PERB SAYS BLATANTLY ILLEGAL? LAUSD AND UTLA SAY, "WE'VE ALWAYS DONE IT THAT WAY"

substitute teacher.jpg

(Mensaje se repite en Español)

In the recent 2/29/16 decision of the Public Employment Relations Board (PERB) in favor of substitute teachers rights (UTLA loss in side letter case.pdf) United Teachers Los Angeles (UTLA) has finally been held accountable for its leadership's longstanding incestuous relationship with the Los Angeles Unified School District (LAUSD) in complete violation of the contractual rights of substitute teachers. The opinion in this case shows a brazen violation of substitutes rights under the LAUSD-UTLA Collective Bargaining Agreement. This open collusion between LAUSD and UTLA in violation of substitute teachers rights was accomplished by non-public "side letters" entered into by UTLA presidents and others at UTLA and their counterparts at LAUSD that were in complete contradiction of substitutes teachers' rights guaranteed by the LAUSD-UTLA Collective Bargaining Agreement.

In reading this decision regarding UTLA leadership's selling out of substitutes and displaced teachers whose placement on jobs with LAUSD was used to stop substitutes from getting work and the 100 days of service necessary to qualify for health benefits, one cannot help but wonder if these same practices were not also used to facilitate LAUSD's concerted attack and removal over the last 7 years on thousands of teachers whose only "crime" that led to their firing was that they were at the top of the salary scale with expensive benefits that were putting LAUSD in the red.

After reading the decision in this case which describes in excrutiating detail how UTLA leadership under virtually all past regimes has used "side letters" negotiated directly between UTLA and LAUSD leadership to completely change the vested and in force collective bargaining contractual rights of its teachers without any ratification by appropriate entities, e.g. Board of Directors, Committees, House of Representatives, or rank-and-files, one cannot help but wonder if the same incestuous relationship of LAUSD and UTLA leadership is not also used to target literally thousands of teachers at the top of the salary scale for removal?

In reading this 113 page PERB decision, what I found most astonishing was how UTLA administration seemed to have much more loyalty to LAUSD administration- and their own careers- than they ever had to the teachers they were supposed to be representing. Given that the administrators of both LAUSD and UTLA are cut from the same cloth of being escapees from what has become the untenable LAUSD classrooms filled with the predictable disruption caused by socially promoted students, it is not surprising they are both so hostile to those still attempting to be teachers.

When Past President A.J. Duffy described Chief Human Resources Officer Vivian Ekchian, who he was entering into some of these questionable side letters with in complete violation of the in force LAUSD-UTLA Collective Bargain Agreement, as a "relationship of trust he had developed with LAUSD's human resources staff, above all, Ekchian," I couldn't help but remembering that Chief Human Resources Officer Vivian Ekchian's name is on all dismissal letters that thousands of teachers have unjustly received from LAUSD over the last few years after a process that presumes them guilty of the clearly fabricated charges brought against them for the sole purpose of removing their costly presence from LAUSD. Both Duffy and Ekchian seem unfettered by the well-being of teachers involved, who both must know have done absolutely nothing to justify their being targeted and removed from their jobs.

In clear and uncontradicted evidence brought in this case, LAUSD used displaced teachers to stop substitutes from attaining the 100 days of service in any year that would have qualified them for expensive healthcare benefits. It accomplished this by using displaced teachers with and without tenure as substitutes in lieu of regular substitutes to so to speak kill two birds with one stone. LAUSD was able to stop regular substitutes from getting their 100 days and at the same time it was able to stop teachers from either reaching tenure or, if they already had tenure and had nonetheless been displace, keep them without a fixed assignment long enough, so that they could be fired by not offering them a fixed position within 3 years.

"Compensation for such substitute assignments shall be at the base rate or extended rate (as eligible) as set forth in Article XIX of the collective bargaining agreement." So LAUSD not only was able to stop substitutes from attaining health benefits for a 100 days of service, it was also able to pay displaced teachers far less than what it would have had to pay them in a regular teaching position. And according to this case, "the District also began tracking substitutes' hours with respect to their health benefits eligibility."

Add to this a warning to school principals to under no circumstances hire these displaced substitute teacher even if a regular position opened at their school and one gets a fairly clear picture of what is really going on. But the piece de la resistance was that if you could keep a tenured teacher working as a substitute for 3 years without them getting another regular position, you could ignore their seniority and treat them exactly the same as an untenured employee at will subject to firing without any rights.

Bottom line according to this case is: "UTLA violated its own policies and its duty of fair representation under the Educational Employment Relations Act (EERA) by secretly negotiating with the Los Angeles Unified School District (LAUSD or District) for a side letter agreement (July Side Letter) to alter the collectively-bargained seniority rights used for assigning substitute teaching work. UTLA breached its duty of fair representation in violation of EERA sections 3543.1, subdivision (a), 3543.6, subdivision (b ), and 3544.9 by negotiating a side letter to UTLA's collective bargaining agreement with LAUSD in secret without consultation or input from Charging Parties, and in violation of UTLA' s internal rules and that the July Side Letter had a substantial negative impact on Charging Parties' employment relationship."

If you or someone you know has been targeted and are in the process of being dismissed and need legal defense, get in touch:

Lenny@perdaily.com

Blogs We Love

Do you find the media and their "teachers-suck," "power to principals," "privatization is the best thing that's happened to public schools" disgusting and distasteful? The powers that be may "control" the main media but it's people like us who control the SOCIAL MEDIA. Hungry for more information about crusading educators going against the grain to do what's right for teachers, unions, communities, and children? Check out some more blogs below:

En la reciente 02/29/16 decisión de la Junta de Relaciones de Empleo Público (PERB) a favor de los derechos de los maestros sustitutos, de Maestros de Los Ángeles (UTLA) finalmente ha rendido cuentas por incestuosa relación de larga data de su liderazgo con el Distrito Escolar Unificado de Los Ángeles (LAUSD) en completa violación de los derechos contractuales de los maestros sustitutos. La opinión en este caso muestra una descarada violación de los derechos de sustitutos en el marco del Convenio Colectivo del LAUSD-UTLA. Esta colusión abierta entre LAUSD y UTLA en violación de los derechos de los maestros sustitutos se logró mediante "cartas complementarias" no públicas que celebren los presidentes de UTLA y otros en UTLA y sus homólogos en el LAUSD que estaban en completa contradicción con los derechos sustitutos de los profesores garantizado por la Convenio Colectivo del LAUSD-UTLA.

En la lectura de esta decisión con respecto a la venta de UTLA el liderazgo de los sustitutos y los maestros desplazados cuya colocación en puestos de trabajo con el LAUSD se utilizó para detener sustitutos de conseguir trabajo y los 100 días de servicio necesarios para tener derecho a beneficios para la salud, uno no puede evitar pensar si estas mismas prácticas no fueron también utilizados para facilitar ataque concertado del LAUSD durante los últimos 7 años en miles de maestros cuyo único "crimen" que condujo a su despido fue que estaban en la parte superior de la escala salarial con beneficios caras que ponían LAUSD en números rojos.

Después de leer la decisión en este caso, que describe en detalle excrutiating cómo UTLA liderazgo en prácticamente todos los regímenes anteriores ha utilizado "cartas complementarias" negociados entre UTLA y el liderazgo del LAUSD para cambiar completamente los colectivos de derechos contractuales creados de sus profesores sin ninguna ratificación por las entidades correspondientes, por ejemplo Consejo de Administración, Comités, Cámara de Representantes, o comunes y corrientes de archivos voto, uno no puede dejar de preguntarse si la misma relación incestuosa del LAUSD y el liderazgo de UTLA no se utiliza también para apuntar literalmente miles de maestros en la parte superior de la escala salarial para su eliminación.

En la lectura de esta decisión PERB 113 páginas, lo que me pareció más sorprendente fue la forma en la administración de UTLA parecía tener mucho más lealtad a Administración- LAUSD y su propia careers- de lo que nunca tuvieron que los maestros que se suponía debían estar representando. Cuando el ex presidente de A. J. Duffy describe Jefe de Recursos Humanos Oficial Vivian Ekchian, que estaba entrando en algunas de estas cartas secundarios cuestionables con total violación del Acuerdo de Convenio Colectivo en vigor del LAUSD-UTLA, como una "relación de confianza que había desarrollado con el personal de recursos humanos del LAUSD, por encima de todo, Ekchian, "yo no podía dejar de recordar que el nombre del oficial de recursos Jefe Humanos Vivian Ekchian está en todas las cartas de despido que miles de profesores han recibido injustamente de LAUSD en los últimos años después de un proceso que se presume culpables de la claridad cargos falsos presentados contra ellos con el único propósito de eliminar su presencia costoso desde el LAUSD. Tanto Duffy y Ekchian parecen sin restricciones por el bienestar de los profesores implicados, que ambos tienen que conozco han hecho absolutamente nada para justificar su objeto de ataques y removidos de sus puestos de trabajo.

En pruebas claras y no contradicha traído en este caso, el LAUSD utiliza docentes desplazados para detener sustitutos de alcanzar los 100 días de servicio en cualquier año que les habría clasificado para beneficios de salud caro. Se logra esto mediante el uso maestros desplazados con y sin mandato como sustitutos en lugar de sustitutos regulares para así decirlo matar dos pájaros de un tiro. LAUSD fue capaz de detener sustitutos regulares de conseguir sus 100 días y, al mismo tiempo que era capaz de dejar de maestros de cualquiera de tenencia de alcanzar o, si ya tenían la tenencia y, sin embargo, habían sido desplazar, mantenerlos sin una asignación fija el tiempo suficiente, por lo que podían ser despedidos por no ofrecerles una posición fija dentro de los 3 años.

"La compensación por tales asignaciones sustituto será a la tasa de base o tasa extendida (como elegible) como se establece en el artículo XIX del acuerdo de negociación colectiva". Así LAUSD no sólo fue capaz de detener los sustitutos de la consecución de beneficios para la salud durante 100 días de servicio, sino que también fue capaz de pagar a los maestros desplazados mucho menos que lo que hubiera tenido que pagar en una posición de enseñanza regular. Y de acuerdo con este caso ", el Distrito también comenzó a registrar horas sustitutos con respecto a sus beneficios de salud elegibilidad."

Añadir a esto una advertencia a los directores de las escuelas de bajo ninguna circunstancia contratar a estos desplazados maestro sustituto incluso si un puesto regular abierto en su escuela y uno para crear una imagen bastante clara de lo que realmente está pasando. Pero la pieza de la resistencia fue que si se pudiera mantener a un profesor titular que trabaja como un sustituto de 3 años sin ellos conseguir otra posición regular, usted podría ignorar su antigüedad y tratarlos exactamente igual que un empleado sin plaza fija a voluntad sujeta a tiro sin ningún derecho.

El fondo de acuerdo con este caso es: "UTLA violó sus propias políticas y de su deber de representación justa en virtud de la Educación Ley de relaciones laborales (EERA) por negociar en secreto con el Distrito Escolar Unificado de Los Ángeles (LAUSD o Distrito) para una carta de acuerdo lateral ( julio lateral Carta) para alterar los derechos de antigüedad negociados colectivamente-utilizados para la asignación de trabajo docente sustituto. UTLA incumplió su deber de representación justa en violación de las secciones EERA 3543.1, subdivisión (a), 3543.6, subdivisión (b), y 3.544,9 mediante la negociación de una carta complementaria a acuerdo colectivo de UTLA con el LAUSD en secreto, sin consultar ni aportes de las Partes de carga, y en violación de UTLA 's normas internas y que el lado carta de julio tuvieron un impacto negativo sustancial sobre el cargador con las Partes relación de trabajo ."

3 Comments

You make my heart ache to see yet another "legal" tactic being put into place which has the power to force "displaced" (long-term experienced) teachers into a penalized position. My own experience with this type of manipulation was so painful: to one day have the power of job security, a recognized voice, respect for my hard-earned education and experience -- and then, over a short period of only a few years, to lose it all. To become simply an unwanted "bad" employee, placed there along with my long-term experienced peers, in a pile on the floor below the ladder of authority.

Yes, I was a full time career sub ready to accept any and all assignments to teach everyday. I was the one who made sure the education of the students continued every single day, regardless of the reason for the teachers absence, which I never really knew, it is private information as to why the teacher needs to take time off.
Yes, I, an engineer that liked math and science and tech was replaced by a new history teacher hired the previous year. I was there 10+ years, but got no work, a history teacher teaching math that she hated got the work instead, according to the memo. I, and thousands of others, lost all insurance with the district. At one time, I was teaching at a middle school and I was the only LAUSD employee on the school campus that DID NOT HAVE HEALTH insurance, so my family had no health insurance, and there was no reason for me not to be teaching except for backroom deals by union thugs that could care less for their members health, even if seniority was violated, 10 years teaching and then kicked out the door, with nothing, NOTHING, and the union thugs still say it is business as usual. Obamacare is ONLY reason most of us have health insurance to this day, but does not excuse the union of its bad faith bargaining for subs.

Yes, many of those 'really bad' teachers should have been let go decades ago, but a bad teacher is a bad teacher, that is DIFFERENT, separate the two, too complex for such simple statements.

Everything stated about this herein is unequivocally true. In fact, ever since the decision was announced, subs have been complaining about the lack of action on it and enforcement of it. By and large these complaints were and are to be found on LASUBS,the most well known website/blog page for subs serving LAUSD. But there's more to this than just that. LASUBS itself has been a long time Trojan Horse for the UTLA until recently. You see, its moderator, a long time chair of the union's Substitute Teacher Committee, was fired several years ago from the district which made him ineligible to hold any union offices. However, he cut a deal to support then union president, Warren Fletcher,on certain issues which allowed him to illegally continue to hold union positions. That came to somewhat of an end with the arrival of Alex Caputo-Pearl who replaced Fletcher and brought in his own union power slate team, a group with no sympathies for subs even though they're dues paying members. So the moderator, Dave Peters, ceased his practice of censoring criticism of the union. But what makes this even more interesting yet is the duality, or really paradox, of subs being blocked from earning health care as compared to contract teachers earning life time health coverage. For all the wailing that goes along with subs being deprived of earning such benefits, along with it goes the huge role they played in keeping veteran contract teachers from reaching the sufficient number of service years to qualify for continued health insurance into retirement. In simple language, every time the district pulled a teacher, there was a sub ready to step in and eat those available work hours thus making it that much easier for the district to keep things together until they replaced the ousted veteran teacher with cheaper labor. So while the complaining continues from subs over not being allowed to acquire the the needed 100 hours for health coverage, they seem to have no issues with being the district's helpful hand in blocking life time coverage for these same veteran teachers. In political terms, they serve as a fifth column for the district.

Leave a comment