Teachers and district strike three-year deal

After more than a year of negotiations, the Whitefish School District and teachers union have finally settled on a collective bargaining agreement.

The three-year contract goes through June 2016 and includes annual pay raises for teachers as well as changes to the retirement program. Both areas proved to be critical talking points during the drawn out negotiations.

The contract was approved by the Whitefish School Board March 28. Two-thirds of Whitefish Education Association members voted to ratify the contract.

The deal includes a 1.5 percent bump to the base salary for teachers for the current school year. Another 1 percent increase to the base salary is scheduled for next year. The base salary will increase again in 2015-16 by a minimum of 1 percent, or a maximum of 3 percent, depending on whether the district’s budget authority increases.

Trustee Dave Fern says the pay increase for 2015-16 shows the district is serious about paying its teachers.

“I hope it shows our intent that if we have the money, we’re willing to put it into wages,” he said.

Fern notes that funding for teachers pay largely depends on the district’s student count.

“Our count has been stagnant for a number of years,” he said. “I totally understand the staff saying they need more money. I agree — but we can only afford so much.”

With the new agreement, the average salary for the 2013-14 year is $59,000 with the highest salary at $70,377 and the lowest at $35,562, not including benefits.

Both sides squabbled over terms in the retirement bonus program.

Fern said the district was adamant about cutting future expenses, while union president Gayle Graf said it was an area they worked to protect.

The district spends about $300,000 annually on retirement packages and felt that amount was unsustainable, Fern said.

“We were looking into the future to see if we could start getting those costs down,” he said.

In the new contract, employees who were hired in 2004 or before will have the option to continue receiving a monthly $500 district contribution for five years or they can receive a $15,000 tax-free payout through the Teacher Retirement System instead.

Trustee Shawn Tucker noted that 87 percent of the school budget goes to teacher salaries and retirement obligations.

“As a business owner that is a number that is staggering to me,” he said. “Yet, I’m all about paying the teachers.”

Fern said both sides made concessions in the agreement.

“Both sides were working toward a middle ground,” he said. “Both sides felt they made some gains, but didn’t get completely what they wanted. Which is not a bad thing — that’s collective bargaining.”

“It will be nice to step away from the table for a while,” Graf said about the year-long negotiation process.

This is the second consecutive year contract negotiations have lasted for more than a year. The 2012-13 contract was a one-year deal, with negotiations on the current deal beginning immediately after it was ratified.

Fern said it’s not unusual for negotiations to drag on.

“You would like to finish within the contractual year, but sometimes you don’t,” he said.

Having a three-year deal is a big relief for both sides, Fern said, as it provides certainty for both teachers and administrators.

He said contractual issues can become distracting and divisive.

“That’s what was happening,” Fern said.

Tucker agrees that the ongoing mediation was dividing the school district.

“It’s troubling that it seems that there’s a difference between teachers, administrators, school board trustees and the superintendent — that they’re not on one team,” he said. “We should be one group working together to educate the children of Whitefish.”

Division between some members of the teachers association and the district is evident in results from a February WEA membership negotiations survey.

The WEA surveyed its members throughout the negotiation process, which helped guide contract talks, Graf said.

About 73 percent of the association responded to the survey. Teachers were not required to answer any of the survey questions, but some took the opportunity to sound off on their frustrations with the district.

Nearly a third of teachers at the high school and middle school who responded said they’re totally unsatisfied with the atmosphere in their building.

“The climate sucks,” one teacher commented. “I have never seen morale as low as this. Teachers cowering in their classrooms, afraid to speak up, teachers in tears, just going through the motions like a bunch of automatons and putting on a happy face for our students.”

Muldown Elementary rated the highest in morale, with an average score of 5.2 on a scale of zero to nine, with nine meaning “completely satisfied.” The middle school scored a 3.75, and the high school a 3.08.

A number of teachers said veteran educators are no longer valued in the district.

“There is a growing chasm between the old and new,” one teacher said. “I am also very concerned that there is no consistency in the delivery of our programs between classes and across grade levels. We have thrown out work that took years to build up.”

“I think it’s obvious...that teachers are not valued here as we once were,” another teacher said. “Staff input is not valued as it once was. Instead, decisions are made from ‘on high’ and then handed down as ultimatums.”

The proposed shift to a block schedule with extended learning times was noted multiple times in the survey.

“There is pressure to support the block schedule proposal, even though it may not be the best for the students,” one teacher commented.

“A calculated effort has been made to divide the staff on the issue of block scheduling,” another teacher commented.

Not all survey responses were negative toward extended learning times. One teacher commented, “I am very excited about the addition of collaboration / prep time that is being discussed in the extended time model at the high school.”

When asked if they were satisfied with the effectiveness of the administrators in the district, more than 20 percent of teachers surveyed at the middle school and 16 percent at the high school scored their survey with a zero, meaning “not effective.”

“It’s a sinking ship in several areas — discipline, dress code, efficiency, decision making, etc. — and we’re going down,” a teacher commented.

“Administrators are refusing to listen to their own staff members if they are not lock step with the current administrative thought process,” another teacher commented.

Others were more supportive.

“I appreciate their hard work, their humanness and their commitment to our school system,” one teacher commented.

Muldown teachers rated the effectiveness of administrators with an average score of 5.39 on a scale of zero to nine, with nine meaning “completely effective.” Middle school teachers gave administrators an average rating of 4.21, and high school teachers gave an average score of 3.96.

Professional development was another area in the survey that drew criticism, mostly for its cost and the amount of time it pulls teachers away from the classroom.

“Yes, there are some good ideas, but we’ve seen this all before over the years,” one teacher commented. “We have sacrificed all other good professional development for this, and spending an embarrassing amount to do it.”

Still, another teacher commented that professional development is “very beneficial” in helping teachers prepare for Common Core standards.

When asked about the survey results, Fern said there are mechanisms in place within the district where teachers’ concerns can be voiced and addressed.