Spencer school support staff negotiations under way

Six members of Local 821 of the United Electrical, Radio and Machine Workers of America Union (UE) represented the district's 153 noncertified support staff members around the board table during the open meeting. This group, which includes approximately 96 part-time employees, represents the Spencer school district's food service workers, custodians, teacher and library associates, secretaries and administrative assistants, media and technology workers.

"Understand that this proposal is being made with the full knowledge of the financial situation of the district. We understand that the district has financial problems. I've been told there was some ideas about cutting staff and limiting hours. Hopefully, we don't have to do that. That's why you're getting the proposal you're getting," Jack Lassiter, a union representative from Waterloo, Neb. said. "Now, if it does become a situation where everything is slash and burn and you're cutting hours and positions and everything else, then we will submit another proposal. This proposal is based on existing hours and on current staffing levels."

The UE representative then presented four contract proposals for negotiation:

* A two-year contract.

* No increase in wages for the 2009-10 school year. (It was later clarified the union's intent would be to "age the schedule," which would carry an approximately $15,000 cost.)

* The two-year contract would be re-opened for a negotiation of wages in its second year, or for the 2010-11school year.

* The district would absorb any increases to the present health insurance plan premiums for covered employees for both years of the two-year contract. (This would translate into no additional out-of-pocket costs to employees represented by this union. In addition, they would be required to stay on the plans they currently have.)

"How does the unit feel about this proposal? I know you guys are the leadership," Superintendent Greg Ebeling asked the six local union representatives seated around the table.

"We voted and it passed unanimously," Chris Beck answered.

"The number of people at the meeting was the highest it's been since I've been around," Lassiter, who's represented district noncertified staff for the last three years, added.

Spencer's superintendent then asked the union representative for clarification on what he meant by their proposal being based on "current staffing levels."

"Next year, obviously, I don't know what's going to happen," Ebeling said, hinting at additional budget and personnel cuts.

"I'll be honest with you. We're talking about staffing levels for this year," Lassiter replied. "Next year, if you cut staff by 20 percent, our proposal for the wage re-opener is going to be a whole lot higher than if you add staff or if you maintain the staffing level. Matter of fact, if you cut by 20 percent, our wage proposal is probably going to be 20 percent higher than what you're seeing now."

As Ebeling calculated what the support staff's initial proposal for 2009-10 would be, he estimated a 1.71 percent increase to age the schedule, to account for an increase in IPERS (Iowa Public Employees' Retirement System), and to realize the insurance benefit being proposed.

"To keep them all at the same amount they're paying now, each one would have to get jumped up $755 (in base pay for insurance) to keep them at the same level (as the 39 full-time people)," Ebeling said.

"So, either everybody could get 15 cents an hour more or 39 (full-time) people could get their insurance covered," he continued. " ... The one thing I think your group needs to wrestle with is: While your proposal is 1.71 percent, 1.77 percent translates into 15 cents an hour more for everybody. So, you're looking at going 15 cents across-the-board for everybody, ... or you're looking at (insurance for 39 full-time employees)."

The superintendent then told those gathered around the table, "I appreciate your proposal. I think you put some good thought into it and I'm very pleased that you are trying to be responsive to our situation. But, I also understand that you just can't take a pay freeze for the rest of your life either."

The district's initial proposal

Next, Ebeling presented a 1.06 percent total package, or $27,891 increase proposal for 2009-10. As he outlined the district's initial proposal with the support staff union, he introduced a 5 cent per-hour increase to the salary schedule and "$50 additional to each covered insurance-eligible employee." Ebeling then stated this amount would not cover their expected increases for insurance next year: Single policyholders can anticipate a $62.98 per month increase and family policyholders can expect a $103.09 per month increase, he reported.

"Anecdotally, the board doesn't expect the support staff to take a pay freeze -- even with not cutting any of the positions. They didn't think that was realistic, only because they know the teachers will probably not be taking a pay freeze," Ebeling said. "Of the staff, I am taking a pay freeze as a superintendent. The only other person I know of now who's taking a pay freeze is Kathy Elliott, the assistant superintendent. But, everybody else has gotten something, or at least at this juncture has been offered something. So, that's what this proposal is based upon."

The superintendent then described four contract article changes reflected in the district's proposal for 2009-10. The first would add categories for full- and part-time special education or preschool paraeducators.

"The reason for this addition is because we are going to have some certification requirements coming because our early childhood special ed, our preschool program, is going to require paraeducator certification," Ebeling explained. " ... That has not been the case with teacher associates (TAs) ever. We haven't had to have a specific certification for TAs. Right now, we are having our teacher associates become certified that are in the (Child's Garden) preschool."

Spencer's superintendent indicated five preschool TAs are currently working on this certification, which the district is paying for.

"The reason we're doing that is we need them certified," Ebeling said. " ... It's sort of like if we already have a teacher in the district and then we tell them, 'We'd really like you to go get certified in this,' then the district helps out with that cost."

"Would it be possible for people to get that certification if they're not in those positions," Lassiter asked. "You would have a bigger pool and our people would have a chance to improve their skill sets."

"We could certainly offer the class at cost, but the people would have to do it on their own time," Ebeling answered.

The district's initial contract proposal also requested clarification in the area of potential reductions.

"Right now, we have seniority throughout the district, and it doesn't really split out anything within job classifications," Ebeling said. "In other words, if I'm a bus driver and I'm reduced and I have more seniority than somebody who's a TA, technically they would bump a TA and I could go into that job. Now, it still is based upon qualifications and whether they have the skills to do that or not, but it's a bit problematic because everybody's kind of in this big pool and there's no seniority within job classification."

"We haven't dealt with many reductions," he continued, "so it hasn't been an issue. But, we potentially down the road will deal with that at some point in time. ... This is just trying to make that more clear."

The district's other article proposals included adding two days of paid business leave for full-time noncertified staff members, which would equalize them with other full-time positions within the district, and adding a three-year salary schedule for the aforementioned paraeducators.

"This proposal puts it about 10 cents above where the current pool of part-time TAs is at per-hour, because of the certification," Ebeling explained.

As the two parties adjourned, they scheduled to begin formal negotiations at 5 p.m. on Monday, March 30.

* The 2009-10 support staff initial proposals compare with what was settled on for this school year: A 3.82 percent, or $102,233 increase. The 2008-09 support staff settlement included a $250 insurance and a 30 cent per-hour increase, among other additions and changes.

In other district bargaining:

* Superintendent Greg Ebeling and Assistant Superintendent Kathy Elliott have agreed to take a pay freeze in 2009-10.

* Spencer's seven district administrators have agreed to a 1 percent salary increase and a .5 percent insurance increase in 2009-10.

* The Spencer Education Association, which represents the district's full- and part-time teachers, has proposed a 6.86 percent, or $616,754, increase. The district, in turn, proposed a 2.01 percent increase for 2009-10, or a total package worth $180,295. The package presented by the district to the SEA would include "aging" the current salary schedule, at an estimated cost of $95,057, and a 12 percent increase for insurance, at a calculated cost of $85,238. The two sides have tentatively scheduled an April 1 mediation date.