麻豆国产AV

December 19, 2016

The district and SCTA held their tenth meeting on December 19 to continue negotiations for a successor contract. This meeting was held again at SCTA by prior agreement to skip one rotation of locations. 

The district presented its counterproposal for Article 11 (Safety Concerns) which proposes new language to address restorative practices that benefits students and families. Specifically, the district鈥檚 proposal seeks to develop a site restorative practices and equity team consisting of teachers, school administrators, students and parents/members of the community. The equity teams would assist with identifying needs at individual sites supported with resources from the Equity Office. The district also presented its counterproposals for Article 8 (Transfers) and Article 9 (Leaves).

The district is currently reviewing SCTA鈥檚 January 12 fiscal proposal which requests sizeable increases in compensation, as well as other items. The district is conducting a total 鈥渃ost out鈥� of each request to determine the potential financial impact to the district, and its programs and services for students and families.      

The district and SCTA will reconvene negotiations on December 21 at the Serna Center.  

December 12, 2016

The district and SCTA held their ninth meeting on December 12 to continue negotiations for a successor contract. This meeting was held at SCTA by prior agreement to rotate locations. 

The district presented its proposals for Article 9 (Leaves) and Article 25 (Successor Agreement), in addition to presenting counterproposals for Article 7 (Assignments), Article 8 (Transfers), and Article 11 (Safety Concerns). SCTA presented its proposals for Article 9 (Leaves), Article 12 (Compensation), Article 13 (Employee Benefits), Article 15 (Substitutes), and a new article to replace Appendix D (Special Education). 

The district and SCTA reached a Tentative Agreement on Article 7 (Assignments), and mutually agreed to keep the current contract language for Article 19 District Rights, Article 22 Professional Growth, and Article 23 Classroom Teacher Instructional Improvement Program.  To date, the District and SCTA have reached tentative and/or mutual agreements on 13 articles of the successor contract. 

The District is currently reviewing SCTA鈥檚 fiscal proposals with the goal of reaching a fair and equitable agreement that protects the interests of students, parents/guardians, unit members, and the District.    

The District and SCTA will reconvene negotiations on December 19 at SCTA.

November 30, 2016

The district and SCTA held their eighth meeting on November 30 to continue negotiations for a successor contract. This meeting was held at the Serna Center by prior agreement to rotate locations. 

SCTA presented its counterproposal to Article 8 (Transfers). The district is currently reviewing that counterproposal to ensure compliance with a recent law which prohibits granting transfer priority to in-district teachers over outside applicants after April 15 in any school year.

The district presented its counterproposals to Article 7 (Assignments), Article 11 (Safety Concerns), and Article 24 (Site-Based Decision Making).  The district and SCTA mutually agreed to keep the current contract language for Article 16 (Liaison Committee) and Article 21 (Organizational Security). 

The district also presented SCTA with draft calendar proposals for the 2017-18 and 2018-19 school years.

The district and SCTA will reconvene negotiations on December 12 at SCTA.

November 28, 2016

The district and SCTA held their seventh meeting on November 29 to continue negotiations for a successor contract. This meeting was held at SCTA鈥檚 office, per the agreement to rotate locations.

The district and SCTA each passed conceptual proposals regarding special education and Appendix D in the current contract. The district鈥檚 proposal includes updating the contract to ensure compliance with legal requirements in serving students with special needs and eliminating Appendix D. The district鈥檚 proposal also provides paid training to general education teachers that serve special needs students, which will benefit all students served.

The district raised concerns with SCTA鈥檚 proposal which included a requirement that a mandatory meeting be held with a teacher before any incoming special needs students can be included in the class. The district pointed out that such a requirement is inconsistent with the law.

The district and SCTA will reconvene negotiations on November 30 at the Serna Center. 

November 14, 2016

The district and SCTA held their sixth meeting on November 14 to continue negotiations for a successor contract. This meeting was held at the Serna Center by prior agreement to rotate locations. 

The district and SCTA signed Tentative Agreements for Article 3 (Effect of Agreement), Article 6 (Evaluations), and Article 10 (Personnel Files). The district also presented its proposal to revise and update Article 14 (Personal and Academic Freedom), consistent with Board policies/regulations. 

SCTA rejected the district鈥檚 proposal to revise Article 24 (Site-Based Decision Making), which included the establishment of a Collaborative Assessment Team to support teaching and learning for all of our students by creating a comprehensive and balanced assessment system.

SCTA also rejected the district鈥檚 proposal to establish a Visual and Performing Arts Advisory Committee to draft a Strategic Arts Plan to increase access to the Visual and Performing Arts (Art, Music, Theatre, and Dance) at all 麻豆国产AV schools. SCTA did not present any new proposals.

The district also proposed to schedule a meeting with the CECHCR Project to receive preliminary information of their study of district health benefits plans to identify potential savings by reducing costs. SCTA stated its preference to hold a telephone conference but was 鈥渙pen鈥� to an in-person meeting with the district and project coordinator. The District will work with the project and SCTA to schedule that important meeting.

The district and SCTA will reconvene negotiations on November 28 at SCTA.

November 9, 2016

The district and SCTA held their fifth meeting on November 9 to continue negotiations for a successor contract. This meeting was held at SCTA by prior agreement to rotate locations. 

The district reported that the CECHCR Project study of district health benefits plans, to identify potential savings by reducing costs, is moving forward as planned. All necessary information has been released for the study and the project鈥檚 coordinator has proposed dates to present their initial analysis to SCTA.

The district presented its counterproposals to SCTA regarding Articles 6 (Evaluations) and 7 (Assignments). The district presented its proposals for Articles 3 (Effect of Agreement) and 10 (Personnel Files). The district also presented its proposal to revise Article 24 (Site Based Decision Making), to focus on establishing a framework for collaborative decision making that benefits our students.

The district鈥檚 proposal includes the establishment of a Collaborative Assessment Team to support teaching and learning for all of our students by creating a comprehensive and balanced assessment system. The district鈥檚 proposal also includes the establishment of a Visual and Performing Arts Advisory Committee to draft a Strategic Arts Plan to increase access to the Visual and Performing Arts (Art, Music, Theatre, and Dance) at all 麻豆国产AV schools.

SCTA did not present any new proposals.

The district and SCTA will reconvene negotiations on November 14 at the Serna Center. 

November 2, 2016

The District and SCTA held their fourth meeting on November 2 to continue negotiations for a successor contract.  This meeting was held at the Serna Center by prior agreement to rotate locations. 

The District presented its counter-proposals to SCTA regarding Articles 4 Grievance Procedure and 6 Evaluations. The District presented its proposals for Articles 8 Transfers and 11 Safety Concerns. The District and SCTA also reached a tentative agreement on Article 4 Grievance Procedure which will help to resolve grievances more efficiently. 

Specifically, the new language extends the time period for holding a Level 1 meeting from 10 working days to 15 working days, and establishes two fixed dates twice a month for such meetings. The signing of this tentative agreement was followed with jubilant applause by all in attendance.

The District and SCTA will reconvene negotiations on November 9 at SCTA.

October 26, 2016

The district and SCTA held their third meeting on October 26 to continue negotiations for a successor contract. This meeting was held at SCTA by prior agreement to rotate locations. 

The district presented its counterproposals to SCTA regarding Articles 1, 2, and 18. The District and SCTA also tentatively agreed to new language in Articles 1 and 2, as well as a new cover page, preamble, and to keep Article 26 鈥渁s is鈥� with the contract鈥檚 duration to be added at a later date. SCTA presented its proposals for Articles 5 and 7, which the district is reviewing. 

The district and SCTA will reconvene negotiations on November 2 at the Serna Center. 

October 17, 2016

The district and SCTA held their second meeting on October 17, 2016, to continue negotiations for a successor contract, at the district office. The District presented SCTA with a proposed agenda to guide the process which included:

• Ground Rules/Norms;
• Minutes;
• CECHCR Project Update;
• SCTA 2016-17 Proposals/District Response; and
• Confirm/Set Future Dates

The district presented a revised proposal of five condensed ground rules which includes negotiating without personal attacks; teams having up to 鈥�60鈥� members during after-work hours, and up to 鈥�12鈥� members during work hours, without the general public; and that all proposals be presented in writing.

SCTA did not agree or object to the ground rules. Although SCTA continues to sidestep this issue, the parties will need to negotiate a reasonable number of representatives for negotiations held during work hours to reach a timely agreement. To date, SCTA has only agreed to meet during after-work hours. The district reserved its right to continue negotiating ground rules before moving forward with this meeting.

The district proposed the parties keep mutual minutes as a collaborative record of each meeting. SCTA refused this proposal.

The district reported that the CECHCR Project study of district health benefits plans, to identify potential savings by reducing costs, is moving forward as planned. 

The district presented its counter-proposals to SCTA which included utilizing mediation as a pre-arbitration step to resolve grievances amicably. Currently, mediation is available in the contract as a voluntary option. Mediation utilizes the assistance of a state mediator to resolve differences at no cost to the district or SCTA, which can result in a binding agreement between the grievant and employer.

Unfortunately, SCTA consistently disregards mediation opting instead to prosecute grievances at arbitration. Arbitration is a costly process that involves a formal hearing with lawyers, court reporters, etc. Arbitration does not foster collaborative resolution of grievances and often results in unnecessary delay as both parties are left waiting for the arbitrator鈥檚 decision which can take up to six months or more after the hearing. SCTA rejected the district鈥檚 proposal.

The district also proposed to establish a committee comprised of teachers, substitute teachers and administrators to develop evaluation tools and procedures for evaluating these educators. SCTA shared its interest in discussing this proposal further.

The district and SCTA will reconvene negotiations on October 26. 

October 11, 2016

The district and the Sacramento City Teachers Association met on October 11 to begin negotiations for a successor contract. This was the first negotiations session and was held at SCTA鈥檚 office according to a prior agreement to rotate locations for each meeting.

The district presented SCTA a proposed agenda, and its proposal for ground rules (norms) to establish a mutually agreeable framework during negotiations. The district notified SCTA prior to this session of its intent to present written ground rules and invited SCTA to present their own proposal. However, SCTA rejected the district鈥檚 proposal and did not provide any written counter-proposal for ground rules.

The district was notified prior to this session of SCTA鈥檚 desire to expand the size of their negotiations team to 鈥�60 members鈥� comprised of unit leadership. However, the 60 were not all comprised of unit leadership but also included non-employee members of the public. The district expressed its concern that by law negotiations are not open to the public and could not move forward without approval from the Board. The District reiterated this concern when receiving SCTA鈥檚 proposal information.

The district invited SCTA to provide a written proposal for ground rules, and for negotiations that involve members of the public, at their next meeting on October 17.