Master Agreement, Part 4
All of my articles on the School District 11 Master Agreement so far have shown that the agreement is a very one-sided instrument. Out of the three parties to the agreement, (labor union, teachers, and school board), only the labor union stands to benefit from many of the provisions. In any true bargaining agreement, of course, all parties should stand to benefit equally.
Chapter X of the master agreement contains those provisions that directly effect the teaching environment. This chapter directly limits teachers and administrators in their ability to plan and execute classroom instruction. This is one chapter that the labor union bosses DO NOT want to allow to change because the chapter not only gives them control over the teachers, but it gives them control over administrators and tax payers, as well.
Article X.A.1. is what labor union bosses used to force the D11 administration to violate state law by adding hours to the school day without a 30 day public comment period. It states: "The school year will be based upon the calendar with the understanding that the school calendar is subject to emergency changes, but that such changes shall not affect the total number of work days required, that is for school year 2006-2007 one hundred eighty-three (183) days, and up to three (3) additional days for teachers new to the District."
The labor union claimed that it would be a violation of the contract if the district used the snow days that are already programmed into the calendar. These days fall at the end of the school year. Of course, all teachers were paid for each snow day that they did not work this year, and since they did not attend school on those days, the work year would not have been extended beyond 183 days. In the minds of the labor bosses, the master agreement trumps state law. Due to the fact that D11 has a labor union purchased school board, the master agreement often DOES trump state law.
Article X.A.2.b.- The normal work week for teachers shall not exceed thirty-five and one-half (35 1/2) hours per week excluding the lunch periods.
If you dare ask why the contract limits teachers to a 35-1/2 hour work week, you will hear that teachers spend countless hours beyond those 35-1/2 hours grading papers, planning, collaborating, etc. In a typical bout of dishonesty, Colorado Springs Education Association labor union leader Irma Valerio actually wrote in a Gazette Op-ed that the 35-1/2 provision actually means that teachers have voluntarily limited themselves to being paid for 35-1/2 hours per week when they really work well beyond that amount. Yes, that is absurd, but to become a labor union boss, one must master the art of absurdity.
If teachers really do work well beyond a 35-1/2 hour week, why on earth would they not want the contract to reflect at least a normal 40 hour work week? As I will show, collaboration and planning are actually included in these 35-1/2 hours. This limitation is extremely damaging to D11 and it is appalling to even think that this could exist in a district that has so many schools that need to improve.
Article X.A.3.- Secondary teachers may be required to instruct students for 1,375 minutes of any normal work week.
For the math impaired, 1,375 minutes per week amounts to 4.5 hours of instruction per day. High school and middle school teachers are only allowed to instruct students for 4.5 hours per day per teacher.
Article X.A.3.a. - A time equivalent to one-fifth (1/5) of the high school instructional assignment shall be reserved for each teacher's planning and conferences. The computation of the 275 minutes per day and the planning time equivalent may be based upon minutes per year.
In plain language, for each 1,375 minute duty week, 275 minutes per week shall be set aside for teachers to perform planning. The 1,375 plus the 275 equals 1,650 minutes. Simple math shows that this amounts to 27-1/2 hours per week. If the work week is limited to 35-1/2 hours, what is happening with the other eight hours? For a 5-day week, this amounts to 1.6 hours per day of unaccounted time, or 96 minutes per day. Maybe this time is being used for other duties, such as supervising lunch or recess or bus loading, or maybe not.
Article X.A.4.a. - The extent to which a teacher is assigned to non-teaching duties (such as, but not limited to, recess supervision, playground supervision, and bus duty) shall not exceed an annualized average of 300 minutes per twenty (20) consecutive school days for each teacher.
I understand that I have been performing some very high level math over these paragraphs, but this article limits these additional duties to an average of 15 minutes per day. If a teacher was performing these additional duties every day, that still leaves 6-3/4 hours per week of unaccounted time on a 35-1/2 hour work week. Maybe they are having conferences with parents?
Article X.A.6. - ...Teachers shall be provided with an equivalent amount of time off during the normal school day for time spent in such evening conference(s).
In other words, conferences do not count against the time spent in the school during a normal 35-1/2 hour work week. How about collaboration and planning and all of these other activities?
Article X.A.3.d.- All schools will collaboratively develop release time in their schedules for professional work, growth and renewal, and involvement (such as collaboration, planning, record keeping, staff development, wellness, community interaction, committee work, partnerships, grant writing, collegial groups, faculty meetings, open houses, professional learning communities, and continuous quality improvement goal teams).
OK, so all of that cannot count against the 35-1/2 work week either. So, teachers have 6 hours and 45 minutes of time each week within their 35-1/2 hour duty day to themselves. Principals are not permitted to use these teachers to instruct students during this time. Many teachers wish that they were able to spend this additional time in front of students, but labor union leaders refuse to allow them to work beyond contract minimums. They say that it would create a situation where additional work would be expected of all teachers, and in their view, this is unfair. More importantly, it would empower individual teachers and principals, and it would certainly benefit kids. Labor union leaders cannot allow that.
Article X of the master agreement is a huge impediment to the performance of D11. When you have a district with so many of its schools in crisis, the attitude ought to be one of "anything goes to educate kids." Instead, labor union activists continue to insist that anything beyond a 35-1/2 hour work week will overburden the teaching staff. While mediocrity apologists insist that poor and minority students cannot learn, they might be better able to learn if they received more instructional time while they are in the school buildings. Student needs should trump master agreement restrictions, but they do not. Weak and meaningless school boards, such as exists currently in D11, will never place the students’ needs ahead of the interests of their masters in the labor union. Nor will weak and overpaid administrators publicly fight for the students and parents who pay their bloated salaries.
A 40 hour work week should be implemented in D11 for all employees. Principals should have broad latitude to schedule teachers to meet the needs of every student in their buildings during this 40 hour week.
Labor union activists say that anyone who questions the 35-1/2 hour work week and 4.5 hour instructional work day is surely attacking teachers. Any criticism of any school is met with this same rejoinder. In reality, I am saying that students will receive more benefit if teachers spent more time teaching them. In other words, teachers are important and should be in the classroom. The labor union is saying that teachers should be severely restricted and should have hard and fast time limits in front of kids. Just as on the issue of teacher absences, the labor union diminishes the importance of having teachers consistently in the classrooms. It is the labor union, therefore, that is devaluing teachers.
The D11 master agreement should not restrict the D11 school managers (principals) from utilizing their staffs in any manner necessary to educate kids. If education is important, then it is time to treat it as if it is important. With the school board firmly under the control of the labor union (and with most of the board having no idea what is in the contract), this will not happen anytime soon.
Chapter X of the master agreement contains those provisions that directly effect the teaching environment. This chapter directly limits teachers and administrators in their ability to plan and execute classroom instruction. This is one chapter that the labor union bosses DO NOT want to allow to change because the chapter not only gives them control over the teachers, but it gives them control over administrators and tax payers, as well.
Article X.A.1. is what labor union bosses used to force the D11 administration to violate state law by adding hours to the school day without a 30 day public comment period. It states: "The school year will be based upon the calendar with the understanding that the school calendar is subject to emergency changes, but that such changes shall not affect the total number of work days required, that is for school year 2006-2007 one hundred eighty-three (183) days, and up to three (3) additional days for teachers new to the District."
The labor union claimed that it would be a violation of the contract if the district used the snow days that are already programmed into the calendar. These days fall at the end of the school year. Of course, all teachers were paid for each snow day that they did not work this year, and since they did not attend school on those days, the work year would not have been extended beyond 183 days. In the minds of the labor bosses, the master agreement trumps state law. Due to the fact that D11 has a labor union purchased school board, the master agreement often DOES trump state law.
Article X.A.2.b.- The normal work week for teachers shall not exceed thirty-five and one-half (35 1/2) hours per week excluding the lunch periods.
If you dare ask why the contract limits teachers to a 35-1/2 hour work week, you will hear that teachers spend countless hours beyond those 35-1/2 hours grading papers, planning, collaborating, etc. In a typical bout of dishonesty, Colorado Springs Education Association labor union leader Irma Valerio actually wrote in a Gazette Op-ed that the 35-1/2 provision actually means that teachers have voluntarily limited themselves to being paid for 35-1/2 hours per week when they really work well beyond that amount. Yes, that is absurd, but to become a labor union boss, one must master the art of absurdity.
If teachers really do work well beyond a 35-1/2 hour week, why on earth would they not want the contract to reflect at least a normal 40 hour work week? As I will show, collaboration and planning are actually included in these 35-1/2 hours. This limitation is extremely damaging to D11 and it is appalling to even think that this could exist in a district that has so many schools that need to improve.
Article X.A.3.- Secondary teachers may be required to instruct students for 1,375 minutes of any normal work week.
For the math impaired, 1,375 minutes per week amounts to 4.5 hours of instruction per day. High school and middle school teachers are only allowed to instruct students for 4.5 hours per day per teacher.
Article X.A.3.a. - A time equivalent to one-fifth (1/5) of the high school instructional assignment shall be reserved for each teacher's planning and conferences. The computation of the 275 minutes per day and the planning time equivalent may be based upon minutes per year.
In plain language, for each 1,375 minute duty week, 275 minutes per week shall be set aside for teachers to perform planning. The 1,375 plus the 275 equals 1,650 minutes. Simple math shows that this amounts to 27-1/2 hours per week. If the work week is limited to 35-1/2 hours, what is happening with the other eight hours? For a 5-day week, this amounts to 1.6 hours per day of unaccounted time, or 96 minutes per day. Maybe this time is being used for other duties, such as supervising lunch or recess or bus loading, or maybe not.
Article X.A.4.a. - The extent to which a teacher is assigned to non-teaching duties (such as, but not limited to, recess supervision, playground supervision, and bus duty) shall not exceed an annualized average of 300 minutes per twenty (20) consecutive school days for each teacher.
I understand that I have been performing some very high level math over these paragraphs, but this article limits these additional duties to an average of 15 minutes per day. If a teacher was performing these additional duties every day, that still leaves 6-3/4 hours per week of unaccounted time on a 35-1/2 hour work week. Maybe they are having conferences with parents?
Article X.A.6. - ...Teachers shall be provided with an equivalent amount of time off during the normal school day for time spent in such evening conference(s).
In other words, conferences do not count against the time spent in the school during a normal 35-1/2 hour work week. How about collaboration and planning and all of these other activities?
Article X.A.3.d.- All schools will collaboratively develop release time in their schedules for professional work, growth and renewal, and involvement (such as collaboration, planning, record keeping, staff development, wellness, community interaction, committee work, partnerships, grant writing, collegial groups, faculty meetings, open houses, professional learning communities, and continuous quality improvement goal teams).
OK, so all of that cannot count against the 35-1/2 work week either. So, teachers have 6 hours and 45 minutes of time each week within their 35-1/2 hour duty day to themselves. Principals are not permitted to use these teachers to instruct students during this time. Many teachers wish that they were able to spend this additional time in front of students, but labor union leaders refuse to allow them to work beyond contract minimums. They say that it would create a situation where additional work would be expected of all teachers, and in their view, this is unfair. More importantly, it would empower individual teachers and principals, and it would certainly benefit kids. Labor union leaders cannot allow that.
Article X of the master agreement is a huge impediment to the performance of D11. When you have a district with so many of its schools in crisis, the attitude ought to be one of "anything goes to educate kids." Instead, labor union activists continue to insist that anything beyond a 35-1/2 hour work week will overburden the teaching staff. While mediocrity apologists insist that poor and minority students cannot learn, they might be better able to learn if they received more instructional time while they are in the school buildings. Student needs should trump master agreement restrictions, but they do not. Weak and meaningless school boards, such as exists currently in D11, will never place the students’ needs ahead of the interests of their masters in the labor union. Nor will weak and overpaid administrators publicly fight for the students and parents who pay their bloated salaries.
A 40 hour work week should be implemented in D11 for all employees. Principals should have broad latitude to schedule teachers to meet the needs of every student in their buildings during this 40 hour week.
Labor union activists say that anyone who questions the 35-1/2 hour work week and 4.5 hour instructional work day is surely attacking teachers. Any criticism of any school is met with this same rejoinder. In reality, I am saying that students will receive more benefit if teachers spent more time teaching them. In other words, teachers are important and should be in the classroom. The labor union is saying that teachers should be severely restricted and should have hard and fast time limits in front of kids. Just as on the issue of teacher absences, the labor union diminishes the importance of having teachers consistently in the classrooms. It is the labor union, therefore, that is devaluing teachers.
The D11 master agreement should not restrict the D11 school managers (principals) from utilizing their staffs in any manner necessary to educate kids. If education is important, then it is time to treat it as if it is important. With the school board firmly under the control of the labor union (and with most of the board having no idea what is in the contract), this will not happen anytime soon.
posted by Craig Cox | 8:43 PM
7 Comments:
You're so right, Craig! Teachers have it way too easy, and they're so stupid that they don't even realize how easy it is.
They have no idea of what it's loke to work for a living without looking at a clock, because their whole job is governed by one. They don't know what it's like to have a job where you can go to the bathroom anytime you want, or go hang out at a water cooler, or take a long lunch hour every now and then. They're so locked into their thirty minute lunch half-hour, which often begins before 11 AM, that they just don't understand how the real world works.
Did you ever try teaching, Craig? You should. Once. That's all it would take, to send you running for cover!
The Watsons once again prove my point. "Oh woe is me. You are picking on teachers again."
As usual, the response is non-sensical and unrelated to my post. Who said anything about being able to tell time? The clock watchers are the labor union leaders who think that it is a good idea to micromanage every minute of a teacher's day. It is the labor union leadership that believes that teachers are so helpless and hapless that they have to be given specific work limitations on their school day. As I pointed out, this 35-1/2 hour work week is a limit imposed by the labor union on teachers and the administration. Most teachers think that it is a silly limitation. Also as I have pointed out, those teachers who have collaboratively tried to formally work beyond that limit have been shut down by the labor union leadership.
Only someone who doesn't believe that teaching is a critical profession or that education is a critical undertaking for this country would argue that limitations on the ability of educators to do their jobs is a good thing. Laborers have their days controlled by the timeclock; professionals have their days controlled by job completion. How does your labor union categorize you in your master agreement?
"Also as I have pointed out, those teachers who have collaboratively tried to formally work beyond that limit have been shut down by the labor union leadership."
How about giving us all the specifics of this assertion? I think it would be enlightening to hear details of the big bad union thugs.
Example: A couple of years ago as Midland was attempting to become a full-fledged IB school, the staff got together and decided to begin their day a little early and to end their day a little late to give that extra effort towards the new program. Mike Coughlin, the head labor union thug at the time, came to the school with NEA representative Dan Daly. They entered a staff meeting, told principal Barbara Bishop to leave her own meeting, and then they told the staff that they would most certainly NOT extend their duty day. They told staff that this act would violate the master agreement and it would make other principals think that they could work their teachers beyond the master agreement's limits. The teacher's were thinking about the kids while the labor union hacks were thinking about the labor union. Of course the kids lost out again. Sadly, this makes people like you proud.
Are you a laborer or professional?
Better quesrion: who and what the hell are you? Who deemed you an expert in anything to do with education?
That story about Midland isn't true, but it makes for a good story.
By the way,isn't that principal at Midland who you claim was booted out of her own meeting the wife of the current superintendent? Consider your sources,for once.
Sorry, but yours was actually NOT a better question. As usual, it was an irrelevant and meaningless question. What do we know about the qualifications of someone who posts as “Anonymous?” Are you a laborer or professional? Look at your contract and let me know.
The story is very true. You have no information to the contrary.
Are you saying that the superintendent's wife is not truthful simply because she is not a union member? Coincidently, the teachers who were at the meeting when the two union boys showed up WERE labor union members.
Another example: Eric McNeil, math chair at Mitchell High School, was speaking at the public math town hall meeting at Tesla in 2004. He related how he and his math teachers were voluntarily meeting before the official start of the school day to develop a plan to reach the failing kids. Labor union representatives informed the Mitchell teachers that they were violating the master agreement. Although McNeil and his staff stuck to their guns and continued to meet, this shows, again, how the labor union leadership has no respect for students or teachers.
For the record, I checked the state marriage files and it appears that Eric McNeil is not married to the superintendent.
Tom, you are losing your mind. Just give it up man. The speeling goes first, then the brain. Check both from now on.
God, this is what techers in D11 think and act like?! Incredible.
Craig, keep up the good work. Providing detailed, factual material like this is invaluable to citizens who actually care about our kids.
Humilating fools like Watson is a nice side benefit.
Post a Comment
<< Home