Resolution on Exclusive Representation for Springfield Teachers

The following resolution was unanimously approved at the SNEA General Meeting on September 18, 2008. The resolution was presented to the Springfield R-12 School Board on Tuesday, September 23.


RESOLUTION ON EXCLUSIVE REPRESENTATION FOR SPRINGFIELD TEACHERS

WHEREAS, Article 1, Section 29 of the Missouri Constitution provides "that employees shall have the right to organize and to bargain collectively through representatives of their own choosing,"

AND WHEREAS, the Missouri Supreme Court ruled on May 29, 2007 in the Independence decision that these rights apply to teachers and all other public employees as well as private employees,

AND WHEREAS, the 34 states that have collective bargaining laws for teachers all provide for exclusive representation,

AND WHEREAS, the laws establishing collective bargaining for employees in the private sector all provide for exclusive representation,

AND WHEREAS, exclusive representation establishes real accountability to all teachers for the representation of all teachers,

AND WHEREAS, exclusive representation provides a single, unified voice for all teachers and prevents an employer from dividing teachers by playing one organization off against another organization,

AND WHEREAS, adherence to the Missouri Constitution is the solemn obligation of all citizens and all governmental bodies,

AND WHEREAS, the Springfield Superintendent and the Springfield MSTA have proposed virtually identical, contrived schemes which would deny Springfield teachers our Constitutional right to a representative of our own choosing,

AND WHEREAS, the Springfield School Board will be considering this question in future meetings,

NOW THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED, the Springfield NEA hereby REJECTS participation in any contrived scheme that fails to provide for our Constitutional right to determine through a secret ballot election exclusive representation and accountability by a SINGLE teacher organization,

AND BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED the Springfield NEA will refuse to participate in any contrived scheme that fails to provide for our Constitutional right to determine through a secret ballot election exclusive representation and accountability by a SINGLE teacher organization,

AND BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED the Springfield NEA will vigorously and relentlessly pursue all available avenues to secure our Constitutional right to collective bargaining through a representative of our own choosing.

Remarks to Board, Summary

Title I Reading Model Stipend - Remarks

SNEA addressed the board last night regarding the removal of the $1500 "Reading Model Stipend", an administrative decision made over the summer. Some one hundred classroom teachers have been receiving the stipend over the past few years. The stipends add up to $150,000 of Title's $6.5 million annual budget.

Ray pointed out that even a highly politicized U. S. Congress recognized the need for added funding and was able to break through its usual impasse to approve a bi-partisan bill that provided a $40 billion funding increase for Title and Special Education last year . . . however, the bill was unable to overcome a White House veto.

Faced with expanding services and flat funding, Title I leadership asked for input from committee members. While it was not feasible to reward all Title teachers with a stipend, SNEA agreed with a proposal that would have allowed the continuation of stipends to those teachers already receiving them and gradually eliminated the $1500 stipend as teachers retired or moved to non-Title schools within the district. While this was not an ideal plan, it was our understanding, after several meetings and talks with administrators, that this compromise plan would be put in place.

In mid-August, Title teachers received an email from Title I stating that the reading model stipend had been discontinued.

In his presentation to the board, Ray stated that this episode was more evidence that the absence of written, signed agreements and a lack of true negotiations leads to unilateral administration decision-making. Teachers attended special training and implemented the model in good faith, and we felt they should be able to retain the promised $1500 stipend. A deal is a deal . . . unless there is no binding agreement.
-----------------------------------------------------------

Board Meeting Summary - Administration Backs Tired MSTA Plan

All school employees received a board summary today via the Public Information office that added some new language to the collective bargaining issue. While it took no more than 15 seconds for the school board to table discussion of the matter without discussion (postponed until Oct. 7, be there!), the administration apparently felt compelled to issue this new language in today's summary to all district employees:

"In 2007 the Missouri Supreme Court ruled that teachers and other public employees have a Constitutional right to engage in collective bargaining. The advisory team would satisfy a court requirement that school districts establish a framework for teachers to exercise their bargaining rights."

Let's make one thing very clear . . . the Missouri Constitution states that employees (not the employer) have the right to choose their representation in order to bargain collectively with their employer. As you know, SNEA is proposing an election so that teachers in our district can choose a representative for real negotiations with the school district - just as they do in thousands of school districts in 34 states and many very successful districts in our own state. One more point of emphasis:

FORMING ADVISORY TEAMS IS NOT COLLECTIVE BARGAINING!

Been there, done that. Doesn't work. It seems that the administration, during this long delay in discussion on the issue (July 15 was the original date), is seeking to redefine Collective Bargaining in their (and MSTA's) own image.

Sign the petition!