Clark County School district Vs Teacher's Union

The Clark County School district and the teacher's union is in a cotract battle that has gone to arbitration. For the most part, the union has kept everyone in the dark while the school district is informing teachers about what is being bargained. This e-mail was sent out to employees in the district this past week. The bargaining part is what I have copied:
• Article 8, Dues Deduction – Change the time period during which teachers may direct the District
to stop payroll deductions for union dues to June 1 – June 30 and September 1 – September 30,
rather than current drop period of July 1 – July 15.
• Article 17, Temporary Leaves of Absence – Limit the accumulation of union leave (teachers out
of classroom doing union business) to 250 days a year, instead of current 450 days.
• Article 18, Sick Leave – CCSD would administer unused sick leave payments directly to teachers
retiring rather than the union.
• Article 26, Professional Compensation
Freeze increments on the salary schedule.
Money set aside for New Hire Orientation ($155,000) to be used to fund professional development
for teachers instead of to pay for teacher substitutes while teachers conduct union business during
school hours.
Remove from the contract payments of $106,000 made to the CCEA Community Foundation and
another $354,000 to be used for CCEA Community Foundation and CCSD joint professional
development projects.
Provide that the STEP-UP program be a District program.
• Article 28, Teachers Health Trust
Provide the District assumes responsibility for providing health and other benefits to its employees.
Eliminate District payments into the retiree Health Trust and the $30 a month ($360 annually)
charge to teachers and allow all District retirees to participate in a single District sponsored health
insurance program.
• Article 29, Public Employees Retirement System – Clarify that teachers and the District split the
cost of PERS contributions as required by law.
• Article 30, Reduction in Force – Other than seniority alone, as required by law, reduction in force
to be based on these criteria:
a) Teachers with two (2) consecutive unsatisfactory evaluations would be first to be reduced.
b) Teachers with disciplinary suspensions would be next to be reduced.
c) Teachers who are found to have abused sick leave would be next to be reduced.
d) Teachers would be reduced in force by seniority.
9. What are CCEA’s proposals to the District?
CCEA submitted only one (1) proposal to the District:
December 12, 2011
Page 3 of 3
“The 2010-2011 Negotiated Agreement between the Clark County School District and the Clark County
Education Association be fully restored to include advancement on the salary schedule.”
10. Has CCEA made any counter proposals to the District?
No.
11. Is a Reduction in Force (RIF) procedure a mandatory subject of bargaining?
Yes. Article 30 in the current teacher contract describes RIF procedures. However, the law was changed
in 2011 to require that other criteria besides seniority be used as a basis to RIF.
12. What does the new law on RIF say?
The new law provides that effective July 1, 2011, seniority alone cannot be the sole criteria for RIF. The
current contract will have to be changed to use a process that does not rely solely on seniority.
13. Have the District and the Union negotiated a change in the RIF process as required by law?
No. The District has submitted a proposal (see Item 8, Article 30). CCEA has not offered any proposal.
14. If the arbitrator accepts the District’s proposal, what will happen to teachers who have already been
compensated a step or column increase?
The Law states that the arbitrator’s decision is retroactive to July 1, 2011. Therefore any payments made
for step and educational increments would have to be deducted from teacher paychecks.
15. If the CCEA prevails in the arbitration, what will happen?
The District will have to continue to pay teachers their step and increment increases. Since the District
does not have the funds to continue to pay all of its obligations, the District will have to reduce in force
teachers or make additional cuts.
16. Why doesn’t the District make additional cuts instead of laying off teachers?
The District has already made approximately $100 million in cuts to balance the budget. Some of them are:
Consolidate school bell times $10.0 million
Administrative department budgets (cut 20%) 48.7 million
School textbook/supply budgets (cut 50%) 24.8 million
Special Education Facilitators, ELL Facilitators,
ECSs, Literacy Specialists (cut 12.5%) 7.7 million
What remains is an additional $56 million in cuts that have to be made through employee concessions to
cover the remaining shortfall. The teachers’ share of this shortfall is at least $39 million as of July 1, 2011.
Every month that the contract remains unsettled means, that should these concessions not be reached, the
number of staff reductions needed grows.
17. Is the District asking teachers to take a pay cut on the salary schedule?
With the exception of their share of the PERS increase, which is required by law, teachers are not being
asked to take an additional pay cut. Teachers are being asked to forgo increases in pay.
https://interact.ccsd.net/Login/FAV1-0012AD85/I3615E81F.0/Negotiations%20Update.pdf
If the District is not sugarcoating or BSing in this letter, then the District's proposals don't seem that unreasonable, especially considering the economy in the State of Nevada and Clark County, and I say that as a union member of the teacher's union. While it not be perfect, we are lucky to have a job in this economy in Nevada and Las Vegas, where the unemployment rate is Around 15-20% or higher.
I also wonder why the local media has not reported on this.
So, I think the union is going to lose the arbitration case we are involved in and we are certainly losing the public relations war with the District. As time goes on, some things never change.