CAT Tracks for April 22, 2003 THE "UNTOUCHABLES"

The CAT Bargaining Team met with the Board's Bargaining Team on Monday afternoon to consider the impact of the massive (unrealistic) RIFs of earlier this month...

The CAT opened the session by requesting the District's "staffing plan" for next year - i.e. who would be teaching what? The purpose of this was to see the official version of what we had already "guesstimated".

There were few surprises and, indeed, most teachers at the elementary level next year ARE scheduled to teach upwards of 40 (and as many as 63) students each next year. The Board team indicated verbally (and in its written "Needs Assessment for 2003-2004") that it knew that this was not realistic and that more teachers will be needed. When the CAT followed up with the obvious question - "Why cut teachers that you know you will need? - the Board team answered with "...because this is the number of teachers that we have money to pay."

The Board team reminded the CAT that the Financial Oversight Panel had insisted upon $850,000 worth of cuts...and therefore that its hands were tied until additional revenue was confirmed - either through grants or increases in federal or state aid.

Since the Board team indicated that it had no leeway "at this time" to make changes to the plan already implemented...and since the CAT needed time to study the details of the plan presented at the meeting...no action was taken. The meeting lasted about 90 minutes.

Disturbing inconsistencies...

The CAT team did ask questions to determine the Board's rationale for implemented cuts and to determine their receptiveness to alternatives...alternatives that would lessen the "hit" and put more personnel into the classrooms. What emerged was not encouraging...

When we asked about "administration"...THAT will remain a "protected species". Although we can fire teachers and schedule one teacher to teach 63 students...because that's all we can afford - it's not realistic to take advantage of administrative retirements (Don't have to fire anybody!) and restructure the administration to save money to hire back personnel that "work in the trenches". We are advertising for a "CHS Principal for 2003-2004". Why? This position could be filled with existing administrative personnel and save a BIG salary. Yes...it would mean extra responsibility...but no more than say 63 students in a classroom!

Speaking of retirements... The Board has put together some type of package for an administrator to facilitate early retirement. Since that action indicates that the Board "buys into" the concept...the CAT team asked about incentive for early retirement of teachers...encourage "top dollar" teachers to retire and fill the positions with less expensive personnel. The answer was brief..."No. Can't afford it." EXCUSE ME!? We can afford to "buy out" administrators...but we can't afford the same for teachers?

(DISCLAIMER: The CAT has nothing against administrators getting whatever they can get. We also understand that adminstrators do NOT desire an increased work load...we can and do empathize with that. BUT...the Board/Superintendent said at the Public Hearing that the pain and suffering was to be "across the board".)

TRANSPORTATION...the Superintendent (in response to CAT inquiries) has said on several occasions that the District could save $100,000 in transportation...a fund that has "run in the red" for years due to the District's insistence on busing students that are NOT required by law. This continued practice by the Board is a major reason why the District is in its current financial shape. But...when the CAT brings it up...year after year after year...nothing happens. We have brought it up three times this year - including yesterday. The response..."No decision has been made." We were warned of the "consequences" of cutting busing...a reduction in ADA (State aid)...due to a decline in attendance when students must walk or find their own transportation to school. We didn't bother to respond, but just wondering...what impact will 63 students in a classroom have on student attendance? Do you think that maybe...just maybe...a few more families may leave Cairo when word spreads as to projected class sizes for next year?

Speaking of 63 students...Under the District's "Proposed Program for Bennett 2003-2004 Based Upon Remaining Staff", there will be one (1) teacher for 63 Fourth Grade students and three (3) teachers for 63 Sixth Grade students. Why? The Board wants to retain "departmentalization" - teachers specializing in Math, Science, and Language Arts. Question: If we can't afford a second teacher for Fourth Grade (and Second Grade and Third Grade and Fifth Grade)...can we really afford the "departmentalize"?

Folks...I don't teach math anymore, but "This just don't add up!"

The Board is obviously still into the mode of picking and choosing where it wants to "get real"...like firing 25 teachers and 30 support professionals...and retaining "pet projects". And we are supposed to "accept" and "understand"...they are only doing what they have to do. Yeah, right!

The good news...the Board DOES anticipate calling back as many teachers as possible IF AND WHEN confirmation of funding is received.

The bad news...all will not be recalled (according to the Board team) and the "lucky ones" will have to continue riding the emotional roller coaster until receiving the recall notice.

The CAT will continue to apply whatever pressure it can to remedy the current situation. If you have any questions or concerns, share them with a bargaining team member (De De O'Shea, Ledora Beard, Deborah Hammel, Ruth Bailey, Penny Farris, Steve Kohn, or Ron Newell). We will support you in any way possible.