SCUSD Observer

Sacramento, California

SCUSD and SCTA leadership reach tentative agreement

(edited 9:22 a.m. Tuesday, June 15)

June 14     3 p.m.    Theodore Judah

Superintendent Jonathan Raymond, SCUSD Board President Ellyne Bell and SCTA President Linda Tuttle announced in a press conference the details of a two-year contract designed to save teachers’ jobs and to keep class sizes small.

The deal includes:

  • a mutual understanding to keep K-3 class sizes small with a 1/25 ratio
  • teachers will be asked to give up the equivalent of 3 furlough days in salary. Each SCTA member will effectively pay back approximately $950 per year to the district in order to “give back” or retain teachers currently holding pink slips
  • teachers will be asked to increase their monetary contributions to their retiree health benefits packages
  • the board is being asked to consider a parcel tax measure to go on the ballot, possibly next year

SCTA’s 3000 members have not yet seen the details on paper.  SCTA volunteers will deliver the proposed contract to members beginning Tuesday morning with a final vote tally promised by late Thursday evening with announcement on Friday, June 18.

This two-year agreement will push out the previously scheduled 2011 contract negotiations for SCUSD and its teachers’ union.

Tuttle described the compromises as a “stop gap measure” to immediately bring back teachers and also to concede to parent partners’ demands for small class sizes in the elementary grades.

Raymond believes the furlough concession is a “huge part” of the agreement because roughly $2.3 million will be saved in district coffers.

Confusion surrounds the school year calendar. In separate agreements with its other bargaining units, it is reported that the District has agreed to three actual furlough days — two at Thanksgiving week and also Lincoln’s Birthday.

SCUSD Board members Roy Grimes and Jerry Houseman were also in attendance.

Advertisements

12 Responses

Subscribe to comments with RSS.

  1. My partner teacher said, “I don’t want to get the 30-1 primary kids 5, 6, 7, and 8 years from now.” Also, working a full years’ worth of days is better for your retirement. So is getting the giveback back in 2 years.

    Tim Hebert

    June 15, 2010 at 12:47 pm

  2. You’d be forced to give up $850 a year for furloughs. The difference? It keeps your gross (which is better for retirement), there is the possibility of tax deduction, and let’s face it, if we took Thanksgiving week off, we would NEVER get those days back. Rescinding giving $850 in 2 years puts us in the drivers seat.

    A. Mercer

    June 15, 2010 at 6:16 am

  3. You know, they have a word for when people are forced to work without pay….SLAVERY.

    This “deal” smells like last week’s garbage. We’re expected to make such a monumental decision on such short notice with next-to-no information and no discussion? This sounds like a shady used car sales tactic.

    Buyer/Teacher beware! Any deal made in haste is a bad deal.

    I will vote “no” to this and try to find a way to join the Teamsters. (Where’s Jimmy Hoffa now that we need him?)

    Old Enough To Know Better

    June 14, 2010 at 11:51 pm

  4. So right, Alice…And it is up to us to call them on it every time they do. This also means being vigilant about proposed policies that essentially sends the same message…

    Anonymous

    June 14, 2010 at 11:45 pm

  5. While I haven’t seen the details yet, so far, I’m disgusting. With already low morale at my site and politicians at every level bashing teachers, I’m in no mood to give the district a “gift” of $950. That $950 less means that I’ll no longer buy technology, art supplies, and manipulatives for use in my classroom. Students and teachers all lose!

    DB

    June 14, 2010 at 10:19 pm

  6. I’ll wait to see the details, but this doesn’t look good as-is. I’m fine with paying more for my family’s medical coverage (within reason), but that essentially forced donation of pretty much $1000 rankles me.

    Michael

    June 14, 2010 at 9:42 pm

  7. Okay, I’ll reserve judgment until I see the details, but I haven’t personally seen or heard anything about keeping counselors.

    Kara

    June 14, 2010 at 8:08 pm

  8. To clarify, the operative word is “tentative”. All parties present today agreed that specific details and numbers need further “hammering out.”

    SCUSD Observer

    June 14, 2010 at 7:44 pm

  9. Raymond did mention that counselors and librarians would be part of the bring back.

    SCUSD Observer

    June 14, 2010 at 7:38 pm

  10. Wow… so we fought hard against furloughs only to take the equivalent pay cut without days off? And it benefits elementary only and won’t bring back my indispensable counselors? Tough sell, man.

    Kara

    June 14, 2010 at 6:11 pm

  11. Whatever it said then, the first priority now, is for the Board and Superintendent to stop bashing the union, or it’ll never get approved.

    A. Mercer

    June 14, 2010 at 5:45 pm

  12. I’ll look through my “archives” and see if I can find any of the information regarding the parcel tax that was studied by the district back in 2004 or 2005.

    klenox

    June 14, 2010 at 5:30 pm


Comments are closed.

%d bloggers like this: