JUNCTION CITY SCHOOL DISTRICT

 

LICENSED BARGAINING MEETING

April 19, 2005 6:00 p.m.

 

MINUTES

 

Recorder: Stephanie White

Location: Boardroom

 

Attendance:

 

Patty Turley

Madeline Jorgenson

Darbi Haffner

Cindy Bandow

James Sundell

Barb Coolman

Galen Carpenter

Mary Jo Husiman

Kate Gillow-Wiles

Judy Croce

Denise Pratt

Brian Hungerford

Wanda McClure

Kathleen Rodden-Nord

Kathryn Hedrick

Tom Endersby

Stephanie White

 

Cal Fagan and Janet Dunham were absent for the association and Mike Brotherton was absent for the district.

 

James Last time we met, we said we would look for articles to TA on and look at those articles we are close to agreeing on. Brian We were thinking along the same lines and we make packet of those articles that neither party had changes to so we can sign off on them tonight.

 

The districts packet matched up with the associations list and Denise Pratt and Kate Gillow-Wiles signed off on 2 copies of the following articles:

 

Preamble

Article 2 Negotiation of a Successor Agreement

Article 3 District Functions

Article 5 Compliance Between Individual Contract and Master Agreement

Article 16 Maintenance of Classroom Control and Discipline

Article 17 Personal and Academic Freedom

Article 18 No Strike

Article 19 Job Sharing

Article 22 Assignments and Transfer

Article 24 Dues and Payroll Deductions

Article 25 Fair Share Agreement

 

Article 24 Dues and Payroll Deductions

 

James We are proposing to sign off on article 24 Dues and Payroll Deductions, as we proposed at the last meeting. Wanda Are you thinking that we will sign off on it the way the association has written it? James Yes, unless you want to change the language. Wanda The unwritten policy now says that we need 8 participants, not 5. We would be ok with the language if it is changed to reflect 8 and not 5. Brian What is the difference? Wanda It just creates more work for payroll and accounts payable. Kathleen How many plans do we have now? Wanda We have about 15. Kathleen Does Paula have to cut a check individually each month for each plan? Wanda Yes. Brian Once they are on the list, do they stay on the list? Wanda Yes; some on the list may have fewer than 8 participants now. James The first time we proposed to change the number to 3 participants, now we are asking for it to be 5; we think that is a compromise. Brian Have you ever had to turn people away? Wanda We have had companies call and ask to be placed on the list and we have told them that they need to get 8 participants in order to be added. Patty How about a percentage, like 5%? Wanda That would be 5 participants. Kathleen The problem with a percentage is that it would constantly be increasing and decreasing depending on the number of employees we had in a given year. Patty What about the classified staff, do they count as part of the 8 participants? Wanda They chose from the same list. Brian Would it be 8 total participants? Wanda I think it is 8 licensed participants. Patty Could you check on that? Brian We will check to see if it is 8 total, or 8 licensed and if it would make a difference in the workload for the business office. Wanda Are you comfortable with keeping the number at 8, or do you still want to change it to 5? James In order for us to make that decision, we would need to caucus. Patty I would like that information before making a decision.

 

Article 4 Association Rights

 

Brian Article 4 is on our list of those articles that we feel both parties are close on an agreement. Mary Jo It seems like both parties agreed on adding e-mail and computers to section D. We looked at the district policy and it looks fine to us. Brian You are ok with the language the district incorporated with your proposal? Madeline Yes. However, the added sentence in A seems to change the current relationship with the district, and we dont want to do that. It doesnt seem necessary. Brian Basically, we put that in there to memorialize what the law already says, which is any public records request, whether it is in the contract or not, can be charged for the amount that it would cost to produce such request. We didnt want there to be confusion if it ever came up. James, do you disagree? James I agree with the law, but I disagree with the concept. I dont feel there is a need for it to be in the contract. Kathleen The intention isnt to charge the association for requests that the district currently provides; it is for something that the district normally doesnt provide. Mary Jo How would this affect the request for bargaining preparation stuff? Brian There will be no changes to current practice. The law is broad in what the district has to provide. Patty What about in a grievance situation? Brian It depends on the request. If you are asking us to review all personnel files and compile a list of all grievances on a certain subject; that is a project that could take a lot of time and the district could charge the association for the time involved. Kathleen This would be for requests that we dont have readily available. Barb This is news to me. I think we feel more comfortable with the relationship that the district and association have now. Brian We can caucus on that. James What about saying that the district will provide information needed for bargaining and that if the project is large enough that the district would need to charge the association, the district would let the association know prior to completing the request and let the association know approximately how much it will cost? Brian I have no problem with giving the association notice, this is something we will talk about in caucus. James It is good to determine up front. It could be a demand to bargain if the district refuses to provide the information. Brian That is why we are proposing to have it in the contract.

 

Article 6 Grievance Procedures

 

Mary Jo Could you please clarify what 2F means? Brian If the grievance was over a letter of reprimand, that letter would be in the personnel file, but the documents of the grievance (the letter from the association informing the district of the grievance, etc.) would be held in another file. Mary Jo It seems like this article already says that. Brian Could you clarify that? Kathleen The next section does cover that. Brian This is just another clarification point. Mary Jo Could you please clarify Section 3.E.4? Brian This is common language to have in a contract. It just means that the arbitrator cannot change the terms of this agreement; that is what these meetings are for. The arbitrator cannot add or delete language from this contract, they can interpret what it means, but they cannot change it. Mary Jo Isnt that what the arbitrator already does? Brian There is no law specifying what an arbitrator can or cannot do. Patty What about the first part of the addition? Brian That is just stating that the arbitrator doesnt have the authority to substitute his/her judgment for that of the districts. Patty So a decision the district has made cannot be overturn? Brian I can see how you could interpret it that way, but that is not what we meant. Patty Article 3 is part of this agreement and it says the same thing, so cant we just scrap the first part of this? Brian We will talk about that in caucus. James Item 6 was deleted. One thing to consider is that any additional witnesses may be added to the lists. Brian Both of us could have been in violation of this during the last arbitration. If we arent going to use it, it shouldnt be in the contract. Up until the arbitration we still may not know who the witnesses are. Patty How about, both parties will make an effort? Kathleen What about on request? Brian If it is, upon request a preliminary list would be given I would be comfortable with that. James We had questions on 2B & C as well. Patty We are ok removing the first sentence, but not the last one. Brian Before, the definition of days was school work-days; now the definition is district business days. Because of this change, this sentence is not necessary. Patty Yes, but this allows for flexibility. Galen During the school year all parties are here, that is not always the case in the summer. Brian You have 15 days to file a grievance, whether that is in February or the last working day in June, you still have 15 days to file it. Patty Is there a way to work the concept of the end of the school year into A? Brian The timeline could be extended with the consent of both parties to accommodate summer vacation schedules. The person doesnt have to be there, just a representative. Why would we have timelines if one party could extend them without the consent of the other? It is each partys option to adhere to the timelines or not. If one person is not available, get someone else to fill in. Patty I would like to work that sentence into A. Brian We can work it into the section, but I am uncomfortable with the verbiage will. Patty That is what it says in B. Brian That is why we are proposing to eliminate it. James We want to keep it. Kathleen I understand the concerns you have expressed and we will discuss it in caucus. Darbi In 2C, the district added association representative and we would like to add association representative or attorney. Brian Is that a personal attorney or an association attorney? Darbi Personal. Brian We will talk about that in caucus. A personal attorney still may not be familiar with public education or grievance procedures. James Refer to 10E I am just wanting to make things consistent. I dont want to deny an employee the right to pursue a grievance on their own if the association doesnt want to pursue it. Brian If someone brought in a private attorney regarding preparation time and we cut a check for them to make up for the preparation time lost if they dropped the grievance, I dont think that would be something the association would want. The association and the district are the ones who resolve contractual disputes. We would still want to keep our language. Darbi in 2H, we think that J takes care of striking students in H. Kathleen A limited number of parties have access to students during the school day. Brian You cant make a student speak with you, having this language implies that the student has to speak with someone. Patty What if the representative needs to speak with a student, is there some way to provide that contact information? Brian Yes, that is considered directory information. To summarize, any time a student is needed to be questioned at school, it must be consistent with district policy. Patty Are you willing to leave it in as long as it says that any contact with students must be in accordance with district policy? Brian Yes. James 2C Add any legal counsel approved by the association? Brian I am ok with that. Patty Do you have any questions with our proposals? Brian No, they are included in ours.

 

Article 13 Leaves of Absences General

 

Brian We withdrew our proposal of adding D. We would still like to change March 31 to March 1. Patty We agree with that. Brian In D, we agree to change the ORS, but not to adding the language. The district can incorporate sick leave in OFLA/FMLA. Kathleen We have to be consistent with our process. Brian We dont want an employee to take their accumulated sick leave and then implement OFLA/FMLA when their sick leave is exhausted. That would be taking advantage of the district. James Can there be some area where the district and employee agree when to implement it? Kathleen It is implemented when the district is notified of the serious medical condition. If an employee needs to take more time off, there is an article in the contract that allows the employee to request more time off from the board. Patty I didnt access OFLA/FMLA when I was out for a few months. For the next meeting, can we have a timeline of how OFLA/FMLA works? Kathleen Yes. Janet and I have worked closely on this issue recently.

Patty At the last meeting you proposed moving 27D to article 13. Brian Youre right. Patty We are proposing to leave it where it is at. It just seems to fit more into salary. Brian That is fine to leave it where it is at.

 

Caucus at 7:35 p.m. Returned at 8:35 p.m.

 

Patty asked to look at calendars for the next few meetings. The following meeting dates and times were agreed upon:

 

May 4 6:00 p.m.

May 17 4:00 p.m.

May 31 6:00 p.m.

June 13 6:00 p.m.

 

Brian handed out the districts counter proposal on Article 6 Grievance Procedures.

 

Brian No changes to page 1. We would still like to delete section B, but would like to add for example, during summer break in section A. Section C, add and/or Association designated legal counsel. We removed our proposal in section F. We reinserted students in section H and added The building administrator will ensure that any such request will comply with District policy. Section III A1, we added and/or Association designated legal counsel. We added your #3 language proposal. On the last page, #4, we struck may not substitute his or her judgment for that of the District, and. We added section 6 back with the addition, Upon request, a preliminary list.

 

The changes were agreed upon by each party. Brian Next time we will bring a copy of the new article for signatures. Brian will email James a copy of the TAd article 6.

 

Article 4 Association Rights

 

Brian We are still proposing our addition, but added another sentence, The District will provide prior notice to the Association if the District intends to impose such a charge.

 

James How about saying that the association shall not be charged for normal copying. Brian My only problem would be getting into arguments about what normal charges are. James We have a problem with the way it is written. Brian We can go with no changes and the district can just apply the law. James What about deleting the first sentence and just going with the second with the addition of for compilation and copying of information.? Brian Ok.

 

Denise Pratt and Kate Gillow-Wiles signed off on the revised article 4 Association Rights

 

Brian passed out the 05-06 calendar comparison spreadsheet that shows all of the Lane County School Districts 05-06 calendar information and informed the association that it was going to be given to the board on Monday night because we are beginning the process of creating the calendar for next year. Kathleen informed the association that she included JCEAs calendar proposal of 3-17-05 in the boards packet as well.

 

The next meeting will be on May 4, 2005 at 6:00 p.m. at the District Office. The meetings are open to the public, and minutes will be posted on the district website at www.junctioncity.k12.or.us. (Just click on Board Info, and then click on Meeting Minutes Archives; there will be a link for Licensed Negotiation Minutes.)

 

Adjourn 9:00 p.m.