA.
This benefit cut is a huge deal for people who have 8 or 9 years in the the district and are in their late 40s thru 50’s It is 5 years of medical— I believe that the district is betting against “the sweeping changes to all health care” and have negotiated a major cost benefit to themselves. The union and its members might not want to count the nationalized health care chickens before they are hatched. The district isn’t.
If I’m not wrong we still pay into Medicare. Medicare benefits are not accepted by many doctors.
http://cache.daylife.com/imageserve/06QQ4Km2gid6B/610x.jpg
Isa de Quesada, a teacher at McFaden Intermediate School in Santa Ana, Calif. , who said she is about to be laid off, reacts after President Barack Obama answers her question at a Town Hall meeting at the Orange County Fairgrounds in Costa Mesa, Calif. , Wednesday, March 18, 2009.
Orange Juice Blog Entry:
Why not cut administrators’ pay and consultants before cutting teachers’ wages?
By Art Pedroza.
Hey,
Recently, I have seen a couple of particularly intimidating letters sent out by certified mail, care of Chad Hammitt. One was a letter of termination for an employee who had been out ill under a doctor’s care. The teacher’s administrator was not notified that this letter was going out to the teacher who was in the process of recovery, so that the teacher could be given a heads up to what was coming. What a costly, demeaning way to notify a valued employee of some bad news.
The teacher had to sign for the certified letter and was outraged that there was a termination date already determined. The teacher had not been previously notified of any kind of plans for termination. In the body of the letter, Chad notified the teacher that three copies of the notification to terminate were put in three separate employee files. When the teacher returned to work, both payroll and HR had to admit that the letter was a total mistake and the letter would be removed from all of the files.
Caution: MAKE SURE THAT YOU RECEIVE, IN WRITING, THAT THE LETTERS OF TERMINATION HAVE BEEN REMOVED BY CHAD HAMMITT. HE’S PRONE TO MISTAKES. HE’S A HOT HEAD AND HE GETS MAD WHEN HE GETS CAUGHT MAKING MANY OF HIS MISTAKES.
Anonplus has cautioned employees about the shoddy tactic of HR “papering” an employee out of their job. Make sure that this does not happen to you. If you are notified that you have derogatory letters or documentation in your files, contact the union immediately. Most likely it will be reversed as an administrative error.
How much does the district get charged for all the (unnecessary) certified mail they send out?
Extensive list of links and resources available. Excellent political contact links.
CA Teachers News OC By Jill Puich
http://orangejuiceblog.com/2009/04/educ/#comment-85336
Red- link doesn’t work.
I don’t like all these new links. It has split us all up into little links which the district just loves. Nobody knows what the other group is doing unless you go through all the links. In the long run this is counterproductive to airing the district’s problems.
Thank you, #429. I thought I was alone. I have visited this blog often, but it is getting so cumbersome that I think I am going to stop. It was much better the way it was before.
Yes, I agree with number 429 and 430. All we need is one blog for SAUSD. There are too many different links.
Horse’s mouth, I am not sure what the issue is. I think that Jill’s links page was very informative and would like to post it back up.
As for the mini-threads: I don’t like them, either. I think that there is enough cross-over in issues for all concerned readers/posters, that we should keep one main linked/thread.
We are not able to make forums with the current format, and based on the actual number of recent posts, I really don’t think that a forum is necessary. Someone else can start that up elsewhere, if they are inclined. 😉
I agreed to putting news and email blasts under a separate thread, after there were complaints that there was too much reading or too many long posts… whatever… so I made a news thread.
This is my proposal: Scrap all the new threads. Keep the news thread and keep the 2009 sausd thread. Cull all the posts from the mini-threads and paste them, by category onto the main 2009 sausd thread.
Comments are welcome.
RV – Your proposal makes lots of sense to me.
Red. Sounds good to me. I thought I was the only one that didn’t like the change too.
One thread to rule them all- I agree these multiple threads are cumbersome, I’m a bit sad to see how little parental input we get. Classified sure puts it out, middle school teachers are apparently too exhausted to post a single response?? We need a single SAUSD thread, news excepted.
Here are the comments from the “SAUSD Parent” thread. There were two:
1. The Horse’s Mouth Says:
April 7th, 2009 at 1:43 pm edit
Office personnel have been working as school nurse stand-ins since nurses were cut to 2-3 days a week. This is a time-bomb for medical insurance lawsuits, yet the district and the union(s) have done nothing. Parents should know about this… who will you tell?
2. tmare Says:
April 7th, 2009 at 6:39 pm edit
I know this issue is frustrating to all from administrators to parents. The certificated union has absolutely no say in this matter. From my experience in the district, parents are the only ones who can make a difference. Attend a board meeting and explain how important this issue is to you. Believe me, we all know how bad this situation has become
Here are the comments from the “SAUSD Elementary School” thread. There were five:
1. concerned parent Says:
April 3rd, 2009 at 11:10 am edit
I hope that the library workers don’t get cut any more than they already have! The “libraries” in the k-5 schools are a disgrace!
2. another anon teacher Says:
April 3rd, 2009 at 7:43 pm edit
From all indications, that is exactly what is going to happen. Let the district know how you feel about this. We are continually receiving money to buy books and supplies and yet we have no librarian or just part time library techs to manage it all. I have been told that the library techs are being asked to inventory everything during the last few weeks of school in anticipation of NOT having anyone to do it in the fall.
3. Wilson Elementary teacher Says:
April 4th, 2009 at 5:47 pm edit
Dear #1 concerned parent,
I don’t know the condition of other SAUSD libraries, but I can confidently say that the library at Wilson Elementary is beautiful and no disgrace due to the diligence of our amazing librarian, Naomi Esobedo. She has worked wonders at our site…nearly all of the thousands of books are new, there are inspiring murals (hand-painted by her and volunteers on their own time) adorning the walls, and everything is neat and in place. Please everyone, do yourselves a favor and come visit Wilson’s library. You’ll see what a dedicated employee can do for their school site.
4. concerned parent Says:
April 4th, 2009 at 7:31 pm edit
How much longer do you think Ms. Escobedo will have her job?
5. Wilson Elementary teacher Says:
April 5th, 2009 at 1:21 pm edit
Dear “concerned parent”,
Yes, you’ve asked the right question. Mrs. Escobedo is already dealing with having her hours cut back this year and very little funding for new books. She’s very worried about next year. I and many other staff members have pushed for SSC monies to cover her position/library, but we just don’t know what will happen next. It’s sad that the classified employees always take the biggest hit financially.
There were NO comments at the “SAUSD Middle School” thread.
Here are the comments from the “SAUSD High School” thread. There were twelve comments:
1. SAHS teacher Says:
April 3rd, 2009 at 6:27 pm edit
So how’re things going at the different high schools? Been pretty much no news after a lot in the past. I heard new Saddleback principal, Rob Laxton, though with the personality of Mr. Spock, has been a welcome reprieve from prior bosses of SHS.
2. shs teach Says:
April 5th, 2009 at 8:58 am edit
more like a combo of mr spock and mr rogers. but at least he is completely ignoring the fact that 15 of his faculty are getting laid off. but hey, what price do you have to pay to get the master schedule and school in general back into shape? teachers, counselors, and benefits should do… right?
3. SAHS teacher Says:
April 5th, 2009 at 10:29 am edit
It should be possible to determine the probablitlity for each rif’d high school teacher to be called back. A reasonable enrollment projection can be made, avg. class sizes have already been pushed up to contract max – even with J.Lopez’s bizarre averaging method. It should be possible to look at posititions lost, which and how many displaced teachers have appropriate credentials to fill rif’d teachers positions, and number of classes in each subject needed next year to arrive at a probablility for a given teacher to be rehired.
“Do I take a job elsewhere, or do I wait to be rehired?” For some this will be 95% certainty the District will need them, lower for others. District is supposed to make those decisions in May, but each year over the last decade (except the last 2 years) District grossly underestimated enrollment leading to ridiculous classroom crowding in September, with sign-carrying teacher protests followed by a flurry long-term sub hirings. I would expect the same this year, except we might have our own teachers to re-hire, but how do they make the decision to chance this? Do some of us have the experience to offer some help here?
4. curious Says:
April 6th, 2009 at 12:55 pm edit
Can someone please explain to me why pregnant teens have to go to their regular high schools and not a teen parent school? I have heard there are several pregnant students at Segerstrom. Doesn’t this normalize teen pregnancy?
5. SAHS teacher Says:
April 6th, 2009 at 1:29 pm edit
The problem would be money. The broad variety of classes needed at the high school level for students to graduate requires quite a large and diverse faculty. Limited budgets preclude a special high school with a relatively small enrollment.
6. Guest Says:
April 7th, 2009 at 1:48 am edit
Number 4 As a former staff member of Segerstrom I can confirm that pregnant teens do attend normal classes. Why I don’t know!
7. SAUSDTeacher Says:
April 7th, 2009 at 8:15 am edit
I think Saddleback has special accommodations for pregnant teens, like a parenting class. But yes, there are pregnant teens all over the place and it seems very normal in that when I see another it’s no longer shocking, more like an “oh, there’s another” type of reaction. There is small stigma associated with it, but since the majority of the community is anti-birth control, anti-abortion, and without proper sex ed, what is to be done? I actually had a hs student who asked me if a baby girl can get pregnant from a baby boy if they are in the womb together (fraternal twins) because they are sharing fluid. Looks like that abstinence-only education the board supports really works, right?
8. Anon Teacher Says:
April 7th, 2009 at 12:44 pm edit
Doesn’t Valley have a segregated teen parent building far in the corner of the campus? If ADA funds are the concern, then perhaps a portion of the school should have a designated teen parent classroom(s) away from the general population.
When I was in high school, once a student started showing, she was transferred to continuation.
As of this writing, I have 2 pregnant students (one is pregnant with her SECOND child), 1 married mother and 2 fathers. A few of my colleagues have a good number of pregnant FRESHMEN. The district needs to address this issue and abandon the abstinence-only approach.
9. Red Vixen Says:
April 7th, 2009 at 1:04 pm edit
SHS: http://visionweb.occourts.org/Vision_Public/DisplayHearingInfo.do
Case # 08CF3283
In progress.
10. tmare Says:
April 7th, 2009 at 6:50 pm edit
I didn’t realize that this was the norm at the high schools. Anytime a certain group is required to attend a specific school for any reason, the district has to provide free transportation. In addition to all of the costs for a Teen Parent program, the additional costs for transportation would also be prohibitive. Santa Ana is a large city and trying to provide transportation to students during the most congested times (before and after school) is very difficult. I would agree that the abstinence-only approach is a complete and utter failure.
11. SHSteach Says:
April 8th, 2009 at 12:07 am edit
SAUSD stopped teaching abstinance only ages ago when Sal Tinajero was on the Board and was the deciding vot. This was even though his mother was there to support the abstinence only program.
But there is a major problem.SHS has had about 50 pregnant students this year and very few are on track to graduate.
12. Red Vixen Says:
April 10th, 2009 at 8:27 am edit
http://www.ocregister.com/articles/students-report-santa-2359733-dropouts-year
Report: Santa Ana dropouts may cost community $105 million
Full Register story posted in the News link at OJ.
Here are the comments from the “SAUSD Classified Employees” thread. There were twenty-six comments:
1. Classified on the Frontline Says:
April 1st, 2009 at 7:18 pm edit
Thanks Art for posting new threads. I really appreciate the effort you put in for us.
2. Classified on the Frontline Says:
April 1st, 2009 at 7:31 pm edit
Does anybody know whats going on with CSEA? I hear that certificated are voting on health insurance like blue shield but what about us? I honestly don’t have faith in our union. There is a serious lack of communication and unity. If we were all truly “united” the district might actually take us seriously. Instead of throwing an unfair labor practice for dso’s and custodians why don’t they defend everybody? Why does the district office have people with 12 months while people with less get the cuts? Lets keep in mind who is behind the operations at the school sites.
3. Art Pedroza Says:
April 1st, 2009 at 7:32 pm edit
#2,
You are most welcome! I am also a teacher. I am an adjunct instructor at Cerritos College – and I am a member of our union too (American Federation of Teachers, which is part of the AFL-CIO).
4. another anon teacher Says:
April 1st, 2009 at 8:07 pm edit
As a certificated person I can only answer from our perspective. I am trying to learn a little more about your contract and those issues affecting you. All I do know is that the district is switching to Blue Shield for the HMO and PPO that we pay for, eliminating Blue Cross. This is a district decision and not something we can negotiate. From all indications, the doctor match is better with Blue Shield. We’ll see how it works out but in my opinion Blue Cross has offered terrible service, so it couldn’t really get worse. Blue Cross says they lost money on Santa Ana Unified last year and will try to recoup the costs through increases, so I think the district is wisely choosing another provider. Kaiser will remain the same except a slight increase in prescriptions, emergency room copays (which will all increase under the Blue Shield program as well).
5. another anon teacher Says:
April 1st, 2009 at 8:10 pm edit
It would be nice if a classified person could invite another classified person who is active either in the union or at the district level to participate in this discussion. I think the goal here is to try to get real dialogue with real facts, so any help the classified people can provide would be great. I can tell you that the certificated people are appalled at the treatment you have received in the last year and we value your service as vital to our jobs and the education of our students. Thank you for all of the wonderful and necessary work you do!
6. CSEA41 Says:
April 2nd, 2009 at 6:06 am edit
As a CSEA CHAPTER LEADER, I cannot comment on any Blog.
As a Classified Employee of SAUSD you have the opportunity to sin up for our email communications, newsletter, and attend Chapter Meetings.
We have a 24-hour email system (CSEA41@Hotmail.com) to answer questions and Chapter Hotline (714) 600-5158. As to the Classified CBA it’s on our web site http://www.csea.com or under outside links of the SAUSD Staff web site.
CSEA HW Benefits were not up yet for renewal and remain the same for Classified Employees. Except SAUSD Blue Cross is changing to Blue Shield sometime soon. More information will follow in the Newsletter.
By the way CSEA is also an AFL-CIO affiliate.
Duane H Lundquist
CSEA 41 CJS
Negotiations Chair
Csea41Lundquist@hotmail.com
7. Red Vixen Says:
April 2nd, 2009 at 5:42 pm edit
“As a CSEA CHAPTER LEADER, I cannot comment on any Blog.”
Mr. Lundquist,
Welcome and thank you for taking time to visit Orange Juice!
You cannot repost information and communications at the OJ, that may have been overlooked by your membership?
It makes sense that you cannot post your personal opinions using your leadership name. I understand the need to stay un-controversial in a public forum. However, it doesn’t seem obvious why you could not participate here if someone is asking for union information that they may not have been aware of.
Just asking for clarification, is all.
8. another anon teacher Says:
April 2nd, 2009 at 7:26 pm edit
Mr. Lundquist,
Please continue to post factual information, I don’t think there is any conflict in that. Maybe you could answer a few questions that come from Classified members from time to time. It may go a long way towards differentiating between fact and rumor. Welcome!
9. Anonplus Says:
April 3rd, 2009 at 7:20 am edit
#7 and #8
Now you see what we have to put up with in our union. Mr. Lundquist has posted before..I believe the mantra was “vote for Noji”. He has been on the negotiations committee before as well and known to be deep in the tank for the district.
We all know he could put out general information either named or under an anon, but chooses to use his “position” as an excuse not to.
10. Anon Classified Employee Says:
April 3rd, 2009 at 11:02 am edit
Does anyone know whats going on with classified layoffs. It is obvious the our so called union leaders are not distributing that information out to it members. A good idea would be to get rid of union dues for everyone and only those who think the union does a good job participate in paying union dues.
11. another anon teacher Says:
April 3rd, 2009 at 7:41 pm edit
I have discussed this with the CSEA rep at my site. Your union is trying to come up with a way for the district to have to decide on layoffs prior to the end of the school year. There are some problems with this due to the budget and some other factors that I am do not fully understand (I will ask more this week). One goal is to try to avoid the situation that occurred last year when the certificated staff was already on summer vacation after the layoff notices went out. It was very difficult for us to provide any support when there was really no means of communication. If I find out more, I will let you know.
12. Classified on the Frontline Says:
April 4th, 2009 at 9:26 am edit
@Duane H Lundquist The problem is that there is little to no communication. I received maybe 2 newsletters this year. I’m on the mailing list and have received nothing. How do I find about chapter meetings? Its either on the same day or the day after its on. Does every site have a union rep? Just how strong are we? Last year we lost a lot of good people. Sure some came back but in the end they lost hours. What happened for the teachers? MOST not some came back. Just how can anybody feel confident in our so called union?
13. Classified on the Frontline Says:
April 4th, 2009 at 9:44 am edit
@ #11 It would be a big help if we could find out about layoffs before we all go to summer vacation. It put more salt in the wound last year every time I had to explain what happened. Nobody knew what was going on and when the certificated staff came back they saw an empty office. It was like we just disappeared. The district silenced all of us. I remember our protest last summer and I believe if the notice was out during the school year we would have had more numbers. At the very least if we did know before June we could protest like the teachers and then the word is out. Teachers will know and parents will at least be warned about whats happening.
14. another anon teacher Says:
April 4th, 2009 at 10:40 am edit
Of course the district will do everything it can to have a repeat of last year as far as layoff notification for Classified Staff. Talk to your reps and make sure they all understand that the timing of notification is a big issue for you. I know they are trying to do something about it, I’m just not sure how much power they have on this issue.
15. Anonplus Says:
April 4th, 2009 at 11:04 am edit
#12/13
Even working out of the district office all anyone hears are rumors. Site reps either know nothing, or say they don’t.
Don’t bother going to the CSEA Chapter #41 webpage either at:
http://www.csea.com/content/OptionC/c_1.asp?ChapterID=41
The latest news entry was Ira Hypock resigning as president in 2007 and the latest copy of the newsletter is May of 2004.
Mr. Lundquist refers to the CSEA (state) webpage and to outside links in the SAUSD staff webpage.
If anyone has found any CSEA links in the SAUSD staff website other than the CSEA state page or the dead chapter #41 webpage, please put those links up here for everyone. Not all of us have access to district computers while working.
Another Anon Teacher. Thanks for trying to get more information because we can’t. The end of the school year ploy is getting pretty worn. As you can read we rarely get newsletters either.
If prior years are any example we will get little information, have no input, and be notified of the results of negotiation after the fact with a recommendation to ratify because it was the best the negotiations team could get. We will be told that if we don’t ratify the agreement more jobs will be cut so just be thankful.
16. Classified on the Frontline Says:
April 6th, 2009 at 8:14 pm edit
@#14 I know many would like to give the benefit of the doubt to CSEA but like we are saying here there is a lot of mis communication. Maybe we can go to the Classified meeting at the district this week. Wait a minute! What meeting? Don’t worry they are still in negotiations. Whats the status of the negotiations? Oh we don’t know yet but you will be updated soon. Of course we should let our reps know about timing. If they really were looking out for us they would already be doing this. How do we know they are or not? You will see it in the next bulletin. But wait the last one I got was in October! There is no communication! This time last year many did not know about the cuts coming. I found out on my last day of work. At least this year we can plan ahead for the cuts. I know I come off very upset and I’m sorry. But honestly what CSEA has to remember that whatever they do they are dealing with many people with families. When they favor one classification over another they screw up with a system thats suppose to be fair. Maybe they should remember whose paying for their “services”. Oh yeah while I mentioned it there is special study session regarding the budget on Thursday, April 9, 2009 at 4 p.m.
17. Parent Says:
April 7th, 2009 at 9:15 am edit
I am trying to become involved with more things. I know how important classified people are as my mom and dad (now retired) were one. I know that the union seems to be helping security and custodians. I know security wanted the 12 months back but I feel that is not needed. I also hope the office workers know in advance as when my child started school the principal told me his staff found out during the summer. That is not right. My calls to district? I have got one call back and they tell me “the budget effects us all” I don’t think so as those people don’t have to worry about their jobs. I want to be sure the school is staffed with nurses, clerks, secretaries, etc.. These are the people who make the school work too. I would like to see the principals work the fax machine, copy machines..believe me I am in there enough times to see who runs the offices.
18. The Horse’s Mouth Says:
April 7th, 2009 at 1:42 pm edit
Office personnel have been working as school nurse stand-ins since nurses were cut to 2-3 days a week. This is a time-bomb for medical insurance lawsuits, yet the union(s) have done nothing. Parents should know about this… who will you tell?
19. Parent of 3 Says:
April 8th, 2009 at 3:06 pm edit
From what I am seeing everyone is doing everyone’s job! Secretary’s are filling in for attendance,clerks, nurse…Office Managers are stepping in for Registrars, nurse, attendance..These people are dumping their own trash and I heard one teacher say they are even cleaning the floors themselves. I have contacted District office saying this has to stop. I am at a loss as now I do not get any calls back and they said ” they do not control the school sites” Who do I go to now/
20. Classified Says:
April 8th, 2009 at 3:08 pm edit
anyone notice that clerk job that is going to be flown? It is a all in one job that almost has all classified office jobs rolled into one. In other words they want this person to do all of those jobs such as phones, nurse, etc.. probably in 3 1/3 hours.
21. tmare Says:
April 8th, 2009 at 4:00 pm edit
At every site there seems to be a portion of the day when the phones go unanswered. We have trained “office aides” (students) who answer the phone while people are at lunch. There just aren’t enough people to enable lunches to be taken and phones to be answered. There was a time that we prided ourselves on the fact that the phone was answered within 2 rings, those days are gone. The only way you will be heard as a parent is to attend board meetings and make a brief presentation highlighting your concerns. We already know that no one will listen to the staff, classified or certificated.
22. Anonplus Says:
April 10th, 2009 at 9:12 am edit
In a comment I made here on 04/04/09 (#15) I pointed out that the local CSEA chapter # 41 website was basically dead. The most current stories were dated in 2007 and the most current newsletter was dated in 2004.
A visit to the webpage now shows some actual very minor changes. All the 5 year old newsletters are gone. In fact the newsletter section is now totally blank!
But there was something positive. A large blue banner has been put at the top of the page that announces the following:
“Next chapter meeting has been changed to April 16th at the labor hall across the street from the district office, 4:30pm – 6:00pm. Chapter meetings have been changed to the third Thursday of the month at the labor hall”
Well it’s a start but a sad commentary on CSEA chapter #41. Since Lindquist bothered to put a “non” comment here we know he reads this blog and could have put up the meeting information here. I don’t think that would have violated his “confidentiality” vow of silence. Now how about some newsletters or progress reports?
23. anon Says:
April 11th, 2009 at 6:38 am edit
A couple of questions that you might ask directly to Lundquist during the next chapter meeting:
Is the union paying for legal defense for the IA at Saddleback who was arrested for a sexual attack against a student?
Was Lundquist served with legal papers not even a month ago charging him with lack of non-representation of classified employees who have been treated badly by SAUSD? The story goes that the district was also served the same day and immediately suspended a “supervisior” and a supervisorial underling named in the complaint. There will be formal investigations coming and state and federal governments are involved.
Mr. Lundquist is dumb for showing up here and telling all the readers that he has no intention of keeping employees informed. He basically is saying he is going to continue to withhold important information and continue to non-represent union members. Maybe classifieds can all get their union dues returned under the last couple of chapter presidents who have attacked their own members in order to get personal favors from SAUSD.
24. Guest Says:
April 12th, 2009 at 11:35 am edit
@ #23 My thoughts exactly! Mr Lundquist is a perfect example of why Classified don’t trust the union. It must be paradise for the District to have CSEA the way it is. So poorly run that they are being sued by the very people they are suppose to protect! I rather have my union dues returned to me and take my chances with the district.
25. Guest Says:
April 12th, 2009 at 11:52 am edit
@#21 Child labor is necessary to get the job done somewhat. How else will the office run without Classified? You can only keep subs for a certain amount of time so why bother to pay for anybody? You have a population of students you can use. I’m sure if you ask any office manager would agree. Oh no they might say but get real. In every school I have been to it seems that “office aids” are the new unpaid classified. You stick students on the phones and make them greeters. Hey they speak Spanish? Excellent! Why pay for a bilingual person when you can just plant a student at the desk. Not once have I called a school and had an adult pick up. The copier machine is down? Send student so and so to put in a replacement part. Just make them read the instructions first. Is my child a new employee for SAUSD? Who can I talk to? Nobody listens and that I would agree with you. What we need is for parents to stand up and speak. THIS HAS BEEN GOING ON ALL YEAR! Ask the board if its reasonable for schools to recruit students this way. Ask them if this is acceptable. Failure is not an option……
26. tmare Says:
April 12th, 2009 at 8:45 pm edit
At my school we have always had the “office aide” student elective. In the past, it has actually been a useful elective for both the students and the teachers. Many students have learned some good administrative skills when placed with the right teachers. However I would have to agree with #25 that we walk a very fine line between something that benefits the students and something that only benefits the district through child labor. This year it seems that students are doing the job of the classified staff (who is no longer there) much more often than in years past.
Here are the comments from the “SAUSD Certificated Employees” thread. There were twenty-four comments:
1. another anon teacher Says:
April 1st, 2009 at 5:03 pm edit
I think the most pressing issue for certificated staff right now is the upcoming contract vote and explaining the new contract to all. Of course, all RIF’d teachers have more pressing issues on their minds, but until the budget from the state becomes a little more clear, I don’t think we can do much about RIF’s. If anyone has questions about the changes in the contract please post them here.
Some of the changes:
Benefits:
-Switch to Blue Shield from Blue Cross (not a part of negotiations, just a district decision)
-Increase in emergency room visits for all plans to $100.
-Increase in tenthly cost for insurance to 11% (varies with plan)
-Option for married employees not to coordinate benefits and have the tenthly cost waived.
-Loss of benefits to age 70 for all employees with less than 10 years by April ‘09. Benefits will continue up until Medicare eligibility.
High School
-15 coaching periods, more only with administrator approval.
Other
-No freezes on step and column, this cannot even be pursued during salary negotiations next year.
-Changes to stipends for GATE coordinators.
-Three staff development days are the unknown because of the state, the district can take these away without negotiation resulting in a 1.5% salary decrease and 3 more days off.
-Plan for a committee to work on work related issues involving special ed and regular ed.
There are other items, I could post more if anyone is interested.
2. Patricia O’Neil Says:
April 1st, 2009 at 7:50 pm edit
Another anon teacher,
In an earlier post (#333), you said, “The fact that CSR was not entirely eliminated by the district and the district will still get funding for classes that are between 20-30 makes me think that not as many elementary teachers will be in danger as previously thought.”
As I understand it, the District can receive 70% of the CSR money and still have classes up to 30. Doesn’t that pretty much amount to eliminating CSR and the corresponding number of positions (while still getting the CSR money), especially considering that 232 CSR positions are part of the total number of RIFs?
3. another anon teacher Says:
April 1st, 2009 at 8:00 pm edit
It depends on how it all works out financially. The percentages vary with the classroom numbers, so I’m sure the district will work it out to their maximum benefit financially. It remains to be seen if that could be at 30 students but it could possible be less, thus saving some jobs. There are so many questions out there that have yet to be answered and it may be quite a while until it all plays out. You can bet that they RIF’s based on 36 students per class, if they choose to take CSR money and hold at 30, some positions will be saved.
4. Robert C. Chavez Says:
April 2nd, 2009 at 4:34 pm edit
Teachers, 1440 teachers will be affected by this two tier insurance benefit reduction not 530 teachers. That is close to fifty percent of our membership. Why can’t our Association leaders not tell us how much money the district will be saving from such a ill thought out plan? I encourage you all to read the contract very carefully and asks questions. Do not let the district win and we will be the losers here. We must vote down this contract. Then send our team back to the bargaining table to develop a more resonable contract for all our association members.
5. Just Another PeeOn Says:
April 2nd, 2009 at 5:21 pm edit
Just In:
The Rif hearing concluded today (Thursday). The district will cancel your sub. Report to work tomorrow and NOT the hearing.
6. Red Vixen Says:
April 2nd, 2009 at 5:46 pm edit
#5 what happened at today’s RIF meeting?
Thanks for any info.
7. another anon teacher Says:
April 2nd, 2009 at 7:32 pm edit
#4
I don’t really think there is any way to discern the actual savings of the change in the retirement insurance. If you could explain why you believe this is such a large issue even though it affects many members, please do so. I personally know many people who will miss this by 2 months to 2 years and it doesn’t seem to be a big concern. The district’s insurance is only secondary to Medicare at 65 anyway and the district was having to fork over the full cost of the insurance even though it was secondary. This is a cost saving measure in the right place, where would you have another cut be made to make up for it? In addition to this, by the time these people retire I believe it is almost certain that Medicare, employer-paid insurance and the entire health care policy of our country will be entirely different.
8. Anon Says:
April 2nd, 2009 at 7:57 pm edit
Rif Hearing:
Our lawyer was defending the “Music” teachers and counselors this year. Maybe next year
he will defend the teachers for once.
They rescinded some people (the ones the district had something incorrect (hire date). 25 people have been rescinded.
In order for the district to have QEIA, they must have CSR (Class size reduction). They go hand in hand.
Carlos Perez (representing the teachers) made the following argument:
Counselors and Psychologists shouldn’t be let go because half of the district needs an SST and the demand is there (to meet those students’ needs). They also claimed they should be part of the “special” ed bandwagon like the speech pathologists and special ed people have (the no
rif bandwagon), but then many teachers can also say the same thing because most of us have special ed students mainstreamed into our classrooms.
They said that they are waiting to see if the May Props pass (see, I knew it). They use
us every year to get their props passed! In June (approx around June 9-10) Arnold will make his state of the state speech and we will know then. They moved the date to June instead of May because of the May 19th ballot.
I predict that the district will go to the new CSr flex plan which states that they can go over 24.5 kids (up to 30) and still receive 70% of the money.
As many people know, 192 Reading Coaches and BRT’s are being placed back into the classrooms, but the principals are whining to keep them to help them. We want them to stay in their current positions (of course) because then the CSR teachers won’t be let go (will not as many). If they go into the classroom…do the math.
232 CSR teachers
192 Reading Coaches & BRTs
40 teachers would be hired back is all. Next, take into consideration that 80 people are retiring and maybe only half are elem teachers, so add approx. another 40 teachers or so to that.
I predict about 80 additional teachers would be needed is all if the Reading Coaches & BRTs go back into the classroom and they use the 70% flex csr plan.
9. ojb Says:
April 3rd, 2009 at 11:07 am edit
At least you guys get that option
10. Art Pedroza Says:
April 3rd, 2009 at 12:07 pm edit
http://orangejuiceblog.com/2009/04/sausd-teachers-complaints-to-obama-about-layoffs-hits-the-ap-wire/
11. Wilson Elementary Teacher Says:
April 4th, 2009 at 5:38 pm edit
I believe Anon. #9 is correct. The District can’t afford to lose QEIA/CSR $$ so they will to to a greater number of students per classroom and accept 70% of the money. I’m not sure they will be able to go as high as 30 students per class. Many schools [like mine, Wilson] have been “retrofitted/walled” to minimal dimensions to only allow 20-22 students per square foot. I’ve heard that the newest elementary, Heroes, has classrooms that are designed for 20 students. Will the District spend money to redesign/rebuild classrooms to accomodate more students per square foot or will they pretend to take the “high road” and defend CSR [20 to 1] when in fact they ran the $$#s and found that the retrofitting involved was cost prohibitive?
12. another anon teacher Says:
April 4th, 2009 at 6:26 pm edit
If you could see the size of the classrooms at my school, which currently hold 45 students and are probably designed for a max of 30, you would understand that the district has no interest in matching the size of a room to the size of a class. It is not even a consideration, they will just do it. And no, there are no fire codes that anyone can find that will stop them. We have tried and all we are told is that the maximum occupancy is determined by measurements exclusive of the furniture in the room. Then our only option becomes getting rid of the teacher’s desk and storage cabinets. We’ve been through it for many years, I think you will find that whatever you have been told about “minimal dimensions” will prove to have no teeth at all when the district puts 30 in those classrooms.
13. Anon Says:
April 5th, 2009 at 12:03 am edit
SAUSD’s Current CSR Plan
Student to Teacher Ratio
Old Penalty
Up to 20.44
No Penalty
20.45-20.94
20% or $4,284
20.95-21.44
40% or $8,568
21.45-21.84
80% or $17,136
21.85 and greater
100% or $21,420
FLEX CSR Plan
Student to Teacher Ratio
New Penalty
Up to 20.44
No Penalty
20.45 – 21.44
5% or $1,071
21.45 – 22.44
10% or $2,142
22.45 – 22.94
15% or $3,213
22.95 – 24.94
20% or $4,284
24.95 and greater
30% or $6,426
Class Size
Cost per Student
20
$ 2,679
21
$ 2,602
22
$ 2,533
23
$ 2,516
24
$ 2,411
25
$ 2,400
26
$ 2,308
27
$ 2,222
28
$ 2,143
29
$ 2,069
30
$ 2,000
Rules:
Districts participating in QEIA grant must continue to meet the 20:1 requirement for K-3 CSR in participating QEIA schools.
Combination classes are still permissible. For combination classes in grades three and four, incentive funding will continue to be available for students in grade three only.
Calculating CSR Revenue
When calculating projected K-3 CSR Revenue, remember to calculate revenue by classroom – not by student. This is particularly important if your district is considering significantly increasing class size. While CSR revenue is frequently stated on a per-student basis, this funding is limited to 20 students per classroom. In addition, penalties are calculated on a base of 20 students per classroom.
An Example: Increasing a classroom from 20 to 30 students would generate only $21,420 ($1,071 per student, 20 students) less a penalty of $6,426 (30% of funding) equaling net revenue of $14,994, or approximately $500 per student.
Assuming an operating cost of $75,000 per classroom, and CSR revenue with the new penalty levels, the table (above) illustrates the net operational cost per student at differing class size levels.
Due to the revised penalty structure, it costs only slightly less per student to operate class sizes at 25:1 than 24:1, so make sure to review the chart and choose class sizes carefully based upon the educational and financial needs of your district.
Maximum Class Sizes
While the revised CSR penalty provisions do not include class size limitations, this does not mean that a district could or should increase class sizes exponentially. Class size limitations in primary grades 1-3 are still governed by Education Code Section 41376 which limits class sizes to a maximum of 32 students per class, with an average class size of 30 students per class or less. Class sizes in Kindergarten are governed by Education Code Section 41378, which limits class sizes to a maximum of 33 students per class, with an average class size of 31 students per class or less.
While Education Code establishes class size maximums, make sure to check your local collective bargaining agreements, which may have more restrictive K-3 class size maximums.
Revised CSR Penalty Effective Date and Timelines
Like other categorical flexibility, the revised CSR penalties are currently effective for the 2008-09 year. However, unlike other categorical flexibility, the modified CSR penalties are available only for three future years through 2011-2012. All other categorical flexibility is available for four future years through 2012-2013.
Last week, staff from the Department of Finance, Legislature, and California Department of Education (CDE) met to discuss the intent of the flexibility agreed to during the Budget process. We have been informed that there will be no restrictions on a district’s ability to utilize the revised penalty provisions based upon priorities for CSR grade level implementation. LEAs will be locally authorized to increase class sizes in any grade level in which they were eligible for participation in 2008-09. Class sizes can be raised in all eligible grade levels with the new penalty provisions applied without further statutory limitations. The California Department of Education (CDE) has stated that they will issue further guidance and instructions later this month.
So, will they or won’t they???? That is the question.
14. Anon Says:
April 5th, 2009 at 12:47 am edit
California
Is school counseling mandated for grades K-8? No; (Yes for grades 7 &
Is school counseling mandated for grades 9-12? Yes (Grades 7-12)
Mandated School Counselor-to-student ratio: None
Source of mandate: Education Code
Who funds mandate? State Budget Act
Other: The California State Budget Act of 2006 (AB 1802, Chapter 79) amended the California Education Code to ensure that students in grades seven through twelve receive counseling services
http://www.cde.ca.gov/ls/cg/re/documents/counselguidelines.pdf
15. Art Pedroza Says:
April 5th, 2009 at 9:26 am edit
http://orangejuiceblog.com/2009/04/why-not-cut-administrators-pay-and-consultants-before-cutting-teachers-wages/
16. Patricia O’Neil (Teacher) Says:
April 10th, 2009 at 8:41 pm edit
Another anon teacher,
You stated above (post #1) that, “Three staff development days are the unknown [because] the district can take these away without negotiation resulting in a 1.5% salary decrease and 3 more days off.”
How can the District take these away without negotiation if the prior contract states that the days and the salary schedule can only be reduced to the extent that the funding is reduced? Since the Buyback Day funding from the State is only reduced by 4.5% for next year, doesn’t that mean that the 1.5% would have to remain on the salary schedule (possibly less 4.5% of the 1.5%)?
Based on information provided at the Board’s Special Study Session on Thursday, it looks like the District is hoping to use the Buyback Day money to help fund staff at the elementary level, including Media Techs, APs, and Music Teachers. I know the State is allowing districts to use the Buyback Day money for other educational purposes, but, if the funding is still allocated, doesn’t our contract prevent it from being used for other purposes?
Perhaps, the answer to this question won’t ultimately have to be provided pending results of the May propositions, federal stimulus money, and availability of other funding sources. Nevertheless, the possibility of eliminating the buyback days and reducing the salary schedule has been raised, so I’m hoping for an answer to the contractual question. You seem very knowledgeable, so perhaps you may know.
Wouldn’t it be helpful if SAEA had an area on their website for members to post questions to be answered by union leadership and staff?
17. tmare Says:
April 10th, 2009 at 9:51 pm edit
I could suggest a question and answer section be added to the SAEA website, it’s a good idea. I think normally they would just ask you to ask your rep. Your question is a good one and I’m not sure about the answer. I only know that if they do take away those days, we will not be working those days. Most likely they if the state is providing that money but removing the staff development requirement and allowing flexibility, then the district will be able to take the 1.5%. I’ll get back to you on that. I am now posting as “tmare” (formerly one of the “anon teacher”s and “another anon teacher”).
18. Red Vixen Says:
April 11th, 2009 at 6:23 am edit
Extensive list of links and resources available. Excellent political contact links.
CA Teachers News OC By Jill Puich
http://orangejuiceblog.com/2009/04/educ/#comment-85336
19. Red Vixen Says:
April 11th, 2009 at 6:27 am edit
SAEA should consider putting up a question/answer section on their website. It would generate far more traffic and teachers would use it as a go-to location to find out information and clear up rumors and other misunderstandings.
20. SAHS teacher Says:
April 11th, 2009 at 9:03 pm edit
Some time back, 3 SAEA pres’s ago and before there was a SAEA website, I proposed just this. A colleague who had a web design business would build the site for SAEA with a moderated bulletin board (”blog” hadn’t come into use at that time.) We got a sympathetic hearing from the president, but got nixed in the end for what would probably be the same reasons the board would give a proposal today. The SAEA board at that time (none are the same today) felt any answer or opinion presented on an official SAEA website open to the public would be considered sanctioned by the executive board, and may be used to their disadvantage in dealings with the school district. They said anything put on a website would have to have prior approval by the SAEA board. So, I proposed an unoffical bulleting board, not linked directly to SAEA and got a no, no, no, please no. This is why I love Art, and you, too, RV, whoever you are.
21. Red Vixen Says:
April 12th, 2009 at 5:49 am edit
Thanks SAHS Teacher for the kind words. I appreciate your insights and contributions to the various threads at OJ.
We have extra OJ Business cards. Not to put you on the spot, but would you be interested in bringing some to the next union meeting? I wonder if they could just be put out on the sign-in table?
As far as the union website issues – I understand the hesitancy because there are only so many battles the board and reps can effectively fight, and why hand over any more gasoline to contentious management? However, I think the discussions here, at OJ, have been pertinent and interesting over the years. I, too, am glad that Art made the commitment to keeping educational issues at SAUSD in the spotlight.
22. Art Pedroza Says:
April 12th, 2009 at 9:24 am edit
SAHS Teacher,
Thanks indeed for your very kind words. We don’t get much of that around here!
I owe a lot to Red as she has been such a big help to me with our SAUSD posts.
Change will come to the SAUSD one day and our SAUSD threads will have immense historical value. We will know how we got into such a state – and how we got out of it together!
23. Patricia O’Neil (Teacher) Says:
April 12th, 2009 at 11:46 am edit
Recently, ideas have been implemented to help make the SAUSD posts more manageable. What do people think about the idea of classifying posts by topic, i.e., RIFs, contract ratification, etc.? I think it could be even more effective than grouping by certificated, elementary, etc., although I don’t know how difficult this would be technologically.
24. tmare Says:
April 13th, 2009 at 10:15 pm edit
#23- I believe Art and RV responded to my similar request by posting the additional threads. I think that a forum is a great idea, but I don’t think the OJB has the type of software available to handle it. I am thankful that they were able to arrange things in this manner, as it is a big improvement. It would be nice if someone else could find a way to implement a SAUSD forum online for questions and answers about the many specific of both employees and the general public.
The information on website is very clear. There are no rumors. Teachers with less than ten years, as of the ratification, will lose five years of medical benefits. Research is showing that Medicare expenses are increasing. I understand that people are thinking that the whole systems will be changed by retirement age for those in the forties and fifties, The district did not hedge their bets on socialized/nationalized health care. I think the district is being very smart and I think we need to be even smarter. This contract needs to be voted down. The people who miss this by a few months are concerned and disappointed that they may have to keep working past typical retirement age. I hope people read the contract carefully and vote accordingly. Please vote this down.
The saying goes, “Whatever the teachers get, classified usually follows”. Although not always true, it is pretty much a fact. I’ve read the teachers tentative contract, especially the medical benefit area.
This will be the 5th or 6th time the district has changed,(effectively lowering) medical benefits over the last 20 years while at the same time upping the co-pays. For some reason each time the copays have nearly doubled for Rx medications.
This time it appears retail Rx copays will double and mail order will be “double” retail for 100 days worth. IE 3rd month free if you don’t do the math on what your payments were before these changes.
I understand fully medical costs are out of control and price adjustments have to happen. Most people understand that. What working people forget are the retired folks.
Presently if a retired couple are now taking medications that equal $100 a month in co-pays, this will effectively double it to $200 a month. It will also increase doctors visit costs, and who knows how ongoing tests (like blood work) are effected since the contract doesn’t exactly outline that.
No one I know on a fixed income, or those still working for that matter, just received a $100 monthly raise to cover that co-pay increase. Many retired folks I know are not yet old enough for medicare coverage because they retired early based on some early retirement package the district sold them. So lets leave medicare out of this for the purpose of this comment.
Bottom line? Before you vote on this agreement consider your own situation, where you will be when you retire and if you could handle these rising expenses.
Possibly this is the best deal we can get. I would be more readily agreeable to that argument if I didn’t know the district was giving medical packages to the board members. I might even go along with these proposals if Russo and her “crew” all took a 10% pay cut to help out. Even Mijares did that!
Newbie: You stated the district was “smart”. Let’s call it what it really is: conniving, manipulative, fear mongering, and deceptive. And both our unions buy into it.
I am beyond words when it comes to the lack of concern that many teachers have about the contract.
Basically they want others to tell them how to vote.
I truly believe the teacher’s union has gone extremely soft. I was being somewhat sarcastic about the “smart” comment. I have seen teachers just give up with this contract even if their being Rif-ed they will probably vote Yes. The union did a good job sugar coating this to their members. I personally have heard site reps say to vote yes, “I highly encourage you.” Isn’t that just plain wrong. Shouldn’t members be encouraged to vote on their own. I think the state CTA should come in on this one. The wool has been pulled over most of the members eyes. I have never seen or heard such blatant BS. I hope the union members who have their ten years can sleep at night. In fact I know they can with the self-satisfied grins on their faces.
PDF of Jane Russo’s letter to Judge Nancy Stock regarding the Grand Jury Report, “Are Charter Schools Getting Passing Grades”. The letter was dated August 1, 2008. The date received was noted as 2/6/09.
If someone knows how to copy/paste the contents of this pdf into the “sausd news” section, I would be very appreciative. One never knows how long these little links last and it is helpful to have the entire document archived. Thanks in advance for any help. Here is the link:
http://www.ocgrandjury.org/pdfs/charterschools/santaanausd.pdf
The president’s stimulus package includes a just announced 3.1 billion for CA schools, this will probably rescue most RIFed teachers. The clowns at SAEA negotiated away far too much with this pathetic contract, teachers must reject it and re-open talks given the new circumstances. SAEA needs to hire a professional negotiator at the minimum and we all need CTA expertise, Gladys is the only bright spot among the amateurs on the third floor.
Re: #18 Thanks Red Vixen…
I moved my Educ Links and contacts page here:
http://jillpuich.edublogs.org/
It has a little bit of everything from lawmakers to the Nea to the CTA.
Just received and read the opinion of the administrative law judge allowing the district to proceed with the layoffs. No suprises. It is evident from the opinion that the hearing was just a formality and that the judge had his mind made up, undoubtedly with the collusion and consent of Carlos and SAEA, before he ever walked into the gym at Villa. This is so sad. We are like cows being lead to slaughter, and we are too passive, naive, clueless and disorganized to do anything about it. After seven years now, I know the routine. We will never hear from SAEA about the riffing again. Anybody who thinks that SAEA cares or will do anything about the rifs is deluding himself or herself.
#445: I don’t know where you get your information from, but it is not accurate. The press is not reporting anything about just released funds. The budget presentations on the district’s web site are clear. The district is concerned that the state will use the stimulus funds to backfill its own coffers and that the district will never see any money. Furthermore, it appears from these budget presentations that the district might still find it necessary to proceed with layoffs even if it received stimulus money and the propositions pass.
It’s all over but the shout for us RIF(ed) teachers. I’ve taught for over 19 years in California and it is all going down the tube now. I guess there’s not much we can do when they already have their minds made up that they want to save $$$. No one can ever tell me that this district puts kids FIRST! I will also never believe that our Union helped me keep my job. I am okay with this because I know whatever happens…happens for a reason.
whatever happens…happens for a reason?
that is a defeatist attitude!
I can’t predict everything that happens in the future but I do know that the union wont be getting any more of my money.
the governor will do anything to avoid taxing his rich friends…including selling out our children’s future. it pays to keep america stupid!
Defeatist attitude? Quite the contrary. I have gone through this RIF process for a few years now, but this year it is reality. What more can I do? It is out of my hands. I just have to accept reality and move forward. Thanks 🙂 Best of luck to all!