Unions and District Settle

The Service Employees International Union, Local 790, which includes clerical workers, janitors, cafeteria workers and secretaries reached a tentative contract agreement with the school board early Wednesday morning.

SEIU employees will get a two-percent salary increase starting June 30, 2006, and another two-percent increase the following year, according to school board president Eric Mar. Union members will also receive 75 percent of dependent health care benefits, which will increase if the district receives more funding.

Union members will vote to accept or reject the settlement after Thanksgiving, The success of SEIU’s negotiations is a result of their close work with United Educators of San Francisco, which sent a clear message to the district that the unions had the power to shut schools down through a general strike, according to social studies teacher and union representative Ken Tray. All of the district unions — including the bus-drivers, the building trades and the Teamsters, which represents the district’s sanitation workers — were expected to honor a strike yesterday.

Mayor Gavin Newsom became involved with negotiations this week and appeared with district and union leaders on Wednesday morning to announce the settlement.

According to Tray, the mayor was strongly averse to a general strike in the school district on his watch.

The two unions’ joint action is expected to strengthen UESF for spring negotiations. “The teachers’ union came out of the negotitations more powerful than we have ever been in our 16 years of existence,” Tray said.

Mar explained in a meeting that a strike would cost the district more money, as it would have to replace the people on strike, in order to keep the schools running.

The contract between the district and educators expired in June 2004 when negotiations began.

Contracts state the rights, working conditions, salaries and benefits required for district employees. UESF members are asking for a new contract that would include a wage increase. The SEIU negotiated with the district for salary and dependent health care benefits.

SEIU had planned a Thursday strike as a result of stalled negotiations.

SEIU initially demanded dependent health care and a 4.5-percent salary increase over a period of two years. The district responded with two alternate proposals. In October, the district offered a four-percent wage increase over two years. On Nov. 1 the district offered a two-percent wage increase, in addition to dependent health benefits. The union viewed both as insufficient and an insult, rejecting them, according to social studies teacher and union representative Sandy Shure.

Both the SEIU and UESF have stated that the district could easily afford their contract demands. Over the past year, the district received a 10-percent increase in cost of living adjustment funds from the state to cover increasingly high costs in the Bay Area. These funds will increase five percent next year, according to the San Francisco Unified School District’s Web site (www.sfusd.edu). Union members argue that the two-percent increase the district has offered to employees is insufficient in comparison to this 15-percent increase in funds. They are not alone. “There is money to fund the contract they (that the SEIU) want,” Board of Education commissioner Mark Sanchez said.

The district also has additional funds on top of the COLA, including $15.6 million from the city in July through Proposition H, money that is earmarked for extracurricular school activities. In addition, the district was allotted $1.8 million in funds from the California Lottery in October. Union members were angered by the district’s choice to offer a $700,000 salary package to superintendent Arlene Ackerman, which also includes a $375,000 bonus.

“It’s obvious that a settlement can be held if the district is willing to be forthcoming about the money,” Tray said. “They need to grant SEIU dependent care; then UESF can sit down and iron out a just salary.”

The district insists that union demands are unattainable. Wages already rank first and second in comparison to other Bay Area districts, according to the district. However, the district only spends 72.74 percent of their budget staff and teacher salaries, according to Tray. Of the 13 biggest school districts, San Francisco ranks last compared to 82.60 percent average.

The district maintains that their own offers are already beneficial and reasonable enough for the workers, as their budget is running extremely low. It is impossible to provide the requested health care benefit and sufficient wage increases in the same year, according to the district’s Web site.

In protest, Lowell teachers chose to hold a Day of Silence on Nov. 9. Participating teachers did not speak throughout the school day. Classes took place, but with much less interaction between students and teachers. Most teachers just gave assignments or tests to students and refrained from teaching.

“This is a form of protest in communicating to parents, the board and the public that teachers need a contract,” Shure said. Shure called the Day of Silence a “mild protest.” “No one wants a strike; we don’t want to disrupt the education process,” she said. “We’re hoping to send the message that teachers are entitled to earn a reasonable living.”

Teachers in other schools in the district have been protesting in other ways. Some schools are doing “Work to Rule.” If Lowell teachers decide to undertake “Work to Rule” as a form of protest, they would work just the seven-hour workday for which they are paid. This would halt extracurricular activities, grading papers at home and other time-consuming responsibilities like writing college recommendations for graduating students.

Both Mar and Sanchez were present at a union gathering after school on Wednesday Nov. 9. The meeting was to discuss the situation between the union and the district and to hear board members’ perspectives. of some of the higher ranking board members. Both Mar and Sanchez spoke about the value of Day of Silence.

“It can be an effective message toward the students, but it is aimed at the district,” Sanchez said.

Mar agreed, adding that the Day of Silence was a good creative idea. “It shows what (teachers) can do to support each other, and the teachers can feel more united in doing so,” Mar said. Science teacher Shawn Laureyns said that the Day of Silence was effective. “Since teachers aren’t allowed to talk, hopefully students will want to do their own research,” he said.