District, Teachers’ Union Still Negotiating Contract
The Glenwood Community School District and representatives from the Glenwood Education Association will continue contract negotiations Thursday on a new teachers’ contract.
The two sides had met previously on April 5 to exchange initial bargaining proposals for next year’s contracts. The Glenwood Education Association (GEA), representing the teachers, and the Glenwood Board of Education, represented by Lynch-Dallas, a Cedar Rapids-based law firm, met for over three hours in initial negotiations in the high school media center and left without a new contract.
The two sides will meet Thursday at the district’s central office at 6:30 p.m.
Taking center stage in the negotiations is a recent change in collective-bargaining for state employees signed into law by Gov. Terry Branstad on Feb. 17. The law limits all public employee contract negotiations to salary only.
In response to the new legislation, and since salaries are the only remaining negotiable factor, the district has proposed a salary-only master contract that includes “step” increases on salaries that have yet to be set. With that, the district proffered a staff handbook that would lay out for teachers the items the law does not allow in negotiations. The handbook, which was not presented to GEA negotiators, would detail health insurance, personnel evaluation procedures, voluntary and involuntary transfers, staff reductions and leaves of absence.
The GEA’s initial proposal requested the formation of a Labor Management Committee to work with the board each year and that all permissive items remain in the teachers’ contract – such as leaves (personal, parental or sick), seniority and grievance procedures. And with that, the excluded items would be moved into the district’s proposed handbook. The union also requested a $1,000 increase on the base teacher salary.
“We had an extensive conversation regarding the new law and how it has impacted our bargaining process,” said Maria Jacobus, the GEA’s chief negotiator and vice president who along with 30 other district teachers were in attendance at the April 5 meeting. “Both sides asked numerous questions regarding initial proposals, but little progress was made toward a settlement. One reason for the lack of progress was the fact that the board did not have a draft of the staff handbook that they proposed in their initial proposal for the association to see and work through. Not being able to see on paper what the board was proposing made it impossible for us to make any meaningful progress toward a settlement.”
Glenwood Community School District Superintendent Devin Embray said he felt the negotiations thus far have “gone well” and cautioned against looking too closely at the pace of the process.
“I think when both initials were offered, I think there were a lot of people in the room that could have been thinking we’re oceans apart,” Embray said. “However I don’t believe that to be the case. I think the teachers association and the board are closer together than they are apart.”
Jacobus said she could not agree the two sides are close to a deal but did add, “Regardless of how far apart we are, we are hopeful that we can continue to work with the board, as we have in past years, toward a settlement that is fair to both the district and its employees.”
The much publicized changes to Iowa’s collective bargaining law for public employees has been debated throughout the state this spring as districts set teacher contracts for the next fiscal year.
While the law allows salaries to be negotiated with employers, it effectively prohibits negotiations on the type and cost of health insurance benefits for employees, and such issues as personnel evaluation procedures, voluntary and involuntary transfers, staff reductions and leaves of absence for political purposes. Public safety workers, such as police and firefighters, are seemingly exempt from the law, retaining a broader list of issues to be considered in negotiations.
In addition to limiting collective bargaining, the new law also appears to take aim at unions. The law bars public-sector unions from having union dues deducted from public employees’ paychecks and unions would need to be recertified by a majority vote of members prior to every contract negotiation.
As the Republican- backed legislation moved through the Iowa House and Senate, many of the state’s school districts reportedly pushed to wrap up contract negotiations prior to the bill’s signing. The Des Moines Register reported that nearly 200 of Iowa’s 322 school districts had settled contracts prior to Feb. 17.
The Glenwood Board of Education did not begin negotiations with the teachers union until early April with the exchange of initial proposals.
Embray said he was unsure why the board didn’t attempt to get the contract done prior to the new legislation taking affect but that the board was guided by the district’s legal representatives throughout the process.
“The board went about it in a very methodical way in trying to understand it and all the components without rushing into it,” Embray said of the district’s position on the new law. “The board felt like rushing into it could hurt the district and the teachers. I feel the way we are going about it will be a better process moving forward and also will be better in terms of compensation and benefits than would have been had we rushed through the process.”
When asked about the possible perception the district delayed contract negotiations until after the new law was signed to give the district a better negotiating position, Embray responded: “I’m not going to deny there might be truth to that. I think when something changes, like it did here, they (board members) just want to have their eyes wide open to what happened with the negotiations process. But to say that management doesn’t have more flexibility than it did before would be a misnomer.”
Embray went on to say he feels the board has the best interest of the district and its staff in mind in every decision it makes.
“This wasn’t a case of the board wanting to ‘win one over on teachers,’” Embray said. “That’s never been in any conversation in my time with the board.”
Jacobus said the union has suspected the board’s reluctance to come to an agreement prior to Feb. 17 was based in part on their desire to achieve “a stronger bargaining position.” She said the union came up with several proposals on a settlement, but the board made the conscious decision to wait and see.
“The two weeks between the introduction and signing of the new law were very stressful and disheartening for our district teachers as they saw district after district settle,” Jacobus said. “By the time the governor signed the law, more than half of the school districts in Iowa had settled their contracts, many of them for multiple years, maintaining their current contract language. To have our proposals and requests for settlement with the Board rejected was a bitter pill to swallow.”
An extended contract signed prior to the signing of the new legislation would have given time for school officials to better understand the new law and perhaps for the unions to potentially challenge it, Jacobus added.
The Iowa State Teachers Union and American Federation of State, County and Municipal Employees (AFSCME) has already filed suit challenging the new law.
“The association’s attempts to settle our contract prior to Feb. 17 was based on our desire to provide stability, security, and knowledge to our district employees,” Jacobus said. “By having a contract in place, the staff would know what their salary and benefits would be for next year and the district would be able to get contracts out at approximately the same time as in past years. Having a settled contract would also have given the district time and breathing room to fully absorb the new law and work with us in developing a labor management committee and handbook containing excluded items without these additional pressures.”
Embray sees no reason why the board and the union can’t continue to work together and get a contract in principle as early as Thursday’s meeting.
“My hope is we can get through the shock and awe of everything on the front side and get down to business and work collaboratively together to get a contract signed and ratified moving forward for the betterment of our district,” he said.