Sometimes you can have too much of a good thing! In this case our 2009 SAUSD thread has so many comments on it that it is now running too slowly. So we are starting this new thread for the second half of 2009.
So far this year we have had plenty to write about. The State budget cuts have had a devastating affect in Santa Ana. Layoffs have ensued.
To top this all off, the SAEA cut a weird deal with the SAUSD that essentially cut benefits for all the younger teachers. And then the SAEA held elections.
Now more budget cuts loom…and all the other issues remain. I expect this thread will fill up too before long…
#449,
I haven’t and I don’t know anyone who has received dental cards yet. As you can tell BS hasn’t even got basic enrollment cards right yet.
Re: the article above
That article is deceiving by the headline…
the SAUSD is considered “qualified” not negative
which doesn’t mean that they are doing the best job over there managing YOUR lives. I wouldn’t trust them if my life depended on it.
They will keep the assistant superintendents, but take YOUR benefits away …it is happening NOW. Bye Bye Benefits by the Bay City Rollers…singing it now…..
http://song.ly/l/1gvigx <—change the words to Bye Bye Benefits 🙂
Blank, I have a friend who had his payments reduced by about 35% 2 months ago.. It should happen automatically, you should not ever be paying the old, higher premium. According to the SAEA, riffees should not start paying COBRA till the end of August. Has anyone been billed yet?
Teachers whose recent grievances were abandoned by the saea and not brought to arbitration need to appear at the next exec board meeting on July 14th.
Is it possible that enough will show up to institute a larger lawsuit against SAEA for failure to represent?
#454,
No I have not started to pay yet. I am debating on if I even want to do Cobra or not. On the paper that was sent to us, it said nothing about it being reduced to 35%. So I guess I better go and find this out.
It was reduced even more, my research reveals…
http://www.cobrainsurance.com/help/questions/1342/ Check that out, it gives website and phone numbers.
John Palacio is going to contact the district about the sub list and about the benefit situation…hold tight everyone.
Just FYI, my benefits situation seems to have been resolved as of today. Just think, it only took an entire day on the phone, not bad for SAUSD.
I hope John is paying attention, I just received another e-mail from a co-worker who says his benefits are also messed up, now 7 out of 8 people I’ve spoken to have some type of benefit screw up. Everyone please watch out for deductible screw ups. Remember that we are trusting the district and a health care company to credit the deductibles for the year that we have already paid.
John is watching and I am emailing him what goes on. Tmare, I am glad yours is all worked out.
Are you guys sure you really want your jobs back?
“Shots fired on elementary Volleyball court”…
http://www.ocregister.com/articles/school-franks-police-2480624-court-shots
http://orangejuiceblog.com/2009/07/why-did-the-insolvent-sausd-rehire-their-laid-off-administrators/
http://orangejuiceblog.com/2009/07/gang-members-shoot-it-out-at-a-santa-ana-school-while-playing-volleyball/
http://orangejuiceblog.com/2009/07/santa-ana-has-slashed-its-library-budget-again/
Interesting…the OCReg deleted “The List” of those who were rescinded and those who were canned.
http://tiny.cc/canned <–I went here 1st then clicked on Santa Ana Unifed and the page has mysteriously disappeared and has been removed.
I made a copy of it though….folks. I even sorted “the list” by credential and we are watching them like a hawk.
You can fool me once…shame on you
Fool me twice…shame on me
http://tiny.cc/PageIsGone <–got it before you deleted it
Good Job, Jill.
Lots of gameplaying going on there. Thanks for looking out for your fellow riff’ers.
OK “The list” is back up. I wrote to Fermin Leal and he put it back up or fixed it. I just got off the phone with my pal, Chris Caesar from the OCReg and he also assisted me and now the page is baaaaack just like Arnold.
I want to know why Fred Gomeztrejo’s rif was rescinded. He has been removed as Principal at
Valley HS. Louis Bratcher coming back to temporarily fill the position. What will Gomeztrejo be doing? I’m concerned that a backroom deal has been cut to keep him employed as he was soccer coach for the daughter of Juan Lopez. Obviously, there are some deep ties there. Because Gomeztrejo came into the district as an administrator, he cannot be moved into a teaching position because of the riffed teachers. If he has been, that means that a teacher will lose their job. The district has a history of moving these failed administrators into TOSA postions at the secondary level (Title I coordinator, Outreach Consultant, etc.). If he has been moved into one of those positions, he is still taking a job away from a riffed teacher who would have seniority over him. Can someone look into this please. It may be a union issue if he has been moved into a TOSA position. Jill, can you have Mr. Palacios look into this if no one is able to find out where Gomeztrejo is being sent.
Got it…Fred Gomeztrejo is on my list of who to watch. Thank you.
John update…he is working on the sub list to make sure that it is done fairly. In other words, the teachers who just lost their jobs should be the only ones even on that sub list. There shouldn’t even be 1 “SUB” on that list who was not a RIF(ed)(canned) teacher. I understand that they may need subs who hold single subject credentials though, of course.
John is going to find out what is going on with Blue Cross/Shield. The Kaiser people seem to be ok. If you have Kaiser and you are having issues, let John know.
I have made my “own list” from the OCRegister and sorted it by the following:
1. Multiple Subject People Laid OFF
2. Multiple Subject People who were Rescinded
3. Single Subject Laid Off
4. Single Subject Rescinded
5. District/Psychologists/Other List
Trust me…we are watching ALL lists like hawks. 1 slip up and we will all own this district.
If you want “the lists” *public info from OCREG (I just sorted them to make them less confusing)
you can ask Red Vixen for it. Red Vixen will make sure that it is confidential. I will be sending her the newest ones (updated) tonight.
Why does the district lump single subj with multiple subj? Makes it confusing for people
(I guess that’s what they want).
All we want is fairness…simple as that!
The questions of the day:
1. Why was the board allowing the district to pay for the AP’s (Assistant Principals) who were supposed to be 1/2 AP and 1/2 BRT (Bilingual Resource Teacher) to be paid their “FULL” AP salary even though they were halftime teachers?
This question will be asked at the next board meeting so if you can answer it NOW, that would be appreciated.
2. Where is Fred Gomeztrejo going?
Enquiring minds want to know.
Although this isn’t related to the ongoing teacher’s discussion it seemed to me to be worth adding.
The Register reports SA has hired a crime mapping service that maps crimes throughout the city. Personally I think it is money well spent (only $2500 a year) for people like Art who like to follow or report crime in the city.
I found it interesting because often the Register reports a major crime in approximation to a park but rarely mentions the school next door, across the street or nearby unless it actually happened on the school grounds.
Presently the latest map report is from June 27-July 2nd and shows 288 crimes. The areas can be focused on specifically or with a little finesse the entire city can be read all at once. Rapes are not included for victim privacy. The breakdown is:
1. 10 weapons crimes
2. 09 Robberies
3. 03 Vandalisms (obviously not graffiti)
4. 02 Homicides
5. 12 DUI’s
6. 36 Drug/Alcohol violations
7. 19 Burglaries
8. 67 Assaults
9. 01 Arson
10. 12 disturbing the peace
11. 23 Motor Vehicle thefts
12. 37 Thefts from Vehicles
13. 08 Frauds
14. 49 thefts/larceny
15. 00 sex crimes
The website is: http://www.crimemapping.com/
Jill,
What I found frustrating was that the APs were called halftime “teachers” for funding purposes. The District wanted them paid for out of categorical funds under the authority of the School Site Councils, but knew that these funds were supposed to be used for other purposes more directly related to increasing students’ achievement.
Knowing that it was likely illegal to pay for administrators out of the site categorical funds, they called them halftime BRTs, for example, even though they knew they were full time administrators. These APs did have to attend meetings, be test coordinators, and perform other tasks a BRT would have done had there been one. However, they did not work directly with students in an instructional capacity as far as I know. There may have been sites where the AP did spend half of their time directly teaching, but I don’t know of any.
Next year, it looks like the District plans to use site categorical funds for what they are calling “standardized staffing” at the elementary sites. It’s not clear which positions they intend to have the School Site Councils authorize to be paid for out of the site funds, but it’s going to be a problem, at least at some sites, if the School Site Councils are not given the authority to use the funds in ways they determine will most impact student achievement.
People have complained for years about the way the School Site Councils are manipulated. Unfortunately, it looks like the only thing that might make a difference at this point is going through the Uniform Complaint Procedure. The State can then decide if the Site Councils are operating properly and being given the authority they should have under the law to make decisions about how to allocate funds in the best interests of the students.
The union should be supporting teachers who want to make sure the School Site Councils are properly run and that funds are being spent appropriately, but I don’t see that happening. SAEA did provide some training to which the District was invited, I believe, but I don’t know that they have done much more than that. In my experience, SAEA has taken far too little responsibility in this area. In the meantime, it’s going to take teachers or others who are willing to stand up for what’s right for the students and for following the law. And, it going to take people who are willing to experience the repercussions that will likely follow taking such a stand.
I think that some of the board members think that they are sitting pretty until 2012, but they may need to look at this. We can get them out if we really wanted to. I know that I would (personally) go door to door if I needed to.
I am not saying that this is what we should do, but I am saying to the board….
“Don’t be “too comfy” over there. You can be replaced before 2012 with the snap of a finger
(a petition).” don’t test me….is all I am saying….things NEED to change and I hope you are reading this.
http://tiny.cc/ReplaceRob
Regarding School Site Councils: The composition of the SSC at elementary is 5 parents/community members and 5 staff including 1 classified and the principal. Since the principal is considered by the community as an authority figure, when they are just a member of SSC during the meetings, they tend to follow the direction of him/her. That means they will always have the votes to pass their agenda. I think it will take an audit of all SSC’s to get to the heart of the matter. Perhaps if any parents are reading this, they will take a stand for the students who are being short changed.
As it is, Tier 3 funds for next year are being used for the standard staffing model. The district presented basic staffing at a previous board meeting. This basic model then morphed into including AP’s, TOSA’s, computer techs, librarians, and music teachers. What was missing was a full time office asst., aides for the classroom, and of course CSR! The closer you are to the district staff, the better chance you have of saving your job.
Who’s looking out for the teachers and students?
Police and Fire Services get paid “overtime” for their professional services when they do these “extra” events like MJ’s tribute event. The question for the day is….why can’t teachers get paid “overtime” for their “extra” hours? I know it would break the system, that’s why. Chuck Devore or any other politician if you are reading this….my point is…get rid of their “overtime” pay or maybe teachers should get it. What sparked this in my mind…. They are announcing Michael Jackson’s tribute event at the Staples Center and the spokesperson is justfifying the use of the “police overtime” costs. Eye roll
Point of the day….
“be close to the district and don’t work with kids directly…visit a Starbucks (often), come late to work and you have a better chance of getting rehired back.” (grin)
http://tiny.cc/MJLastVideo <—the district’s new “theme song” to us. Listen to the words carefully
As Bunky said, half of the School Site Council is composed of school staff, and the Principal is automatically on the Council as one of the staff members. (The exact number of staff depends on the total membership according to the site’s bylaws.)
It is important to remember that CLASSROOM TEACHERS must form at least the majority of the staff portion of the SSC according to Ed Code. This could be 3 or 4 depending on whether the Council was composed of 10 or 12 members, for example. The remaining staff position(s) are for non-classroom teacher positions or “other school personnel”. Usually this is classified, but there is nothing in the law that says it must be. It could theoretically be the AP or a non classroom teacher.
I agree that the staff will usually follow the lead of the Principal (who is probably pressured by the District), and that it may be up to the parents to make sure the law is followed. I know there are schools where the parents are taking this lead.
I also believe, as I said before, that if SAEA were to take more responsibility for making sure SSCs were properly run, this would support the teacher members of the SSC, as well as other staff and parents, who want to make sure the money is going where it will make the most difference for students.
The following information is taken from A Guide and Template for the Single Plan for Student Achievement: A Handbook for School Site Councils which can be found at the following link:
http://pubs.cde.ca.gov/tcsii/ap/azhotlinks.aspx
The California Education Code requires the school site council to develop a Single Plan for Student Achievement for Consolidated Application programs operated at the school or in which the school participates. . . .The school site council must approve the plan, recommend it to the local governing board for approval, monitor implementation of the plan, and evaluate the results. At least annually, the school site council must revise the plan, including proposed expenditures of funds allocated to the school through the Consolidated Application, and recommend it to the local governing board for approval.
Composition of the school site council is specified in the California Education Code as follows:
The school site council shall be composed of the principal and representatives of: teachers selected by teachers at the school; other school personnel selected by other school personnel at the school; parents of students attending the school selected by such parents; and, in secondary schools, students selected by students attending the school.
At the elementary level, the school site council shall be constituted to ensure parity between (a) the principal, classroom teachers, and other school personnel; and (b) parents or other community members selected by parents.
At the secondary level, the school site council shall be constituted to ensure parity between (a) the principal, classroom teachers, and other school personnel, and (b) equal numbers of parents or other community members selected by parents, and students.
At both the elementary and secondary levels, classroom teachers shall comprise the majority of persons represented under subdivision (a) of this section.
At the discretion of the local governing board, the middle school may, but is not required to, include student representation on the school site council.
School Principal
The principal has the following duties with respect to the SPSA:
•Is a voting member of the school site council
•Provides information and leadership to the school site council
•Administers the school-level activities of the approved SPSA
These responsibilities make the principal vital to the success of the SPSA. However, the principal has no administrative authority over the school site council, may not veto decisions made by the school site council, and may not make changes to the SPSA after it has been approved by the school site council.
Governing Board
The local governing board adopts policies for the development and implementation of the SPSA consistent with law. Acting upon the recommendation of the school site council, the board votes on the approval of the SPSA and all subsequent revisions of the SPSA. The board also must certify that the SPSA is consistent with local educational agency plans required for federal funding. The SPSA must have board approval to authorize expenditures proposed in the plan.
Accountability
Because the local governing board, administration, and school site council have separate but related responsibilities for the Single Plan for Student Achievement, they need to work cooperatively. Should an impasse occur, several remedies are available:
•The school site council may appeal to the local governing board to resolve issues of planning or implementation, clarify an issue in doubt, or establish a needed policy;
•The administration may recommend the board not approve a plan believed to be flawed;
•The local governing board may develop policies to regulate or inform school site councils and staff in the performance of their duties;
•Individuals may file a formal complaint under the district’s Uniform Complaint Procedure.
http://law.rightpundits.com/?p=597 <–oh oh spaghetti oh
Our SSC was coerced by our Principal to cover half an AP as an Outreach Consultant – still haven’t figured out when he was the Outreach Consultant. Guess he did it at night!
District taking ALL categorical funding away from sites and controlling it from district office. Standardized staffing will occur at all schools – elementary, middle and high schools. I think it will be a good thing because the district knows what is best for the sites! J/K
The parent component has now gone out the window. I did hear that Olsky will control a districtwide School Site Council to rubber stamp her grand plans.
Let me clarify what the ten most important responsibilities of a TOSA are —
1.Leave for an hour or more in the middle of the day to have lunch and bring lunch back for the principal.
2.Sit around and talk on the phone.
3.Attend meetings off site that nobody ever hears the purpose of.
4.Play video games on the school computer.
5.Arrive late and leave early.
6.Destroy morale because by abusing the position.
7.Tell hard working teachers they are too busy to help them with anything.
8.Complain about being overworked.
9.Gossip with the other TOSA teachers.
10.Put the benchmarks in the mailboxes four times a year.
Jill and Patricia, thanks for the awesome job you are doing. You are making a difference for us. You are making the district listen.
I think it is shocking that the district is trying to hang onto money over and above the required reserves so it doesn’t get taken over by the state. Isn’t it the job of the district to serve the students. The only reason to hoard money is to make absolutely sure that Jane and her staff will have jobs in the future, even if classes are going to be staffed at 40:1 or more. This is criminal. That stimulus money is for kids, not for Jane and her cronies.
On another note, this subbing this is very interesting. The district is legally obligated under the Ed. Code to offer jobs to riffed teachers in order of seniority. If the system can’t be set up to do this, then Blanca better plan on getting up early to make the calls herself. I don’t think we should allow the district to ignore the Ed. Code because it purchased a computerized system that is not able to meet the Ed. Code’s requirements.
Also, I think we need to focus on benefits in the event we have to sub. Although I was not laid off three summers ago, a friend of mine who was shared a letter with me that Dave Barton sent. In the letter, Barton stated that the Ed. Code requires riffed teachers who work more than 20 out of 60 days to receive their full “COMPENSATION.” Barton said that SAEA interpreted compensation to include salary AND benefits. We need to press Susan on this. The district is going to need to reimburse us for COBRA if we have to go that route. We need Susan’s support on this.
One question for anybody who can answer. Can PERB help teachers who were placed on the list or moved down the list because the SAEA and their pseudo-attorney Carlos decided to support the Bakersfield teachers and refused to provide another attorney to argue during the rif hearings that the district should have gone by date of credential instead of date of hire. In other words, is the union’s conflict of interest with respect to Bakersfield something that would interest PERB?
rif rif- I too would like to know the answer about the union’s conflict of interest !!! For years there were 20 people with less seniority than me at my school site and all of a sudden the wind blows and now these same teachers are ahead of me. PERB interested at all?
http://tiny.cc/gohere568 <–ex of a school district that is not acting like a bank and is using the money to educate children rather than hoarding it.
The state will come up with the money eventually…it always does. The districts have to do what I call “their media blitz” of “woe is me” in order for the politicians to get off the can and on the stick (that’s an expression my father used to use)….he’s a Jack Nicholson/Jackie Gleason all rolled into one…that’s who I got my sarcasm from…sorry…I will try to tone it down.
PERB is big and complicated- check out their web-site(google perb). The only way I can see is failure to represent, unfair labor practice.
I have heard of a school dist- and now I can’t find the reference-that forces all credentialed admins to do a day of subbing a month. It was written into the contract. When this crisis is resolved and we are all back to work, why not give that a try? I would love to see the rotund district admins- who rather resemble those fake inflated Foster farms chickens- rolling into a classroom at Community Day School -har de har.
Count the calories,
Someone in email corrected me: PERB is not a federal entity, it is run by the state. I did take time to read over the PERB site and got kind of an idea on how to access cases. I noticed that there were several cases against unions, but every one of them I saw had been dismissed b/c there was no malicious intent to do wrong. Incompetence, failure to represent because of inept representation is not actionable. So if you’ve got a lame grievance chair, an unresponsive board, an absentee executive director, you are screwed. You’ve got to have a concerted effort to correct the problem by informing the membership of the issues and try to change things from there.
I did sign up for the PERB email notifications whenever the board makes a decision. I think that there were several decisions regarding Sacramento over the last couple of days.
I also made it a point to see the cases involving SAUSD. There were a couple that were brought about by this own board’s participant/poster Patricia O’neil. Maybe she’ll be kind enough to tell us how the process is… is there any sense of correction and justice….etc.
I now know why Jennifer has tried to taint Patricia’s reputation as being not-sane, as she implied in her elections email. Patricia must scare the hell out of a cowardly lightweight like Isensee. I doubt Mercer would return a call to Patricia. Another election cheat and lightweight.
The classified group involved in the recent PERB investigations indicated that the Nativo Lopez arrest and investigations also has ties to this PERB suit. It also implicates Mijares and there have been a number of people under direct scruitiny. The union for the classifieds is being investigated. IF you have complaints about your district and union, you should contact PERB and see if you can speak to the attorneys working on the current SAUSD case. It sounds like it’s a big one. What can be accomplished out of it, I just don’t know. Is it kind of a grand jury investigation that may or may not facilitate some kind of action?
I too would like to read about Patricia’s experience with PERB. My own experience is 25 years old when I testified over a decertification hearing. Back then PERB was inclined to rule in favor of districts and Unions. I’d like to know what the current track record of PERB is.
Anonplus,
I didn’t see many cases where an individual prevailed. But there were lots of lots of cases, so that’s why I signed up for their email notices and case results – I was interested to see what the pattern is for PERB.
I know that the classifieds involved with the current PERB investigations are happy with the attorneys and are happy that there seems to be reaction/response by the district so far. Just the fact that those group members are not being attacked by superiors in a free wielding way and that some of those supervisors have been put on leave or fired, has been a big boon to morale.
They have retained back up attorneys in case they need to pursue civil restitution actions.
I agree with Anonplus (#487) and Red Vixen that PERB generally rules in favor of unions, although there have been important exceptions. When reading the case summaries on the PERB website, it appears that nearly all the cases were decided in favor of the unions, however, it is important to know that these represent only those cases which have gone through all the dismissal and appeal processes. Cases which have been settled after the initial filing and hearing would not appear here.
As you read the case summaries, you will notice that one has to prove that the union acted in a way that was arbitrary, discriminatory, or in bad faith. The alleged violation of the duty of fair representation also has to have a direct impact on the member’s relationship with the employer, or the case will be dismissed as a matter of internal union affairs with which PERB does not get involved.
When I first started reading cases, I was rather amazed to find that “mere negligence” does not mean that the union failed in its duty. It seems that if they can produce any kind of remotely “reasonable” explanation for their action (or lack thereof), the case against them will be dismissed (at least regarding contract ratifications).
Discriminatory action also has a specific meaning as interpreted by PERB. It does not necessarily mean, for example, that the union acted in a way that had an unfavorable outcome for some of the members. Again, it depends on whether the union has a reasonable explanation.
On the other hand, misrepresentation of facts (lying) in order to secure ratification of a contract would be considered a violation of the duty of fair representation – if the misrepresentation can be proven to be deliberate.
Although my case did not involve failure to process a grievance or take a case to arbitration, I would think that such a charge would be upheld if the union did not have a reasonable explanation, if there were a pattern of failing to process alleged violations of the contract, or if the contractual violation was unequivocal and not remedied through the grievance process. A careful reading of applicable cases should provide fairly clear guidance.
I would be happy to share the details of my cases. One case was filed against the District (which, except for discrimination cases, can only be filed by the union) and one against the union. Both were somewhat complex and filed after studying many PERB decisions. I will prepare a summary of each case and work with Jill to post links to the entire case history. In the meantime, I would be happy to share what I have learned and help (confidentially, of course) with the preparation of a case for anyone who may want assistance.
Re: Freddy Gomeztrejo
I hear from a Valley teacher that he may take a P.E./coaching position since that is his credential, but he might not have an administrative position.
How can he “bump” another PE credentialed teacher who has been riffed, if he has not been a PE teacher in this district?
There are a numbere of Riff’ed PE teachers and certainly they would have more seniority than Gomeztrejo. He’s only been in the district, how long?
Patricia, (in #489)
Thank you for posting about PERB. Was it a lengthy process? Were there confusing aspects about it? Did you have to do most of the work yourself, or were the attorneys doing the heavy lifting?
I understand that IF the classifieds actually win their case against the district and union, that it will NOT be published by PERB. That PERB only publishes the cases that were dismissed?
Do you know anything about that?
Thanks again for your input and insights.
RV: I really don’t know how it’ll work out, but again, it’s hearsay from a Valley teacher about him getting a PE position. Gomeztrejo came around August 2006 to Saddleback before abruptly transferring to Valley [West] before the end of the 06-07 school year. Since he came in as an administrator (an at-will employee), I’m not sure how his seniority number works since he NEVER taught in an SAUSD classroom.
I viewed the OC Register’s rif list today, and one of our PE teachers/coaches has yet to be rescinded. He’s definitely a great person/teacher/coach, and the students love him. I’d HATE for Gomeztrejo to take his spot.
RE: Gomeztrejo
I’m classified but as I understand the contract regarding administrators, they have no bumping rights if they have not previously taught in the district. They are either an administrator or they’re out the door if there are riffed teachers waiting to be called back. You really must have your union look into this ASAP as someone legally entitled to be called back may not because of these backroom deals.
RV (in #492),
As you said, the published cases are those which have been dismissed by a PERB Regional Attorney and appealed to the five-member Board itself. I don’t believe that cases successfully settled prior to an appeal to the Board would be published by PERB.
In answer to your question about what work the attorneys did, most union members who file PERB charges against their union, do so without attorneys. In a case brought against SAEA, CTA attorneys would then prepare the union’s response after consulting with the local staff.
Charges against a district are usually brought by the Association. As far as I know, the only kinds of cases which an individual can take to PERB against the District are charges related to discrimination for protected activity, such as union activity. (There are other venues for other kinds of discrimination.) SAEA could have chosen to pursue my discrimination case with PERB (which can be done even after arbitration under certain conditions), but I did not believe that they were interested nor that they would have prepared a convincing case.
I did discuss with CTA the possibility of taking the case against the District because of its potential precedent-setting nature. I don’t recall that these discussions were conclusive. In the end, I wrote and filed the case myself. In part, I found it an interesting intellectual exercise because my case involved legal issues that didn’t appear to have yet been settled by PERB.
While the writing of the original charge may be difficult (depending on the details of the case), the actual filing and subsequent steps in the process are not complicated, at least not in my experience. The steps are explained on the PERB website.
Some of the cases were confusing, especially when one seemed to contradict another. Of course, looking back it often seems simple enough. Isn’t that the way with most learning?
After reviewing some of the PERB case summaries and reading through a few of the cases alleging a union’s failure to fulfill its duty of fair representation as it relates to grievance processing, I thought it might be helpful to post some observations. (With the exception of my introductory observations to each section, the text is from the case summaries on the PERB website.)
There are earlier precedent setting cases to which later cases frequently refer. Some of the most common of these expressions are shown in the following four examples:
1. Charging Party must show that the Respondent’s conduct was arbitrary, discriminatory or in bad faith (without a rational basis or devoid of honest judgment).
2. A union may exercise its discretion to determine how far to pursue a grievance in the employee’s behalf as long as it does not arbitrarily ignore a meritorious grievance or process a grievance in a perfunctory fashion.
3. A union is also not required to process an employee’s grievance if the chances for success are minimal.
4. Absent bad faith, discrimination, or arbitrary conduct, mere negligence or poor judgment in handling a grievance does not constitute a breach of the union’s duty.
I noticed that the following three cases refer to examples of exceptions to the “mere negligence” defense:
1. The Board has found that various actions taken by a union, considered separately, would not violate the duty of fair representation. However, when considered in their totality, the actions represent a pattern of conduct which demonstrates an arbitrary failure to fairly represent the bargaining unit employee. 1747 MIUOE Local 39 (Kempe)
2. The Board has held that a union’s case-handling error (e.g., missing the deadline for filing a grievance) only constitutes negligence and does not rise to the level of arbitrary conduct sufficient to establish a breach of the duty of fair representation. The courts have recognized an exception to this rule where the union’s negligence foreclosed any remedy for the grievant. 1572E Fremont Unified District Teachers Association (Kaiser)
3. A union’s failure to inform an employee of its progress in processing her grievance, its failure to respond to the employee’s request for clarification of the grievance, and its failure to notify the employee of the employer’s ultimate response approaches but does not meet the standard for arbitrariness under state and federal precedent. CUE reasonably understood that arbitration was not available under the expired Collective Bargaining Agreement and so its failure to inform Buxton of the progress of her grievance is not evidence of breach of the duty of fair representation…. 1517H Coalition of University Employees (Buxton)
The following three cases appear to have been successful on appeal:
1. A pattern of failure to respond to the employer or employee during the grievance procedure established a violation of arbitrary failure by the exclusive representative to fairly represent the employee. 1152H AFSCME (Dehler)
2 A union cannot refuse to process a grievance because exclusive representative believes its member has engaged in conduct that the union considered disloyal . . . Where union has shown bad faith in the processing of grievances it is appropriate to require the union to hire outside counsel to do it. Reasonable attorneys’ fees granted. 0967S CAUSE (Baima)
3. Failure of union representative to seek extension of time for taking grievance to next step, after promising grievant it would do so, states prima facie allegation of violation of DFR. Dismissal is reversed. 0430E San Francisco Classroom Teachers Assn, CTA/NEA (Bramell)
And then there is this rather odd case which can make you think twice if CTA offers to take on your case:
Union’s decision to refer Welch’s case to the California Teachers Association to file a lawsuit on her behalf rather than take her grievance to arbitration did not violate the duty of fair representation….
1850E California Teachers Association and Oakland Education Association (Welch)
http://snipurl.com/presentation1 <—a MUST SEE
Edit by Rv – – this is a collaboration piece by Jill and Patricia O’neil presenting CSR for SAUSD. It features the priorities of the school board that maintains a focus outside of giving the best education for students in the Santa Ana school district. Excellent, quick animated presentation of data that apparently has been overlooked during negotiations on how to balance the school budget. It is a “must see”.
Thanks given to both of these teachers for bringing the important issues front and center.
WoW! That is quite a web site. Thank you so much for putting it together. I did leave my personal information as I am a rif(ed) teacher and would like to stay informed. ☺
Welcome SA Teacher,
We are doing what we can to get all riff’ed teachers back on the job! Please consider contacting the Biden site for the middle class and tell them that you and your family need your job back.
I just want to say that I love the website that has been created. I too signed up for it to keep updated. I also follow this blog on a daily basis. Keep up the great work!!! I will be at the next board meeting so I am sure I will see some of you there.