Contract was negotiated before this board's time
Published: Tuesday, January 14, 2003 at 6:01 a.m.
Last Modified: Tuesday, January 14, 2003 at 1:13 a.m.
I read with dismay Ann Strouse's letter (Jan. 6) titled "School Board should work for all school employees."
Strouse, a member of the union bargaining team, played a part in negotiations, which culminated in a three-year collective bargaining contract for career service personnel (CSP), which was ratified by both the union and School Board on Aug. 6, 2002.
Included in this three-year contract was a pay increase for CSP for the school year of 2002-2003.
The CSP contract is not identical to the teachers' contract. They are different because two separate negotiated agreements were reached between the union for the teacher unit and the union for the CSP unit.
It is unfair to ask a new board to undo a ratified agreement once the votes were taken and the contract apporved. If morale was a concern, perhaps the CSP bargaining unit should not have ratified (it is believed almost unanimously) the three-year contract.
The new board will have the opportunity to discuss salary and other issues during the reopener period for the 2003-2004 school year as specified in the collective bargaining agreement.
Let's not place blame on the new board for simply following a negotiated contract. Morale is about looking forward to the future, not trying to undo the past.
Reader comments posted to this article may be published in our print edition. All rights reserved. This copyrighted material may not be re-published without permission. Links are encouraged.
Comments are currently unavailable on this article