SC Staff Organization

A Sad Day for The SCEA

2009-10-24T10:18:00.015-04:00

On October 21, The SCEA and SCSO returned to the bargaining table to resume contract negotiations. Management began by withdrawing the package they placed on the table on July 29. They replaced it with salary freezes, furloughs, take backs on longevity and sick leave bank days. They presented the furloughs as an alternative to RIFs and threatened to completely restructure the organization and change job descriptions if we didn't go along. They justified the furloughs by saying that one or more of the members of their Board have been furloughed (1-2 days) and it was said "if it's good enough for us, it's good enough for staff." It should be mentioned here that they proposed a furlough of TEN days, not the 1 or 2 days that some teachers were furloughed AND they want the furlough to take place 5 days the week of Thanksgiving and 5 days the week of Christmas. The inhumane, cruel, and senselessness of this have left the staff speechless.

Converations that took place at various times made it clear that the Board have no respect or regard for the staff. We see this as the result of a long-standing focus at the state level to keep staff and leaders at a distance from one another and resist opportunities for staff and goverance to develop relationships. Board members do not know what goes on behind the scenes, and the lack of support and resources the staff face every day. Because of our committment over the years to protect the association as professionals do, our leaders are mostly in the dark. In the days ahead, the staff will be having very candid conversations with their leaders.

The SCEA has spent an estimated $60,000 so far, to have an attorney sit at the table with them. The SCSO did not use an attorney, but if we had, it would not have cost the association anything. Attorneys are not needed in these meetings.

The contract is likely headed to arbitration, which could cost anywhere from $5,000 to $20,000 more in legal fees for the attorney. So far, The SCEA has spent more for an attorney than three times the cost to give us the salary increase we asked for. It is clear to SCSO that the association has plenty of money.

The SCEA should be ashamed of itself. As the largest professional association for public school educators, they would NEVER sell out their members this way. They would NEVER suggest that teacher salaries be frozen, that their benefits be cut, or that they be furloughed 10 days during the Thanksgiving and Christmas holiday season. Why do they think this is appropriate for their staff?

The SCEA expects and depends on the staff to keep this association moving forward while they insult us, demean us, and try to take back salary and benefits from a staff who is already overworked and underpaid. The staff will remember this, the next time they are faced with a choice of working an 8 hour day versus the traditional 12 hour day, and the next time their phone rings before 9 or after 5, or the next time a member wants to meet on a Saturday. Giving the job more than 100% is not appreciated, so instead, the staff will give that time to their families.

October 21 was a sad day for The SCEA and Staff.

Return to the Table

2009-10-07T20:44:00.004-04:00

On October 21, SCSO and managment return to the table to sign a TA on the proposal management put on the table on July 29. In preparpation for our return to the table, management has implied they may, as a first course of business, renig on their July 29 proposal. In conversation with SCSO President on October 7, management attempted to paint a gloomy picture of the association's financial status and implied that the proposal they put on the table is shaky and that staff should prepare for a ZERO contract. When they were reminded that the association has financial resources to fund their proposal, they reverted to the oldest and nastiest trick ... we have the money, we just don't want you to have it. Shame on management for believing we would fall for this trick. They have already spent more money on an attorney to sit beside them at the table than it would have cost to fund their proposal 4 times. This is all especially disconcerting that management's chief negotiator is a retired long time union member. He has forgetten from whence he came. This poor attempt at posturing is not a surprise but it is disappointing. It's an ongoing reminder of how little management values their staff. SCSO will meet management at the table on October 21 but take backs will not be considered. We will hold the line for what we deserve.

7/29 Update

2009-08-24T13:10:00.009-04:00

After declaring impasse on July 22, management communicated interest in returning to the table. On July 29, management presented the union with a counter proposal. We were to meet the next day to consider the proposal and move forward; however, within minutes of sending the counter proposal, management's chief negotiator fell ill and bargaining was cancelled. SCSO is currently waiting for a date to resume negotiations.

In the new counter proposal and in follow up conversations with the FMCS mediator to clarify their document, management withdrew key take backs that would have caused the union to outright reject the counter proposal. One such take back was the "evergreen" clause. Of the original 70+ take backs, the counter proposal that currently lies in wait, contains only a few.

The proposal offers a 2% increase in salary and status quo on all other monetary benefits. The focus of the original contract was on take backs in non-monetary language that created immediate jeopardy for the job security and well being of staff. The union's original proposal contained significant language enhancements to clean up outdated and invalid language and to enhance non monetary working conditions. The union also originally proposed increases in salary, mileage, cell phones and longevity. By 7/29, those had been withdrawn pending consideration of management's 7/29 proposal.

NSO President Visits SCSO

2009-08-12T20:00:00.014-04:00

NSO President Chuck Agerstrand paid a visit to SC recently and spent time with SCSO members. It was a wonderful evening of union solidarity and fellowship. Chuck listened with concern and love for his union brothers and sisters while they shared with him what it is like to work in South Carolina. In the midst of what seemed like a gloomy evening, Chuck reminded SCSO members, more than once, that NSO is here for them through the good, the bad and the ugly. He stressed the importance of solidarity. He presented SCSO with a check, to help offset crisis expenses. In addition to this crisis grant, NSO has provided funding for Gerry Lange to represent us at the table, and Jack Schamel to assist us with grievance assistance. Chuck's wife, Bonnie, also made the journey and she was a delight to meet and spend time with. The NSO Contact will run a story about the trip in the near future.

What were they thinking?

2009-07-22T22:55:00.007-04:00

Bargaining resumed on July 21 and ended July 22 with management declaring impasse. Going into contract negotiations – which began in June – the union felt optimistic that we would move through the process with less conflict than in the past. We believed this largely because we have a new management team who has modeled the kind of outlook and approach needed to take our association forward. However, it is obvious now that we under-estimated the influence others would have on our management team and their willingness to tear down relationships, destroy staff morale, and continue the same modus operandi that has been damaging our association for the past few years. Our hopes of a new direction for our association is now threatened by a draconian union bashing agenda promulgated by internal and external influences on management. We hoped our new management team would be able to recognize these agendas for what they are and do the right thing. Those hopes are gone.

The union was prepared for challenges around monetary issues. We were not prepared for and did not expect the hurtful and insulting take backs in language that do not involve money.

As we move forward to arbitration, management will spend an amount that is estimated at more than double the amount of the cost of the union’s proposal…..all in the hopes of winning a battle over the right to mistreat staff in the most cruel way. Why? The answer is clear. The only thing that changed during negotiations – between the time we were making progress and the time impasse was declared – was the influence of others on management.

It is ironic when you think in terms of "do unto others", that the impact of the language that management's team is proposing for staff is the kind of treatment that we are paid to protect them from. This is an embarrassment for our association.

Bargaining Resumed and Stalled

2009-06-26T11:49:00.005-04:00

Bargaining resumed on 6/22. Both teams were to swap lists of items they were willing to withdraw, in an effort to reduce the size of the proposal to be negotiated. SCSO presented their list and then, due to illness on management's team, we had to cancel the meeting before we were able to get management's list. We are now temporarily stalled while management and governance attend the NEA RA. Bargaining resumes on July 21-22.

SCSO 2008 Retreat

2009-06-14T12:12:00.011-04:00

Photos by David Stein, June 2008, Myrtle Beach, SC

Contract Negotiations Update - June 8/9 Sessions

2009-06-07T17:07:00.019-04:00

The SCEA and SCSO met for the 2nd round of contract negotiations on June 8 and 9. Each Team presented their package and responded to questions. On June 22, both teams will come together to begin presenting counter proposals.

Management's proposal does not provide any increase (zero) in salary or benefits and proposes to delete language from the contract that takes back rights and a fair and reasonable work environment. The union's proposal asks for improvements in working conditions, benefits, workplace safety and an increase in wages.

Management's proposal has caused staff morale to sink to an all time low. A union that advocates for fair and reasonable treatment of its members should model that same philosophy as an employer and treat their staff at least as well as they advocate for their members.

Updates will be posted on this Blog after each bargaining session.

Minimum Standards for Bargaining

2009-02-23T21:58:00.003-05:00

Our bargaining this year will be more focused, with attention being paid to compliance with NSO standards. NSO's CBC sets minimum standards for all contracts, that we must abide by. Here is an exerpt from the NSO web site:

In 1987, NSO adopted a policy of an "Affiliate in Good Standing" requiring that affiliates, "shall also abide by the guidelines and procedures adopted by the CBC of which it is a member. Should the appropriate CBC determine that an affiliate is not in compliance with this definition, recommendations for action shall be referred to the Executive Committee through the CBC co-chairs."

In 1987, the RA demonstrated its commitment by adopting a policy for enforcement of the Affiliate in Good Standing policy:

"In order to effectively enforce the 'Affiliate in good Standing' policy adopted by the 1986 NSO Representative Assembly, the following disciplinary actions may be taken against those affiliates not complying with the constitution and bylaws of NSO including all policies adopted by the RA and the guidelines and procedures adopted by the CBC of which it is a member.

"Should the appropriate CBC determine that an affiliate is not in compliance with this definition, recommendations for action should be referred to the Executive Committee through the CBC co-chairs.

"Disciplinary action shall be uniform and progressive and may include: withholding of crisis fund moneys, withholding of any kind of assistance, fines levied against the affiliate, censorship. Action shall be taken only after the CBC co-chairs have contacted the affiliate and encouraged the affiliate's compliance with the guidelines and procedures adopted by the CBC."