Another Budget Driver- My Position

Referring again to the Mayoral candidate's debate comments, derived from Mr. Dean's carefully prepared letter that has been circulating throughout the community, I'd like to address the issue of what appeared to be inconsistent and overly generous jumps in teacher salaries in the seniority part of the matrix and the steps towards professionalism part of the matrix (I can never remember which is X and which is Y).

They are there. They are there for a reason; taken out of context, which both the candidate and Mr. Dean have done (of course they have; there is no way for them to know what actually happened in the negotiations of each of those items). They seem like logical targets for questions. And questions deserve answers.

For the last two contracts, the teachers union rejected the request by the School Committee to do collaborative bargaining, in which the entire bargaining unit on each side use the same data, and work towards using that data to support a consensus for contracting together. The contract prior to that was done collaboratively; it was before my time, but the feedback I received from our attorney at the time was that it was the quickest, easiest and most satisfying negotiation between the Newburyport Teachers Association and the School system.

Instead, for the last two contracts, the NTA has insisted on positional bargaining, also called adversarial bargaining. In this type of bargaining, each side exchanges evolving positions on a particular issue being addressed, and there is virtually no collaborative effort to agree on facts. Most of the work of responding to proposals at the table is done by the Lawyer for the School Committee and the Massachusetts Teacher's Association representative assigned to work with the NTA.

In my opinion, frankly, the latter bargaining style is tedious, incrementally productive, and lends itself to a lot of posturing. With the upcoming election undecided, I do not know if I will be involved, given my seniority, with the negotiations for the next contract. If I do, I am hopeful that the quality of the relationship Doc Lyons has created with the teachers will encourage the collaborative bargaining. It is such a wonderful learning process.

Having set the scene, one of the elements of any contract negotiation is that each party has its own list of "items" it would like to see eliminated or added; these items may have little to do with salary or benefits; but salary and benefits are often used as bargaining chips to get at these items. Increased sick time or a personal day more; a change in the co-pay of medical expenses, or the number of hours a teacher is expected to be on-site doing school work are four examples some of the "shopping list" items.

In my own experience negotiating a contract with the teachers, the seemingly inexplicable salary "bump s" were often linked with concessions that helped constructively impact another long-term budget expense. We didn't give something for nothing, and the teachers didn't get something for nothing.

Let me repeat that. Most of the seemingly curious and uneven bumps in salary movement across the matrix were agreed to in exchange for other items the teachers made concessions on. It may be that an analysis showed we were losing more teachers at that point than at other points in their tenure, and we wanted those teachers to stay. In may be there because it was a concession we made to achieve something we felt would be in the long-term best interest of the school system, the students, or the budget. You give a little, you get a little.

From my recent introduction to Mr. Deans, (through a number of very informative and animated conversations, and my longstanding personal admiration for the Mayoral candidate who unfortunately chose to present Mr. Deans' arguments out of the context in which the criticized decisions were made), I have to say they are both extremely intelligent men, who are passionate about public service. Frankly, I believe that both of them will make terrific public servants when elected. There's no personal beef here for me; the issues they raise absolutely deserve an adequate response.

The problem is that everyone wants to go to heaven, but nobody wants to die; everyone wants to express a nice clear and seemingly simple talking point, but man is it a pain the petootie to actually place it in context. It forces you to write long postings.

My respect and admiration for both Mr. Deans and the unnamed candidate for Mayoral makes my disappointment all the more painful.

Again, I am not defending the salary schedule that was negotiated for this contract; if memory serves I was actually one of two School Committee members who did not vote to approve this contract, because of the salary schedule.

I think the long-term, and deserved basic mistrust of the School Committee and the administration has made it difficult to for the community to appreciate that some significant and more recent changes in approach and style and accountability have occurred.

Yeah, we still talk things to death, and our meetings aren't as tight as they could be. Our commitment to community engagement lends an air of sloppiness and informality to our meetings. We don't make lightning fast decisions (given my own experience with the tightly structured and highly choreographed votes on previous SC's, that may not be a bad thing overall).

But this refracted view of the SC automatically triggers in some members of the community the assumption that negotiating the contract was simply an exercise- the teachers said "jump," and we said "how high?" Every single item in the contract was analyzed for it's immediate and long-term financial impact; we didn't just throw our wallets on the table and say "leave us the Washingtons, you keep the Benjamins."

Even knowing that, and knowing and having tremendous respect for our teaching staff, I still voted against the contract because I thought the bill was too steep. Majority carries.

Them's the facts, boys and girls. Stick them where you've affixed your assumptions and see if it clarifies anything for you. Perception may be reality, but context matters the most.