top of page

Teacher Bargaining April 20, 2023

April 20, 2023

Roll Call: HPS: Josh McKay, Brian Cummings, Keri Mizell, Cal Boyle, Brett Zanto, Wynn Randall. HEA: Jane Shawn, Kelly Elder, Erika McMillin, Anna Alger, Paul Phillips, Adam Clinch, Joanne Didriksen.

8:00 Reviewed Norms, Reviewed time limits for article discussions


Board Certification 2.4 H

HPS: Largely housekeeping. The rationale behind the proposal is to keep to the intent of the article.

HEA: Change “ensure funding” to budget for funding. Or take out “ensure funding” entirely

HPS: Keep aware of changes in paragraph markers—may change from C to D, for example

HPS: Change the language to ensure that new placement follows the timeline congruent with other lane change notification.

TA: Language changes


PIR 2.5

HEA: Is HPS agreeable to include the time limitation for receiving PIR renewal credits?

HPS: We are agreeable if we can include language from the previous MOU for new educators with a change from “community engagement and mentor orientation” to district orientation that can be designed specific to the needs of the district.

HEA: We value the ability to use this day for connecting new educators with a mentor. Are we changing this orientation day to not include mentor/mentee work? We would be giving up a lot if we eliminate the mentor orientation.

HPS: We do not want to eliminate time with mentors for new educators. We are looking for more broad language to modify the opportunity to include other elements that are needed from the district. It was not the intent of the district to get rid of the mentoring program.

HEA: The new teacher orientation has been ineffective for many of our new educators who have experience teaching. Mentorship programs nationally have a significant impact on the success of teachers and for retainment.

HPS: Can we sit down as a group and discuss how we will continue and strengthen our mentoring program? We do not want to eliminate mentoring program just the language “community engagement and mentoring orientation”

HEA: Discussed the history and language of the MOU for new educators from last year. This language is specifically aligned with the importance of mentoring.

HPS: We need to design this day for new educators to become oriented with district wide initiatives and information needs.

HEA: District direct PIR is not always valuable for all teachers. We do not have a lot of faith that the district can make these meaningful for all.

HPS: For the sake of time, can we get a small group together and talk about the mentoring program? We can gather our group and come back to this next time with more definition.


PIR 2.6 E

HEA: We need to keep this paragraph to ensure that PIR credit is awarded for those educators who need to use it to move on the S&L matrix.

HPS: We are only interested in making sure that there is a limit on the amount of PIR credit that is allowed to be used.

TA: Teachers are able to use all PIR credit from January 2017-2021 for lane movement in a 12:1 ratio for half credit.


Discipline and Termination 3.1 A

HPS: We are not in agreement for an automatic sunset date to disciplinary files. We are proposing that purging a disciplinary record from the file is handled on a case-to-case basis at the discretion of the district. We can make this decision at the time of the disciplinary event.

HEA: We agree your suggestion is good practice, but past experience demonstrates inconsistent practice among Principals.

HPS: Can we include case-by-case basis and add a stronger Disciplinary Procedure to prevent inconsistency among Principal? We also need to include indication of pattern regardless of the year that it occurs. We have agreement that it should not be automatic but how to introduce sunsetting and still maintain district’s ability to keep records on pattern of behavior.

HEA: Our concern is related to minor disciplinary issues, not significant ones. Those that include “verbal warning”. Our disagreement here is that a “verbal warning” is written down.

HEA: Can we add a checkpoint during our 3-year evaluation cycle to include a review of an employee record and purge at that time during formal evaluation with their principal?

HPS: We do like that idea.

HEA: How can we protect our employees when principals deny purging records? Are there verbal reprimands that principals would not feel comfortable removing?

HPS: We propose that verbal sunsets at 3 years. If behavior is a pattern it should become a written disciplinary record and stays in file.

HEA: Called caucus to discuss proposals and discussions for 2.5 and 3.1

HEA: We are rejecting taking out “community engagement and mentoring orientation” language. (2.5)

HPS: We are proposing verbal reprimands can be reviewed to be removed upon employee request after one calendar year. Written reprimands can be reviewed to be removed after 3 years by the request of the employee.

HEA: We will caucus on this new proposal and respond later today.


Professional Growth 4.1-4.5

HEA: Where does the money that funds these PG areas come from?

HPS: Funding comes from General Fund.

HEA: Why is PG money coming from General Fund? Can these PG areas be funded through Title Funds.

HPS: We will do research and find out which areas of Professional Growth can be funded through Title money.


Professional Growth 4.6

HEA: Would like language from MOU regarding dates for PIR Year to read June 1-May 31in CBA language.

HPS: Agree

TA: Dates for PIR Year to read June 1-May 31in CBA language.


Professional Growth 4.7

HEA: Open up conversation regarding mentoring program as a partnership between HPS and HEA.

HPS: We would like to improve our partnership with HEA and strengthen our mentoring program.


Sick Leave 5.2

HPS: We are in agreement for the addition of language “chosen family” in 5.2 Sick Leave and 5.5 Leave of Absence. We are not in agreement for this language added in 5.3 Emergency Leave (including Bereavement Leave)

HEA: Why agree for one and not the other?

HPS: Because employees hold a bank of “sick leave” however Emergency/Bereavement Leave is paid for by the district. Also, the Sick Leave is a finite amount, Emergency Leave is not finite.

HPS: There is a difference with Bereavement that does not have a cap and is outside of the leave bank. Therefore, “chosen family” should apply to only what is in the leave bank.

HEA: Taking the language ‘chosen family” out of bereavement leave leads to inequity. Is it possible to include record of employee “chosen family” and honor the bereavement leave for this group? The inclusion of “chosen family” in our bereavement leave is a good will benefit.

HPS: Bereavement leave is a fiscal variable that we have no control over and ability to predict. We have to look at everything for in our budget considerations.

HPS: We are adding ‘chosen family” to 5.2 and 5.5 for the good of our employees but adding to 5.3 and bereavement leave is consideration that is difficult for the district.

HEA: Please find the cost of Emergency (Bereavement) leave average for one year. We will revisit this conversation.


5.2

Discretionary Leave

HPS: In agreement with HEA’s language proposal for Discretionary in 5.2 (a)

TA: Adding new language in Discretionary Leave section


5.5 Leave of Absence

HPS: For planning purposes and to eliminate staffing dominoes, HPS is proposing changes to specific types of leave for LOA (such reasons as immediate or chosen family illness, parental leave (for purposes of caring for a newborn child, newly adopted child or foster child within the first year of placement)maternity, post-adoptive care, advanced educational- or vocational-related preparation, or the election to a full-time political or professional office or as otherwise required by law.)

Also a change in notification date from May to April for LOA when accepting a teaching position elsewhere.

HEA: These are very limited reasons for requesting a LOA. Why are we limiting the opportunities for employees?

HPS: We are seeing a significant increase in requests for LOA. It creates difficult staffing issue. We are trying to find a better balance between providing for our employee needs and the district staffing needs.

HPS: We need clarity on the language in this section. For example, “shall” and “will” and also clarify the amount of time that will be granted. Right now 3 years is past practice.

HPS: Proposed to add paragraph that LOA does not exceed two consecutive years within a 5 year period. With exceptions granted for parental leave of as required by law.

HEA: This language does not read like contract language.

HEA: caucus

HEA: We are not in agreement with the language change proposal in LOA (5.5).


7.2 Potential Openings

HPS: We would like to discuss how we can improve language for efficiency in the hiring process. (7.2 and 7.7) Our original proposal was to remove 7.7 allows for internal candidates to be interviewed. We are willing to request discussion to modify language instead. These sections have become particularly burdensome for the district because there are so many dominoes that happen with transfers, especially at the elementary level.

HEA: Can we just include the language that we added this year: 2-day notification for transfer?

HPS: We still want to use the maximum transfer request of 3 per employee to improve the process that leads to the domino effect.

HEA: Added language that reflects transfer requests must be made within a 2-day window to apply for the position.

HPS: We need to think about it. We like the idea of limiting to 2-day. Will come back to this at next meeting.


7.4 Contracts

HPS: Would like to strike “seniority” from B.

HEA: We agree with this language change.

TA: Strike “seniority in item B

HPS: Would like to discuss language in HEA’s proposal with regard to a “temporary” contract.

HEA: The rationale for this is that temporary contracts for FTE teachers are unnecessary as every teacher is non-tenured until year 4. Also temporary contracts create a problem for teachers when trying to get a loan, etc.

TA: agree to language addition proposed by HEA


7. 6 Involuntary Transfer

HEA: Proposed adding “volunteer with the most seniority according to the seniority list” in this section and adding “least senior”

HPS: We are in agreement for the addition of these phrases in 7.6

TA: HEA language proposals in 7.6


1.3 Teaching Load: second discussion

HEA: Is proposing to strike 2nd paragraph and adding the language. If minimum standards are exceeded at the K-5 level, the district will provide one and a half (1.5) hours per day of certified paraprofessional classroom assistance for each student over the minimum standard, up to four (4) additional students. No classroom will enroll more than four (4) additional students above the minimum standard.

HPS: The language in the first paragraph already that we follow State Standards. What happens if we add this language and the State Standards for accreditation change?

HEA: We can make an MOU if necessary, but the state standards only change every 10 years.

HEA: Can we just strike “shall be used as a guideline”

HPS/HEA: struck language “shall be used as a guideline”

HPS: We do not want to be locked into language that we cannot meet. What if we are not able to find a para? We would rather have a problem-solving process in place for when we exceed the standards instead of the accreditation language proposed by HEA.

Are we more interested in the problem-solving process than the proposed language here? Even if we include the proposed language we may still be unable to fill the position. Then what?

HPS: we are not in agreement for the addition of this section.

HEA: Proposal for paragraphs 6 and 9

HPS: We are not in agreement with any of these proposals

HEA: We are not in agreement with the addition of “school week” as proposed by HPS “Preparation periods shall be during the (school week)”


1.3 Teaching Load: did not reach agreement on any of HEA’s proposals. HPS will offer a counter-proposal or language will remain as is.


2.1 Salary Schedule

HEA: Proposal to include language that adds COLA to master's stipend

HPS: Knowing that wage increase may not be able to match COLA, we do not want to attach it to this area. For this reason, we propose change in COLA language to “wage increase to the base salary matrix that percent increase” and “through this contract cycle”

HEA: What will we do if there is no increase or a flat amount?

HPS: We added “through this contract cycle” for that reason. We will revisit this next bargaining cycle.

HEA: Do we have an issue with the change to COLA as “wage increase”? Can we just add “an increase”

TA: Adding language to 2.1: Should the District and HEA negotiate a an increase adjustment wage increase to the to that base salary matrix, that percent increase will Cost of Living Adjustment (COLA) to the pay matrix, that COLA will also apply to any Master’s Stipend held by teachers on the PCAP lane through this contract cycle.


2.4 (a) New Section-Additional Duties Compensation

HEA: Proposal for compensation for teaching duties outside of regular teaching duties that is based on the teacher’s hourly rate.

HPS: Our system only calculates 15-minute increments, noted as an administration consideration. Because we are talking about compensation, we do not have a response for this proposal because we would need to cost it out.

HEA: Proposal for language addition: “supervisory positions, will be compensated at the Lane 1, Step 0 rate of pay.”

HPS: Because we are talking about compensation, we do not have a response for this proposal because we would need to cost it out.


2.4 D:

HEA; Proposal to change the date materials for lane movement need to be in from January 15 to January 30, as was suggested by HPS HR.

HPS: We can keep January 15 and use past practice which is currently used to award movement pending the collection of official transcripts. (This language will be added) What we have an interest in is adding a date for the completion of credits. “If notification is made later than January 15th and such credits may be used the following year”

HEA: This addition of language and date works for us.

TA: Set date at January 15 and pay will go into effect when the official transcripts are received.


2.4 Class 4 License

HPS/HEA: Met and agreed to rewrite paragraphs I and J and make A a guiding statement for the entire section. B and C will be relettered. D will be broken into two paragraphs.

HEA: Change the language in paragraph B from “graduation” to “receiving a teaching degree or license”

HPS: In agreement with the change from “graduation” to “receiving a teaching degree or license”

TA: Change in paragraph B from “graduation” to “receiving a teaching degree or license”

Next Steps:

Meet: April 27th Language

May 17th Full Day: Compensation






Comments


bottom of page