Q&A About Oakland Teachers Negotiations

(Written by a group of Oakland teachers, revised April 2, 2006

(quotes are in italics)

1. What were the five main findings and recommendations in the neutral fact finder’s report issued January 23?

a. The District can afford to restore the 4% salary cut teachers agreed to in 2003. The financial data provided by the District to the fact finder show that the District ended the 2004-2005 fiscal year with a $21 million surplus. The fact finder stated that a raise for teachers “is within the District’s financial means and would have an enormous positive effect on teacher morale, and may even be viewed as a demonstration of the District commitment (which it will be) to retain and attract quality teachers…” (page 14) In fact, the fact finder said the District could afford to fund an even higher increase than the 4% restoration.

b. Oakland’s low salaries are a main contributor to high teacher turnover in Oakland. “…Comparisons show that Oakland is not competitive in attracting and retaining quality teachers…or substitutes…due in large part to low pay. The District does not deny these comparisons and has acknowledged having on average an annual teacher turnover rate of 30% each school year.” (page 11)

c. Classroom Enrichment (Prep Teachers) should not be cut: Dr. Ward has been trying to cut credentialed enrichment teachers to our elementary students. His efforts have led to the destruction of music, art and science enrichment classes during District supported prep periods. The fact finder’s decision: “Notwithstanding the District’s position, evidence presented at the fact finding hearing clearly supports this program as being both instructionally sound and extremely beneficial to students, especially those students needing a well-rounded curriculum…But of paramount concern in eliminating both covered prep periods, is the appearance and perception of District supported discriminatory coverage and endorsed inequity between affluent and less affluent school locations. Given the District’s stated mission of quality education for each student, it can do no less than provide teachers with one (1) staffed (covered) prep period.” (page 18)

d. Teachers should begin to pay 0.5% of their salary for health insurance. The fact-finder said that OEA should “abandon its previous position of a fully paid health insurance program by the District, and require OEA members to make a contribution of 0.5% of their scheduled annual salary, up to a maximum of $500 annually, towards payment of their health insurance premiums.” (page 16)

e. The contract should be extended past July 2006. The District wanted the contract to expire July 2006, meaning we would have to start bargaining again almost immediately (by March or April). The fact finder felt “the District’s present desire to limit any future term of agreement…would be of little benefit to either party.” (page 8)

2. How has Dr. Ward reacted to the fact finder’s report?

a. Dr. Ward has attacked the fact finder’s report: “I don’t believe the report is an accurate description of the picture here. It is not an attack on the individual, the report is just plain wrong.” (Oakland Tribune, 2/11/06). Teachers’ comment: The point of fact finding is for the District to produce its most accurate information and allow a neutral to decide. It is amazing that after having his positions proven wrong he simply says that all of the work of the neutral party to find the facts is wrong. He does this again when he denies the incredible 30% turnover rate of teachers, even though this information came from his own sources.

b. Dr. Ward has started publicizing his preparations for a strike. Teachers’ comment: It is not in the interest of the students or teachers to allow Dr. Ward to deny the results of fact finding and play a game of brinksmanship with the teachers. He certainly should take responsibility for the disruption that would occur because he doesn’t like the neutral fact finder’s recommendations. His actions can lead to irreparable harm to our students and our teachers.

3. What happened in bargaining after the fact finder’s report was issued?

a. There was one day of bargaining several days after the FF report was issued. The District surprised the union by proposing a 3-year contract (July 2004 to June 2007), with salary and health insurance re-openers for the third year. Up until then the District had insisted any new contract expire July 2006. The union countered that we should negotiate the 3-year raises now rather than have to start re-opener negotiations in two months and proposed a 3.0% salary increase for the third year. The district then walked out of negotiations, and no further talks were held until March 23.

b. Currently the District has opened negotiations once more. After the March 22, 2006, Membership Meeting in which members voted to authorize a strike (of no more than three days) and in which such strike was approved by 74% of the voters, the District reopened negotiations. And yet, although the District representatives seem to be more willing to listen, they have not given in on any points so far.

4. So why is Dr. Ward saying the teachers are making new proposals, and now want 3% more than they wanted before?

The only thing that is new is that since the District recently proposed adding another year to the contract, the teachers asked for a 3% pay increase for that additional year. (See full description in 3a above.)

5. How do Oakland teacher salaries compare to other Bay Area teachers?

Oakland teachers ranked in the middle of Bay Area salaries in 2002; since then Oakland teachers agreed to a 4% salary cut in 2003 with no raises since that time. Since 2002 teachers at many Bay Area districts won modest raises annually, so Oakland teachers are now at or near the bottom of Bay Area teacher salaries.

6. Have Oakland teachers done our part in restoring the District’s financial health?

Most definitely. The fact finder reported that teacher’s. 2003 4% salary cut resulted in an “approximate savings to (the District) of $7 million.” The teachers accepted their “fair share of the burden of the fiscal recovery of the Oakland Unified School District”. (page 12)

7. Is the 4% pay increase really a raise?

No. First of all, the four percent pay increase is actually just a restoration of a voluntary pay cut teachers took three years ago. We took the pay cut to help our District regain financial solvency. Now that we know the district has the resources we are asking for it back. Because of the difficulties our District has faced, we are willing to return to the salary we had four years ago and to maintain that salary for another two years. This means that we will have gone six years without a cost of living or inflation adjustment to our hourly pay.

8. What do teachers think about the proposed health insurance cuts the fact finder recommends?

Many teachers feel that given our already low salaries, astronomically high teacher turnover (30% turnover), any further cuts in salary or benefits will further hurt our students’ education in Oakland by making it less desirable to teach here, and need to be considered very carefully before being agreed to.

9. To get a copy of the fact finder’s report, go to the OEA website, www.oaklandea.org.

10. To reach Dr. Ward, his supervisor Jack O’Connell, or the Oakland Education Association:

a. Dr. Randolph Ward: 510-879-8200 or Randolph.Ward@secmail.ousd.k12.ca.us

b. California Supt. of Public Instruction Jack O'Connell: 916-319-0800 or joconnell@cde.ca.gov

c. Oakland Education Association: 510-763-4020 or OaklandEA@OaklandEA.org

11. What else could parents do?

Parents, family and community members who would like to show their support of teachers can help by displaying signs on your cars, trucks, windows at home, in bright green color,that simply say you support the Oakland teachers and/or that Oakland teachers should get a fair contract.

You can also join us when we organize rallies or marchs. Even though the School Board does not have much power at the moment, it is important to go before them to exercise pressure on Dr. Ward and above all to get press attention in order to raise awareness and more popular support.

Students, and consequently their parents stand to gain or lose the most from the results of this battle, and they (YOU) are the ones with the most rights to be heard. Therefore, do not remain quiet before this unfair situation. Remember that there is strength in unity!

Join us Wednesday, April 5, 2006 at 4:00 at the Oakland’s City Hall

for a rally of support for public education in our city.