Cairo Association of Teachers

Cairo Association of Teachers - Negotiations

Key Dates & Updates

March 5, 2002 - Eighteenth Negotiations Session - 5:30 p.m. - 7:30 p.m. - Official TA of Section 2.17 (Student Discipline) and Section 3.12 (Instructional Facilities). No progress was made on Section 3.11 (Working Conditions)...still discussing the "pulling" of teachers' assistants for other duties. We had a long discussion concerning the new Board proposal concerning lesson plans. They want plans to remain in the building at ALL times so as to be available to the administration for review and substitute teachers for use. The Board also wants the plans in a form that the substitute "can use to teach". The CAT discussed the impracticality of their language...that teachers often prepared/modified lesson plans at home to make them relevant and timely. Your team also indicated that day-to-day substitutes could NOT realistically be expected to "teach" the class...and that teachers took that into consideration when they "substituted" modified/practical lesson plans for the day/days they would be absent. The Board team indicated that they would take our concerns into consideration for the next session. We then turned to Section 4.3 (Payroll Installments). The major concern in this section is the incident which occured last summer when teachers requested or were required to take "lump sum" payments of their "summer money". Exorbitant taxes were withheld...literally hundreds/thousands of extra dollars...dollars that could not be retrieved until the employees filed their income tax return...and received their refund. Teachers who retired or resigned from the District had no choice...they had to receive their money in a lump sum...and lose access to some of their income for months. Those teachers who exercised their right to a contractual "benefit" were NOT AWARE that the District was going to withhold taxes differently than it had for all previous years. The Board team indicated that a change in computer software caused the problem, BUT the CAT team reminded them that the change in computer software did not take place until this year. ALSO...the "computer software" handled other "lump sum" payments differently...taking out NO TAXES on thousands of dollars of extra duty pay or summer school pay. The CAT team suggested that if the computer software were the problem...maybe we need to get the computer folks in here and solve the problem...because BOTH sides agreed that the taxes that were withheld were excessive. The Board team said they would contact the computer company and get more information on the problem...and its possible correction. They also indicated that MAYBE the "problem" did not exist anymore...since the District had changed software companies. The CAT team indicated that hopefully that was true...but that we wanted assurances before the next round of lump sum payments. Next session is scheduled for March 9th. (This was changed at a Special Meeting of the Board on March 6th...Next session on March 11th AND another...1st with federal mediator...on March 16th.)

February 25, 2002 - Seventeenth Negotiations Session - 5:30 p.m. - 7:50 p.m. Verbal agreement was reached on Section 2.17 (Pupil Discipline) and Section 3.12 (Instructional Facilities). Much of the discussion during the past two sessions had focused on student discipline...primarily on the length of the "time out" for elementary students sent to the office for violations of the Code of Conduct. The Board team wanted to reduce the amount of time from the current 50 minutes to 30 minutes. The CAT team objected, citing the increasing verbal and physical abuse suffered by teachers at the hands of "small children"...that curse, bite, kick, etc. Tonight, the Board team responded to these concerns. They agreed that at the "Elementary Level--A student sent to the office for a severe act of misconduct as defined in the student-parent handbook shall not be readmitted to class without a minimum of 50 minutes outside of the regular classroom." Section 3.12 concerns procedures for assigning an academic class to an area other than a classroom (e.g. cafeteria, boiler room, etc.) Modification of existing language now specifies the time period that is allowed for emergency movement of a class; namely 10 school days. If said assignment exceeds 10 school days, that situation shall be impact bargained. Considerable discussion was held on Section 3.11 (Working Conditions), which ALMOST brought agreement. However, one item...using classroom aides for other than their assigned duties...still remains unresolved. At the conclustion of the session, the CAT team asked the Board team whether they had made a decision concerning a call for mediation. They indicated that they were still waiting to hear from the "facilitator" offered by the "outsiders" in mid-January. The CAT team indicated that 6 weeks had now passed...and no facilitator. Also, the CAT team reminded the Board team that the facilitator was going to cost $500 a day or $250 a night, whereas, a federal mediator is "free of charge". After some discussion, the Board team agreed with the CAT team that the best option at this point would be the federal mediator. A joint request will be made for this service this week. The CAT team again emphasized the need to bring a conclusion to these negotiations...hopefully by the end of March. We offered to meet longer and more often. The Board team indicated their willingness to do the same. The next negotiations is scheduled for March 4 at 1:00 p.m.

February 19, 2002 - Sixteenth Negotiations Session - 5:30 p.m. - 8:10 p.m. - Opened session with TA of Sections 3.4 (Voluntary Staff Transfer) and 3.8 (Involuntary Transfer). The Board Team did question the first sentence of the last paragraph of Section 3.8: "A teacher with ten or more years of experience in the district will have the right to veto any reassignment (as defined in the first paragraph of this section) unless the reassignment is being done to reduce the number of teaching positions." The Association Team explained the intent of this language as originally negotiated. Namely, that the administration/Board could exercise "management rights" during the first ten (10) years of an employee's tenure. After that, the employee gained job-site security/stability. Accordingly, in the event a vacancy occurred at another building, which necessitated an involuntary transfer, an employee with less than 10 years of service (if one existed) would have to be moved prior to one with more than 10 years of service. Section 3.8 as TA'd does contain an amendment agreed to by the CAT Team at the last session which addresses a concern raised by the Board Team. Namely, giving the administration the ability (in the event an employee vacates a position) to reduce the number of teaching positions in a building by NOT advertising the "vacancy" (to other buildings or outside the District) and adjusting the job assignments of remaining building personnel. The vacated position WOULD be advertised within the affected building so that employees of same could exercise their rights under Section 3.4.) The two teams then turned to further discussion of Section 3.11 (and very briefly Section 3.12), with the Board Team promising a counterproposal at the next negotiations session. Prior to adjournment, the CAT Team asked if there was a way to finalize Section 2.17 (Student Discipline). The two teams have spent considerable time on this section and are now "20 minutes apart"...namely, the CAT Team wants to continue the "50-minute time out" for elementary students who are guilty of Class II or Class III violations of the Code of Conduct. (The specification of Class II and Class III was a concession on the part of the Association Team to address the Board Team's expressed concern that elementary students were missing too much instructional time for minor infractions...being sent to the office for not having paper or pencil, for chewing gum, etc.) The Board Team wants to reduce that "time out" to 30 minutes. The CAT Team stressed that doing so would send the wrong message to employees who are enduring physical abuse. After further discussion, it was agreed that the two parties would come to the next session with a fresh proposal...agreeing that the length of time was secondary to the desired outcome...behavior modification. The next negotiating session...February 25th at 5:30 p.m.

February 11, 2002 - Fifteenth Negotiations Session - 5:30 p.m. - 7:50 p.m. - Opened session with a TA of Section 3.1 (Notification of Assignment). The Board team stated that their "Top Ten" list presented at the last session would stand as is...no changes. This reduced the final list of negotiable items to twenty (20) - actually 18, since two items appeared on both lists...and the TA of 3.1 made it 17. The CAT team then presented its promised counterproposal for Section 3.8 - Involuntary Transfer. Much discussion and a couple of caucuses followed as the two sides expressed their respective concerns. The Board team wanted the administration to have the freedom to pick applicants based on "qualifications". The CAT team expressed its concern that the "freedom to pick" had led to numerous grievances in the past as employees cried "foul", alleging that "picks" were made on the basis of "personalities" and or "retaliation". The CAT team stated that the only way that the Association could accept language on "best qualified" would be the development of specific criteria - defining what those qualifications would be. After some exploration of that topic, the CAT team (again, in the interests of expediting negotiations) proposed going "back to book" on Section 3.8 AND Section 3.4 (Voluntary Transfer). The Board team agreed to this proposal...reducing the number of outstanding items to 15...plus the salary schedule. The two teams began discussing Section 3.11 - Working Conditions. The CAT team expressed a concern that some teachers are routinely required to forfeit their scheduled planning time for required staff meetings. No agreement was reached, but the Board team promised to explore the matter prior to the next scheduled negotiations session...which is Tuesday, February 19th.

February 4, 2002 - Rescheduled Fourteenth Negotiations Session - 5:30 p.m. - 7:08 p.m. - Confusion abounds...After a one-week delay (at Board request - needed more time to prepare their "Top Ten" list), a snag occurred in the expected exchange of bargaining proposals. AFTER exchanging proposals, the Board team expressed their belief that these proposals were "language items" only...that "money" issues would be separate from and in addition to the "Top Ten" list. The Association strongly objected to this interpretation...citing the FACT that we sent them a letter on January 22nd stating that the "Top Ten" included everything except the teacher salary schedule. The Board's team acknowledged getting the letter, but cited "communications problems". Oh, well...yet another delay...a small one, but after eight (8) months...any delay...(repeated delays)...becomes very (suspicious?) disturbing! "Plan B" - the Board team will prepare a "new" (comprehensive) list for our next negotiations session - TENTATIVELY (Take nothing for granted!) scheduled for Monday, February 11th. Two steps forward and one step back...we did TA Section 2.10 (Employee Evaluation) as expected. However, the full Board objected to their team's concession on Section 2.17 (Pupil Discipline). Therefore, more negotiations on that item. The other step forward was that we did reach verbal agreement on Section 3.1 - Notification of Teaching Assignment - an item appearing on both "Top Ten" lists. Another such item - Section 3.8 - Involuntary Transfer - is still being discussed. At the conclusion of the meeting, the Association suggested that the two sides request the services of a federal mediator as provided for in the Contractual Agreement. After eight long months, we feel that an outside presence would be beneficial...would keep both sides focused and on task as we reach a critical juncture of negotiations. The Leadership Teaming group that visited the District for our "intervention" in mid-January suggested and offered the services of a "facilitator", but questions now arise on the funding of such a third party. The Federal Mediation and Conciliation Service - FMCS (...yet another acronym for future reference - there will be a quiz/test during the ratification meeting - gives you plenty of time to study!) - is free. The Board team said that they would discuss this with the full Board at their Special Meeting on February 6th. As usual...stay tuned!

January 28, 2002 - Scheduled Fourteenth Negotiations Session - 5:30 p.m. - Canceled at Board Request - They are not ready...want another week! They did indicate that they were agreeable to the CAT proposal of each side picking their "Top Ten" language items in order to expedite the much stalled much delayed negotiations process.

January 19, 2002 - 11:00 a.m. - Members of the two bargaining teams met briefly following the CSD #1 Leadership Teaming meeting on Saturday morning to discuss negotiations procedures. The CAT team suggested that each side pick ten (10) of the remaining language items on the table (excluding the teacher salary schedule as well as the "completed" Sections 2.10 and 2.17) and submit them to the other side at our scheduled January 28th negotiations session. All other items would go "back to book" and remain part of the next Contractual Agreement. Hopefully, this would expedite the process, giving us a realistic chance of concluding negotiations in a timely fashion. The Board President stated that he would present this suggestion to the full Board at its regular meeting on Thursday (January 24th) and let the CAT know whether it was acceptable/unacceptable on Friday morning at the latest.

January 16, 2002 - Thirteenth Negotiations Session - 5:30 p.m. - 7:50 p.m. - The CAT team presented the Board team with a summary of our January 7th discussions concerning Section 2.10 (Evaluation) and Section 2.17 (Discipline). The Board team said it needed to caucus in order to read and discuss the language. An hour later (!!!) we resumed negotiations. After further explanation of the respective positions, agreement was reached on the two articles. The CAT agreed to type the final language to be TA'ed at the next meeting. That meeting is scheduled for January 28, 2002. At our suggestion, the two teams will attempt some preliminary discussion of the remainder of Article II following the Leadership Teaming meetings this Saturday...hopefully to expedite the negotiations process. The CAT team reminded the Board that due to the much delayed start, time was of the essence.

January 7, 2002 - Twelfth Negotiations Session - 5:30 p.m. - 7:30 p.m. - Well, the new year did not begin with a bang! The teams spent two hours discussing Section 2.10 (Evaluation) and Section 2.17 (Pupil Discipline) with no agreements forthcoming. Both teams did agree that the purpose of teacher evaluation should be the improvement of instruction - not a "gotcha" by an administrator with an axe to grind. The Association is seeking contractual guarantees that the teacher will receive input/feedback on what is expected of an excellent/satisfactory teacher from the principal PRIOR to the (final) observation. With respect to pupil discipline...the Board is concerned about students being denied instructional time by being sent to the office for the lack of a pencil, for chewing gum, etc. The Association expressed the concern of teachers that disruptive students returning to the classroom during the same period (secondary) or without an adequate "time out" (elementary) tended to enter with an "attitude", causing further disruption of the educational process. The Board team does not want to tie the hands of its adminstrators who are being asked to "handle the teacher's problem" - that if the adminstrator feels that he/she has solved the problem, then the administrator should have the discretion of returning the student to the classroom. The Association reminded the Board team that the current language existed because teachers felt that in the past many administrators just wanted to "clear the office" without addressing the underlying concerns. Both teams agreed to revisit these two sections prior to the next meeting based upon the concerns expressed at the table. That "next session" is scheduled for Wednesday, Janaury 16, 2002.

December 17, 2001 - Eleventh Negotiations Session - 5:30 p.m. - 8:00 p.m. - The two sides reviewed the "summary" of Article II sections discussed on December 10th as prepared and submitted by the CAT. Following further discussion and subsequent revisions, the summary was TA'd. Finally, after 6 months...some tangible progress! Hopefully, this is a preview of coming attractions. The Board team promised to give the CAT a counterproposal to Article III prior to the next negotiations session. That session is scheduled for 5:30 p.m. on Monday, January 7, 2002.

December 14, 2001 - CAT delivers "summary" of Article II sections discussed on December 10th for possible TA on December 17th.

December 10, 2001 - Tenth Negotiations Session - 5:30 p.m. - 7:38 p.m. - Renewed discussion/disagreement over the continuation/cancellation of "past practice". Neither side wants the daunting task of identifying and reducing to writing such practices. Tabled with no agreement. Board then surprised CAT with an insistence on immediately negotiating Article I - Recognition. The CAT objected - citing that it would be an exercise of hypotheticals - why waste time (with an entire contract yet to negotiated) trying to finalize language on whom the CAT represents when the merger election has yet to happen? The Board had no real answer - simply a repeated insistence that it be negotiated - NOW! Finally, we turned to Article II. The Board finally made some movement in a counterprosal presented at the table. The two teams discussed Sections 2.1 through 2.15, noting areas of agreement and citing continued concerns. At the conclusion of the session, the CAT volunteered to "write up" its understanding of the agreed upon language items and to submit them to the Board by Friday, December 14th, for possible TA during the next negotiations session to be held on December 17th. At that session, the two sides hope to conclude Article II and begin on Article III. The Board has promised to have a counter to Article III at that time. (CAT presented its Article III counter - as promised - at the table on December 10th.)

December 3, 2001 - Ninth Negotiations Session - 6:15 p.m. - The first meeting with the new Board team wasn't pretty...after beginning 15 minutes late (waiting for their team to arrive) we spent at least 30 minutes of a scheduled 2-hour meeting arguing about whether to "renegotiate" the "guidelines for negotiations"...guidelines that were "TA'd" back on June 5th--the ONLY TA that we have had since negotiations began...a period of over 6 months! When we finally resumed negotiations, we pointed out to them that we had made forward movement in 13 sections of Article II...they had made 1...giving back something that they took away in their initial proposal...something that we are entitled to by law. The counterproposal that they presented to us on November 30th was actually "regressive" (backward movement forbidden by IL labor law) in 4 sections! They defended their regressive movement by stating that they were unaware until last Thursday that certain sections of the contract even existed!? At the conclusion of the meeting, we impressed upon the Board team the need for movement...that nothing had been accomplished after 6 months of negotiations. They are to "revisit" their response to Article II and we (in an attempt to expedite the process) will submit a counterproposal for Article III. A meeting for this purpose has been set for Monday, December 10th, at 5:30 p.m. Adjournment was at 8:15 p.m.

November 30, 2001 - Exchange Counterproposals on Articles I and II - 10:00 a.m.

October 31, 2001 - Rescheduled Eighth Negotiations Session - 6:12 p.m. - 6:37 p.m. - Board team confirms that it has no new proposals to make and indicates that they knew coming in that there probably would not be any progress since a new Board would be seated on November 7th. When asked why they wanted to meet, their response was that they had promised back in August to meet and that they wanted to show that they were willing to sit down and work. Yet, they had nothing to offer. It WAS a show...pure and simple. If/when CAT complains to the IELRB about the Board's bad faith negotiations, they can proudly point to October 29th and say that they met. That sham will NOT withstand the most casual scrutiny. ANY SUBSTANCE? For what it is worth, the Board tentatively agreed to exchange counterproposals with CAT on November 30th and then negotiate on December 3rd. Time will tell...

October 26, 2001 - Receive telephone call from the Superintendent...Board has no counterproposal to exchange...Board's "position for negotiations" is the same as it was on June 26th...four months ago and six negotiations sessions ago! Still would like to meet on October 31st.

October 25, 2001 - Exchange Counterproposals - Articles I & II - Oops...Did not happen...Superintendent out of the office. Association faxes letter asking for a new "exchange date".

September 17, 2001 - Eighth Negotiations Session - 6:00 p.m. - Postponed at Board Request

September 13, 2001 - Exchange Counterproposals - No Meeting - Postponed at Board Request

August 27, 2001 - Seventh Negotiations Session - 6:00 p.m. - 8:00 p.m. - Two teams complete "asking questions". Some initial financial questions were posed and answers/documents promised. It was agreed that the two teams would prepare counterproposals for Articles I and II and exchange them without a meeting on Thursday, September 13th. This will allow the two teams to prepare for discussion/negotiations on Monday, September 17th.

August 21, 2001 - Sixth Negotiations Session - 6:00 p.m. - 8:00 p.m. - Two teams continue asking questions to determine rationale for respective bargaining positions. One more meeting might do it!

August 14, 2001 - Fifth Negotiations Session - 6:00 p.m. - 8:00 p.m. - Stiiiiiiiill going...Two teams continue asking questions to determine rationale for respective bargaining positions.

August 6, 2001 - Fourth Negotiations Session - 6:00 p.m. - 8:15 p.m. - Two teams continue asking questions to determine rationale for respective bargaining positions. (Two teams agree to submit form to the Illinois Educational Labor Relations Board - IELRB - asking to "Defer Mediation".)

July 30, 2001 - Third Negotiations Session - 6:45 p.m. - 8:45 p.m. (Late start - Board trying to raise a team!) Two teams continue asking questions to determine rationale for respective bargaining positions.

July 23, 2001 - Rescheduled "First" Negotiations Session - 6:00 p.m. - 8:30 p.m. - Two teams ask questions to determine rationale for respective initial contract proposals.

July 19, 2001 - "First" Negotiations Session - 6:15 p.m. - Canceled

July 18, 2001 - Regular School Board Meeting - Board accepts CAT proposal of July 23rd as "first" negotiations date.

July 17, 2001 - Board cancels July 19th negotiations date.

July 10, 2001 - Board proposes July 19th as negotiations date - CAT accepts

July 4, 2001 - CAT offers dates (week of July 16th or July 23rd) for negotiations

June 26, 2001 - CAT President and Superintendent Exchange Initial Bargaining Packages - 3:30 p.m. (No Meeting)

June 5, 2001 - Negotiations Session - "Guidelines" - 6:00 p.m. - 7:30 p.m. - Agreed upon guidelines and set date for exchange of contract proposals - June 26th.

May 16, 2001 - Regular School Board Meeting - Board offers to meet with CAT (on June 5th) to discuss guidelines for negotiations - States that no proposals shall be exchanged until after that meeting.

May 11, 2001 - CAT sends letter modifiying original "Demand to Bargain" letter - If Board intends to propose changes in Contract rather than work from CAT proposal (as in past), then there should be an EXCHANGE of proposals on a mutually agreeable date.

April 30th - CAT sends "Demand to Bargain" letter - Offers to deliver "CAT Initial Bargaining Proposal" on May 15th

April 6, 2001 - CAT Tracks - Reminder: Turn in "Negotiations Survey"

April 1, 2001 - Contractual Provision: "Negotiations shall begin no earlier than April 1."

March 13, 2001 - CAT Tracks - "Negotiations Survey" requesting membership input