CONSIDERATIONS IN NEGOTIATIONS A REVIEW OF PREPARATION, PROCESS AND - - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

▶
considerations in negotiations
SMART_READER_LITE
LIVE PREVIEW

CONSIDERATIONS IN NEGOTIATIONS A REVIEW OF PREPARATION, PROCESS AND - - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

Oct 07, 2023 134 likes •952 views

CONSIDERATIONS IN NEGOTIATIONS A REVIEW OF PREPARATION, PROCESS AND CURRENT ECONOMIC CIRCUMSTANCES FACING NEW JERSEY PUBLIC SCHOOL DISTRICT NEGOTIATIONS PRESENTATION OBJECTIVES To facilitate communication between the Board of Education and the

slide-1
SLIDE 1

CONSIDERATIONS IN NEGOTIATIONS

A REVIEW OF PREPARATION, PROCESS AND CURRENT ECONOMIC CIRCUMSTANCES FACING NEW JERSEY PUBLIC SCHOOL DISTRICT NEGOTIATIONS

slide-2
SLIDE 2

PRESENTATION OBJECTIVES

1.

To facilitate communication between the Board of Education and the public

2.

Allow people to understand the collective bargaining process

3.

Identify economic challenges facing New Jersey public school districts today

4.

To answer any questions involving the collective bargaining process

5.

Remove any confusion about the facts surrounding collective bargaining

slide-3
SLIDE 3

PRESENTATION DISCLAIMER

1.

New Jersey Statue does not permit the Board of Education to reveal or discuss the actual proposals or items being negotiated during a collective bargaining negotiations between two parties, unless the both parties agree to do so.

1.

Note: The Clinton T

  • wnship Board of Education offered the Clinton T
  • wnship Education Association (CTEA) the
  • pportunity to negotiate in public in December 2016. The CTEA declined.

2.

The content included in this presentation WILL NOT reveal any specifics related to actual proposals or items being negotiated at this time between the Board of Education and the Clinton Township Education Association (CTEA).

3.

The confidential nature of these negotiations WILL NOT be broken.

4.

The Board of Education and its representatives only will answer any question that is permitted by the law.

slide-4
SLIDE 4

AGENDA

Introduction

Overview of Collective Bargaining in New Jersey

Vito Gagliardi Jr., Board Legal Counsel - Porzio, Bromberg and Newman PC

Board Preparation for Collective Bargaining Process

Alissa Olawski – Chairperson - Personnel, Negotiations Committee

Key Components and Considerations in Negotiations

Maria Grant – Chairperson, Negotiations

Kevin Maloy – Chairperson - Facilities and Finance, Negotiations Committee

Rising Healthcare Costs – Premiums

Brian Rizor – Senior Vice President, Employee Benefits - Brown & Brown Benefit Advisors

Salary Guide Structure and Considerations

Phillip E. Stern – Board Labor Representative - DiFrancesco, Bateman, Kunzman, Davis, Lehrer & Flaum, PC

Current Negotiation Status – Board of Education and Clinton T

  • wnship Education Association

Basic Question and Answer about Current Negotiations

slide-5
SLIDE 5

OPENING COMMENTS AND INTRODUCTION

MARIA GRANT, PRESIDENT, CLINTON TOWNSHIP BOARD OF EDUCATION - CHAIRPERSON

slide-6
SLIDE 6

WHY WE NEGOTIATE

VITO GAGLIARDI JR., BOARD LEGAL COUNSEL - PORZIO, BROMBERG AND NEWMAN PC

slide-7
SLIDE 7

REASON WHY WE NEGOTIATE

Profound Effect on School Management

Dictates over 70% of a school district’s budget. 1

Affects personnel policies.

Impacts District’s ability to implement its educational program.

Board cannot change certain terms and conditions of employment without negotiations with the union.

1AN OVERVIEW OF THE BOARD'S COLLECTIVE NEGOTIATIONS OBLIGATIONS, NEW JERSEY SCHOOL BOARDS ASSOCIATION, AVAILABLE AT

WWW.NJSBA.ORG/WP-CONTENT/UPLOADS/2016/04/NEGOTIATOINS ADVISOR BOARDS COLLECTIVE BARGAINING OBLIGATION.PDF

slide-8
SLIDE 8

WHAT IS COLLECTIVE BARGAINING

Good Faith Bargaining

Joint-decision making process

Eliminates Board’s ability to unilaterally determine certain employment issues

Bargaining Unit

Negotiate with union representatives, never individual employees

Mandatory T

  • pics of Negotiations

Intimately and directly affects employees’ work and welfare

Not preempted by statute or regulations

Would not significantly interfere with management’s inherent rights

slide-9
SLIDE 9

APPLICABLE LAWS

Public Employment Relations Act

Employees have right to:

Form a union

Initiate grievances

Collectively negotiate

Collective Negotiations

Meet at reasonable times

Negotiate in good faith

Agreement must be included in a signed, written contract

Board cannot change certain work rules without negotiations

Enforced by the Public Employment Relations Commission (PERC)

slide-10
SLIDE 10

WHO REPRESENTS THE BOARD

Negotiations T eam

Composition •

Board members

Professional negotiator

Superintendent/Business Administrator (advisors)

Role

Prepare Board’s proposal

Negotiate with union

Sign tentative agreement (Memorandum of Agreement)

Full Board

Set direction for the process and outcome of negotiations

Establish parameters for a settlement

slide-11
SLIDE 11

STAGES OF NEGOTIATIONS

  • 1. Good Faith Negotiations
  • 2. Impasse Declared

Further meetings will be unproductive

  • 3. Mediation

Third party neutral is assigned

Makes nonbinding recommendations

  • 4. Fact Finding

Publically issues written, nonbinding recommendations

  • 5. Super Conciliation

Publically issues written, nonbinding recommendations

slide-12
SLIDE 12

BOARD PREPARATION FOR NEGOTIATIONS

ALISSA OLAWSKI – CHAIRPERSON OF PERSONNEL AND NEGOTIATIONS COMMITTEE

slide-13
SLIDE 13

BOARD PREPARATION FOR NEGOTIATIONS

General Notes – Board Preparation

The Board spends in excess of 60 hours to prepare for the collective bargaining process.

Preparation for negotiations begins in the fall before the contract expires.

Board President assigns a negotiations committee after the re-organization meeting held during the first week of January.

slide-14
SLIDE 14

BOARD PREPARATION FOR NEGOTIATIONS

Step 1 - Obtain Labor Counsel

Identify Candidates

Negotiations Committee Conducts Interviews

Committee Recommends Its Choice for Labor Counsel to the Full Board

Board Votes to Approve or Not Approve the Candidate

Step 2 – Review Current Contract

Identify contract articles that need to be updated as a result of new laws, mandates or processes that would positively or negatively impact classroom education

Step 3 – Review Current Contract with District Administration

Review contract with superintendent to make sure it complies with policies, procedures, operations, educational programs and processes, professional development days required, and length of school day, week and year.

slide-15
SLIDE 15

BOARD PREPARATION FOR NEGOTIATIONS

Step 4 – Conduct Secondary Research

Review, Compare and Document Contract From “Like-Districts” & Districts in Hunterdon County (Same Enrollment Size, K-8, District Factor I Group)

 Salary Percentage Increases  Additional Instructional Time  Higher Co-Pays  Benefit Packages & Increases  Increase in Length of School Day  Increase in Deductible  Professional Development Days  Additional Parent Conference in Day or Evening  Sick Bank

slide-16
SLIDE 16

BOARD PREPARATION FOR NEGOTIATIONS

Step 5 – Identify the Current Structural Costs of the Existing Contract

Benefits, Sick Bank, Increment Cost, T

  • tal Salary Cost

Step 6 – Meet With Board - Approved Experts

NJSBA – Contract Review

NJSBA – Salary Guide Review

Insurance Consultant – Brown & Brown

slide-17
SLIDE 17

BOARD PREPARATION FOR NEGOTIATIONS

Step 7 – Develop Proposals

Step 8 – Negotiations Committee Reviews Data with Full Board and Makes a Recommendation

Step 9 – Discussions Occur in Executive Session and Board Provides Guidelines to the Negotiations Committee

Step 10 – Committee Provides the Status of Negotiations On a Constant Basis

slide-18
SLIDE 18

KEY COMPONENTS AND CONSIDERATIONS IN NEGOTIATIONS

MARIA GRANT – CHAIRPERSON, NEGOTIATIONS

slide-19
SLIDE 19

GENERAL CONSIDERATIONS FOR NEGOTIATIONS

General Considerations Across All Disciplines

T eachers, teaching assistants, school guidance counselors, long term substitutes, school nurses, school psychologists, learning disabilities teacher consultants, school social workers, occupational therapists, physical therapists, speech therapists, behavioral specialists, custodial and maintenance staff, and secretaries.  Length of Contract (3 or 4 years)  Professional Development  Work Day, Week, Year  Black Seal License  Certifications for T eaching Assistants  Tuition Reimbursement programs  Holidays  T eacher Evaluation Program  Employee Leave Situations  (Child Care Leave, Emergency Leave of Absence, Disability Leave/Family Leave  Sick Bank Process  Grievance Process  Stipends for Extra Curricula Activities

slide-20
SLIDE 20

KEY FINANCIAL COMPONENTS AND CONSIDERATIONS IN NEGOTIATIONS

KEVIN MALOY– CHAIRPERSON, FACILITIES AND FINANCE – NEGOTIATIONS COMMITTEE

slide-21
SLIDE 21

FINANCIAL CONSIDERATIONS

Comparison Staff Salary and Impact on Budget 2016-17 and 2017-18

February 23, 2017 Scattergram for CTEA Members is $12,945,918 as of the signed agreement with the Board

2% General Fund Tax Levy CAP

Increment Cost to the District

Current and Future Healthcare Benefit Structure/Options and Associated Costs

Contribution percentages for the employee and District

Impact of Pending Cadillac Tax

Cost of Sick Bank (compensated balances)

Tuition Reimbursement

slide-22
SLIDE 22

BUDGETARY FINANCIAL CONSIDERATION FOR NEGOTIATIONS COMPARISON STAFF SALARY/BENEFITS & BUDGET ALLOCATIONS

77% 15% 8%

2016-17

Salaries Required Variable

79% 13% 8%

2017-18

Salaries Required Variable

slide-23
SLIDE 23

BUDGETARY FINANCIAL CONSIDERATION FOR NEGOTIATIONS

Understanding the 2% General Fund Tax Levy Budget CAP

2017-18 T

  • tal General Fund Tax Levey was - $23,145,143.

A 2% Increase in the General Fund Tax Levy CAP for 2018-19 equals- $23,608,045 (an addition of $462,902)

Therefore, to remain under the 2% CAP, the District cannot increase the General Fund Levy more than $462,902

If the Board increases the budget above the 2% CAP, then budget goes out to the Township for a vote.

slide-24
SLIDE 24

BUDGETARY FINANCIAL CONSIDERATION FOR NEGOTIATIONS

Increment Cost to the District

Increment cost is the total amount of money that is required to permit each member in the CTEA to receive a salary step increase from the year’s prior salary

The salary guide is constructed by the members of the NJEA and the CTEA negotiation’s team

The Board IS NOT legally permitted to work outside the construct of this guide as it exists today

CTEA teacher increment cost for 2017-18 is approximately $326,251 (2.7%) for the CTEA population

This means that for 2018-19, the total General Fund Tax Levy would have to increase by $326,251.  This total dollar cost is close to the total general fund 2% tax levy CAP of $462,902

slide-25
SLIDE 25

BUDGETARY FINANCIAL CONSIDERATION FOR NEGOTIATIONS

Overview of Current Healthcare Benefit

Medical – New Jersey Employees Health Benefits Program

Options Direct 10, Direct 15, Aetna Freedom 1525, NJ Direct 2030 and NJ Direct 2035

Prescription Coverage – BeneCard Prescription Benefit Facilitator Program

$3 retail generic co-payment and $15 Brand Name Medication co-payment

Mail order prescriptions - $5 generic mail order co-payment and $15 brand name medication brand name medication co-payment

Dental

Horizon Dental Plan

Optical Benefits

CTEA is provided $100 per family per school year optical benefit for exams and devices

Employee Assistance Plan

Provided Employee Assistance Program which is confidential, counseling, assessment, and referral program

Flexible Spending Account

Option of participating in a Section 125 Flexible Spending Account

slide-26
SLIDE 26

BUDGETARY FINANCIAL CONSIDERATION FOR NEGOTIATIONS

2017-18 Projected Final Healthcare Cost to the District

12% increase - $3,237,979

Last year’s healthcare benefit increase was projected at 12%, but the actual increase is 13%

1% increase to 13% starting on January 1, 2018, the final medical benefit cost to the district is projected to be $3,254,068. This is an increase of $16,189 over the original projection.

The average percentage contribution for a CTEA member is 16% of premiums

Approximately 53% of the CTEA members pay less than 16%

District pays 84% of total premium healthcare cost

Healthcare Benefit Increase Projections for Calendar Year 2019

Projected Increase18% - $576,246

slide-27
SLIDE 27

BUDGETARY FINANCIAL CONSIDERATION FOR NEGOTIATIONS

Why are these things financial considerations for the Board?

Remember 2% General Fund Tax Levy CAP of $ 462,902

Add the following components for 2018 -19 General Fund Tax Levy

 Increase in healthcare costs of 18% $ 576,246  Increment cost of 2.7% + $ 326,251  T

  • tal Increase $ 902,497

 The total increase puts the District over the 2% General Fund

Tax Levy CAP of $462,902 by $439,595.

 Keep in mind, that these are only two components that comprise the budget.

slide-28
SLIDE 28

BUDGETARY FINANCIAL CONSIDERATION FOR NEGOTIATIONS

Impact to the District if Projected General Fund Tax Levy Exceeds 2%

Reductions in –

Security upgrades

Capital projects – for example, air conditioning and new windows

Curriculum development and needs for the classroom

Keeping pace with technology

Staff size forcing higher class sizes above State average

Professional development programs

Extra curricula funding – Pay-to-Play

Funding Reserve accounts

Facility upgrades and maintenance

slide-29
SLIDE 29

ADDITIONAL BUDGETARY CONSIDERATIONS

Sick Bank Costs – Compensated Absences Payable

Sick Bank is defined as a collection of sick days that members of a bargaining unit donate into a “bank” to be used by other members of the unit who may have used all of their allotted sick days.

The District must pay the employee’s salary when he/she uses a day from the sick bank and for the substitute employee that the district must hire to cover for the absent employee.

T

  • insure that a school district can financially cover the total number of days left in the Sick Bank, it must add that projected

cost into its budget.

Below are the Compensated Absence Payable ending balances for the Clinton T

  • wnship School District at the end of the

last three years.

June 30, 2017 $663,595 June 30, 2016 $658,563 June 30, 2015 $698,124

slide-30
SLIDE 30

ADDITIONAL BUDGETARY CONSIDERATIONS

Tuition Reimbursement Program

The District pays for two graduate courses, graduate or technical/craft courses taken during any school year.

Reimbursement Costs to the District

2017-18 $51,211 (school year not complete as of today)

2016-17 $51,694

2015-16 $35,580

2014-15 $68,697

2013-14 $67,975

slide-31
SLIDE 31

ADDITIONAL FINANCIAL CONSIDERATIONS

Cadillac Tax

Permanent tax beginning in 2022 to raise $80 Billion to finance expansion of health coverage.

Based on projections using the 2017-18 cost of healthcare benefits, the Cadillac Tax to the District will be an additional $412,008.

slide-32
SLIDE 32

RISING HEALTHCARE COSTS - PREMIUMS

BRIAN RIZOR – SENIOR VICE PRESIDENT, EMPLOYEE BENEFITS – BROWN & BROWN BENEFIT ADVISORS

slide-33
SLIDE 33

B B

Clinton Township Board of Education Health Benefits Overview

February 2018

Employee Benefits Consulting & Brokerage I Labor Relations & Human Resources Support Client Services & Claims Adjudication I Compliance & Regulatory Guidance I Enrollment & Decision Support Technology

  • Wisdom. To your benefit.TM
slide-34
SLIDE 34

Table of Contents

School Employees’ Health Benefits Plan (SEHBP) Overview Chapter 78 Cadillac Tax

  • Wisdom. To your benefit.TM
slide-35
SLIDE 35

Comparison of SEHBP Medical Plans

slide-36
SLIDE 36

SEHBP 2018 Medical Rates – CTEA Only

slide-37
SLIDE 37

SEHBP Renewal History

slide-38
SLIDE 38

Projected Increase in the SEHBP

  • SEHBP Commission approved 1/1/18 rate increase = +13.0%
  • 2010-2018 nine year average rate increase = +11.3%
  • 2010-2018 compounded rate increase = +159.5%
  • SEHBP suffers from:
  • Structural annual operating deficit 3 of the past 5 years
  • “Adverse selection” via “good” groups leaving and “bad” groups

entering

  • Legacy plan designs with next-to-zero member liability (e.g.,

“Direct 10”)

  • Our preliminary forecast for 1/1/19 = +18.0%
  • Our forecast could go up based on quality and quantity of additional

SEHBP “defectors”

  • Wisdom. To your benefit.TM
slide-39
SLIDE 39

Offsetting the Increase in Premium Costs

Move into lower cost plans within the SEHBP

Plan Premium Difference

Direct 10 to Direct 15

  • 4.8%
  • 7.6%

Direct 10 to Direct 15/25 Direct 10 to Direct 20/30 Direct 10 to Direct 20/35

  • 13.1%
  • 25.33%
  • Wisdom. To your benefit.TM
slide-40
SLIDE 40

Chapter 78

  • Signed into law June 2011
  • All employees now have “skin in the

game” relative to the cost of employee benefits

  • Year 1 through 4 “sliding scale” premium

contributions based on salary. Most districts are currently in Year 4

  • Year 4 premium contribution ranges from

3% (<$25K salary) to 35% (>$110K salary)

  • Average Chapter 78 contribution district-

wide is 16%. Fifty three percent of the staff contributes 16% or less to the premium.

  • Wisdom. To your benefit.TM
slide-41
SLIDE 41

Chapter 78 Contribution Chart

slide-42
SLIDE 42

Chapter 78 Contribution Chart (continued)

slide-43
SLIDE 43

Cadillac Tax – What Is It?

Permanent annual tax beginning in 2022 on employers that provide high-cost benefits through an employer sponsored plan Applies to all employer sponsored coverage, except:

  • Stand-alone dental
  • Stand-alone vision

Purpose: To generate

  • Disability benefits

$80 billion over the next 10 yhelp finance the expansion ears to

  • f health coverage
  • Workers’ compensation
  • Long-term care insurance
  • Other HIPAA “excepted benefits”
slide-44
SLIDE 44

Cadillac Tax – How is it Calculated?

Plan Cost Is Determined Based on:

  • Premiums paid by employers and

employees

  • Employer & Employee contributions

to FSA, HRA, and HSA

  • Cost of Employee Assistance Plans

(EAP’s), onsite clinics and wellness programs

slide-45
SLIDE 45

Cadillac Tax – How is it Calculated?

The tax is 40% of the amounts that exceed predetermined annual threshold amounts*

  • $10,200 for single coverage
  • $27,500 for other than single coverage

Cost includes the total premiums paid by employer and employee, but not the cost sharing amounts such as deductibles and copays

* Amounts subject to change when final regulations are issued and indexed for inflation in

future years. Thresholds will be adjusted for high-risk professions (law enforcement) and group demographics (age/sex).

slide-46
SLIDE 46

Cadillac Tax Impact – CTEA Only

SEHBP NJ Direct 10 (w/Rx Card)

Projected Annual Cost

CADILLAC TAX

2018 Rate Single Family $1,145.90 $3,225.86 $13,751

$1,420 $4,484

$38,710

School District with 124 employees (47 singles & 122 families) using above projections would face a Cadillac Tax of

$412,008

slide-47
SLIDE 47

SALARY GUIDE STRUCTURE – INCREMENT COST

PHILLIP E. STERN BOARD LABOR REPRESENTATIVE – DIFRANCESCO, BATEMAN, KUNZMAN, DAVIS, LEHRER & FLAUM, PC

slide-48
SLIDE 48

SALARY GUIDE STRUCTURE

What is a Salary Guide?

A salary guide, in the form of a chart, pinpoints how much a school district pays a staff.

This includes teachers, teaching assistants, school guidance counselors, long term substitutes, school nurses, school psychologists, learning disabilities teacher consultants, school social workers, occupational therapists, physical therapists, speech therapists, behavioral specialists, custodial and maintenance staff, and secretaries.

This chart helps to compensate a staff member based on years of service and education. See next slide for an example.

The salary guide is constructed by the NJEA and the CTEA negotiations committee.

slide-49
SLIDE 49

SALARY GUIDE STRUCTURE

slide-50
SLIDE 50

SALARY GUIDE STRUCTURE

What is an increment cost?

An increment cost is the total amount of money that is required to permit each member in the CTEA to receive a salary step increase from the year’s prior salary. (or years’ prior salaries.)

For example: the increment value for one teacher in the CTEA between BA step 1 ($45,800) and BA step 2 ($46,100) is $300. The increment cost for that one teacher is $300.

The current increment cost, the total amount of money require, to give everyone in the CTEA a raise would be an increase of approximately 2.7% for one year, equaling $326,251.

The members of the CTEA’s current total cost of salary and benefits are $12,945,918. If you add the cost of an increment, then the total salary would equal $13,272.669.

slide-51
SLIDE 51

SALARY GUIDE STRUCTURE

What are the current salary guide challenges for the CTEA?

The biggest challenge is an increment cost of approximately 2.7%. This is considered to be very high.

The problem with an increment cost this high is that any settlement less than 2.7% means that in all likelihood, each teacher will not advance on the salary – no increase in salary.

slide-52
SLIDE 52

SALARY GUIDE STRUCTURE

Why is the increment cost for the members of the CTEA so high?

Over the years, the CTEA has developed salary guides that do not lower the high cost of increment.

This is a problem because an unresolved high increment cost is then passed on to the next round of negotiations, which is where the CTEA and the Board find themselves now.

Negotiating a salary guide containing a 2.7% increment cost places a great strain on both the CTEA and Board.

slide-53
SLIDE 53

SALARY GUIDE STRUCTURE

How can the guide be corrected? If the guide can be corrected, then how much would it cost the District?

Lowering increment costs can be accomplished by changing the entire structure of the salary guide

Establishing salary ranges rather than salary steps. Not many districts in New Jersey take this approach

Another approach, is to lower the amount of money between steps on the guide. This can be done by increasing salary steps, or adding more money to existing steps.

With an existing 2.7% increment cost, the Board would be forced to add hundreds of thousands of dollars to lower such a high cost

The amount of money to correct this problem is prohibitively high sum of money.

slide-54
SLIDE 54

CURRENT NEGOTIATIONS STATUS CLINTON TOWNSHIP SCHOOL DISTRICT & CTEA

PHILLIP E. STERN BOARD LABOR REPRESENTATIVE – DIFRANCESCO, BATEMAN, KUNZMAN, DAVIS, LEHRER & FLAUM, PC

slide-55
SLIDE 55

CURRENT STATUS OF NEGOTIATIONS

What is the current status of negotiations between the Board and the Clinton T

  • wnship Education

Association (CTEA)?

Contract negotiations began in December 2016.

Board has worked diligently to come to an agreement that would be mutually beneficial to both parties.

Unfortunately, negotiations have stalled, with no movement on many topics, for quite some time.

As a result, on February 1, 2018 the Board filed impasse with the Public Employee Relations Commission (PERC).

Impasse is when a public employer and a certified employee representative have failed to achieve an agreement through negotiations.

The Boards action to file impasse is not punitive towards the CTEA or a diversion tactic.

The Board’s hope is that a neutral third party mediator will help bring both parties to an agreement.

A mediator has been assigned to this case and both parties will meet on March 14, 2018, along with the mediator to try to come to an agreement.

slide-56
SLIDE 56

QUESTIONS FROM THE PUBLIC

Is the impasse document that the Board filed, requesting a mediator, available to the public? Did the Board file an addendum with the impasse form?

The an impasse form and an addendum were filed with the Public Employees Relations Commission (PERC).

The impasse addendum was written to emphasize the need for the Public Employees Relations Commission (PERC) to intervene and assist both parties come to an agreement.

While impasse documents and the addendum filed with PERC are publically available by law, subject to an OPRA filing, the Clinton T

  • wnship Board of Education will post these documents on our district website by the end of business on Tuesday,

February 27, 2018. www.ctsdnj.org

slide-57
SLIDE 57

OVERVIEW OF IMPASSE ADDENDUM

Background

September 2016, the CTEA leadership signaled their desire to begin negotiations, but then retracted from that plan to wait for retroactive pay to be complete from the 2013-2017 contract that was approved by the Board on July 25, 2016.

October 2016 - Retroactive pay from the 2013-2017 contract was completed.

slide-58
SLIDE 58

OVERVIEW OF IMPASSE ADDENDUM

Background

October 2016 - The Board informed CTEA leadership that it could not begin negotiations until the new Board was seated in January 2017 to ensure consistency through the negotiations process. However, the Board committed to engage in the work that both parties needed to accomplish before proposals were exchanged. For example:

October 24, 2016 - the Board hired a labor attorney.

October 25, 2016 - the Board’s labor attorney contacted the NJEA Uniserv Representative to begin organizing negotiations.

October 25, 2016 - Board President e-mailed the CTEA’s leadership and offered a small meeting to establish negotiation ground rules, decide on process for negotiating and schedule future dates.

The CTEA leadership failed to respond to the Board’s offer to meet until November 25, 2016, in an e-mail, four weeks after the Board’s initial offer. This delayed the pre-negotiations process from beginning.

October 25, 2016, the NJEA Uniserv representative informed the Board’s labor counsel that he was leaving that position and would not be representing the CTEA any longer.

The Board’s labor attorney called and emailed the NJEA office to coordinate efforts, and ensure a smooth and productive process.

slide-59
SLIDE 59

OVERVIEW OF IMPASSE ADDENDUM

Background (continued)

November 25, 2016, responded to the Board President’s e-mail from October 25, 2016. The CTEA leadership informed the Board they would only meet with the full negotiations team, and threatened to file an Unfair Labor Practice against the Board if they didn’t meet with the CTEA with the Board’s negotiations team.

Again, the Board explained that they needed to wait for the new Board to be seated in January before they could start for consistency purposes.

December 1, 2016 – the Board’s labor attorney wrote a lengthy e-mail to the NJEA Uniserv Office describing the challenges facing negotiations.

Calls and e-mails by the Board’s labor attorney went unanswered. The negotiations process was delayed again.

slide-60
SLIDE 60

OVERVIEW OF IMPASSE ADDENDUM

Background (continued)

October 2016 - The CTEA requested information on healthcare, salary and similar data through the Board’s labor representative.

The Board’s legal counsel provided that data on November 3, 2016 to the first NJEA Univserv representative, on December 20, 2016 to the second NJEA Uniserv representative, and for a third time to their third NJEA Uniserv representative on January 31, 2017.

February 7, 2017, the third NJEA Uniserv representative told the Board’s representative that he had what he needed at that time.

slide-61
SLIDE 61

OVERVIEW OF IMPASSE ADDENDUM

Background (continued)

December 8, 2016 - The Board President and the CTEA’s representatives met and exchanged ground rules proposals. No agreement on ground rules were reached that night, nor was a process identified for how negotiations would move forward.

January 4, 2017, the Board held its reorganization meeting. Negotiations committee was assigned.

January 5, 2017 the Board, through their representative, transmitted a settlement offer to the NJEA Uniserv representative.

The Board did not receive a counter proposal or feedback on their offer until February 15, 2017 – approximately 40 days later.

This represents another delay in negotiations.

January 2017 (beginning of this month), the second NJEA Uniserv representative took ill and the Board waited for their replacement. A new NJEA representative was assigned at the end of January 2017

slide-62
SLIDE 62

OVERVIEW OF IMPASSE ADDENDUM

Background (continued)

March 21, 2017 - The Board attempted to engage the CTEA in a process to establish a core set of values that could help both parties derive a healthier working relationship.

The CTEA rejected the offer after the Board made many additional requests to sit-down and meet to discuss ways of improving the relationship between both parties.

April 26, 2017 - The CTEA filed an Unfair Labor Practice charge against the Board for not wanting to negotiate.

The Board was trying to improve how the two parties worked together so that negotiations would be more productive, work more smoothly and improve the overall working relationship between the two.

The CTEA offered to sit down for 30 minute meeting to “clear the air” so that both parties could begin negotiations.

The Board knew that a 30 minute meeting would not be sufficient to resolve our challenges.

The hearing with PERC to settle the Unfair Labor Practice charge was set for July 19, 2017. The CTEA cancelled and postponed the meeting. A new date was set for September 2017 – almost two months after the initial meeting date.

slide-63
SLIDE 63

OVERVIEW OF IMPASSE ADDENDUM

Background (continued)

September 18, 2017, Unfair Labor Practice allegations were heard and both parties agreed to have “core values” meetings and also schedule negotiations sessions.

The settlement included an agreement that neither side was found guilty of failure to negotiate.

Both parties met in a series of meetings and developed a set of “core values” that both parties agreed to abide by in negotiations and in day-to-day interactions.

Pursuant to the settlement agreement, the CTEA owes two more hours of core value discussions. They refuse to do so, which is in violation of the PERC settlement agreement.

slide-64
SLIDE 64

OVERVIEW OF IMPASSE ADDENDUM

Background (continued)

The first negotiations meeting that took place after the “core values” were agreed to, was very positive.

Subsequent meetings, however, were very acrimonious and both parties agreed that the best method to bargain would be to authorize the respective representatives to meet along and report back to their respective teams.

Unfortunately, this process has failed to move negotiations forward.

There is a stalemate on the same six points, with no positive movement.

slide-65
SLIDE 65

OVERVIEW OF IMPASSE ADDENDUM

Background (continued)

The two parties have met seven times since December 8, 2016.

The CTEA has cancelled two meetings and the Board has cancelled two meetings.

slide-66
SLIDE 66

OVERVIEW OF IMPASSE ADDENDUM

Background (continued)

October 28, 2017 - The Board offered to meet to negotiate on Saturday, at 8:30 am.

Members of the negotiations team did not arrive until 10 a.m., and failed to notify the Board that they would be late. However, once they arrived the meeting was productive.

December Meeting – both parties met. It was immediately obvious that movement on the same six topics would not happen that evening. Both parties decided to end the session and asked that both representatives continue negotiations separately.

February 1, 2018, the Board filed for impasse with the Public Employees Relations Commission.

The hope of the full Board, is that a neutral third party mediator, will help bring both parties towards a

  • settlement. Mediation meeting set for March 14, 2018.
slide-67
SLIDE 67

QUESTIONS FROM THE PUBLIC

Did the CTEA file an unfair labor practice against the Board? What was the outcome and are the findings public?

The CTEA filed an Unfair Labor Practice Complaint against the Board on April 26, 2017.

Complaint claimed that the Board failed to negotiate.

On September 19, 2017 both parties met with a representative from PERC to hear the claim.

Result

Both parties agreed to settle the Unfair Labor Practice Claim, agreeing to discuss “core values” and to negotiate.

The Board was not found to be at fault in the claim filed by the CTEA

The finding are public and the agreement will be placed on the Clinton T

  • wnship School District website by the end of

business on Tuesday, February 27, 2018: www.ctsdnj.org.

slide-68
SLIDE 68

QUESTIONS FROM THE PUBLIC

Why does a mutual agreement between the Board and the CTEA always take so long?

Number of Members and a variety of Disciplines in the CTEA

For example: Teachers, teaching assistants, custodial and maintenance workers, and secretaries

A large number of complicated topics to discuss and agree upon for each of these disciplines

For example: Percentage increases, increment cost, benefits, tuition reimbursement, stipends, personal leave, disability leave, evaluations, number of work hours in a day, work week and year.

The District operates under a 2% General Fund Tax Levy CAP on spending. This CAP complicates costs versus statutory caps.

Rising Cost in Healthcare Benefits to the District

This has had a HUGE impact on negotiations. Rising healthcare benefit costs, spending caps, declining revenues in public education complicate and lengthen negotiations.

slide-69
SLIDE 69

QUESTIONS FROM THE PUBLIC

Why does the administrators’ contract always negotiate so much faster than with the CTEA?

The last negotiation that took place with the Board and the Clinton T

  • wnship Administrator’s Association (CTAA)

(Directors, supervisors, principals and assistant principals) took a little over one year to settle.

The CTAA is a much smaller bargaining unit with less than 10 employees

The CTEA has approximately 206 members.

The most recent contract discussions were resolved after one meeting with the help of a mediator.

slide-70
SLIDE 70

QUESTIONS FROM THE PUBLIC

Can the Board and the CTEA negotiate in public?

  • Yes. It is legal for both the Board and CTEA to negotiate in public. Both parties must agree to do so.

January 2017 - The Board invited the CTEA to negotiate publically, so that there would be full disclosure and tranparency regarding the facts and elements in negotiations to the public and CTEA’s members.

The CTEA declined to negotiate in public.

slide-71
SLIDE 71

QUESTIONS FROM THE PUBLIC

What does it mean when people say teachers are working without a contract? Are teachers getting paid? Will they get retroactive pay?

Contracts that are negotiated between the Board and the CTEA are set for a period of time, from one to five years.

When the timeframe expires, people say that the teachers are working “without” a contract.

However, while negotiations for a new contract are taking place, members of the CTEA still get paid and work under the terms of the expired contract.

If the Board and CTEA agree to a contract that provides an increase in their salary, then they will receive retroactive pay based on the terms of the new agreement.

slide-72
SLIDE 72

QUESTIONS FROM THE PUBLIC

Why has the Board not been vocal about negotiations and updating the community on its status?

On October 5, 2017 - the Board and the CTEA agreed to a set of “ground rules” that provide the general foundation of how the two organization would negotiate during the collective bargaining process.

Ground Rule #8 says, “unless impasse is reached, both parties, and their members, agree to negotiate at the negotiations table and not publically or within the media.”

Therefore, the Board is honoring this ground rule and has not said anything publically until impasse was filed.

slide-73
SLIDE 73

QUESTIONS FROM THE PUBLIC

Why doesn’t the Board tell the community what the teachers are asking for during negotiations?

By law, the Board cannot share any of the specific details or proposals discussed during any negotiation session.

slide-74
SLIDE 74

QUESTIONS FROM THE PUBLIC

What are the benefits to the Board to prolong negotiations?

There aren’t any financial benefits to members of the Board or to the district to prolong negotiations.

Members of the Board are volunteers who are working towards the best interest of the school and community. T

  • a

person, the Board always strives for an expedient and mutually beneficial contract resolution.

Hours of preparation go into every negotiations session over and above the normal requirements of the negotiations committee and other Board related responsibilities.

slide-75
SLIDE 75

QUESTIONS FROM THE PUBLIC

Why has the Board cancelled so many negotiations meetings?

The Board has cancelled only two meetings during this negotiations and the CTEA has cancelled two meetings.

Board Cancellations

December 11, 2017 – labor representative was sick

October 24, 2017 – labor representative had a School Boards Presentation

CTEA Cancellations

July 19, 2017 – meeting with PERC to review the Unfair Labor Practice with the Board

November 14, 2017

slide-76
SLIDE 76

QUESTIONS FROM THE PUBLIC

What does the term “core values” between the Board and the CTEA mean?

The Board and CTEA continue to have a difficult time trying to find common ground when working with one another.

The Board offered an opportunity during the negotiations process to work together to try to find common ground and develop a set of core values from which both parties could derive a healthier and more productive working relationship.

Over the course of a couple of meetings the two parties developed the following tenets, with the following goals –

To overcome our existing challenges

Repair and improve our relationship

Move forward in a positive, effective and efficient manner for the children

Both parties agreed that they would abide by the following “core values” both in negotiations and in day-to-day interactions

The full board adheres to the agreed to “core values” established with the CTEA

slide-77
SLIDE 77

CORE VALUES AGREED TO BY THE BOARD AND CTEA

1. Active / Empathic Listening a. Creating a safe environment conducive to collaborative problem-solving 2. Appreciate each other’s perspectives a. Walking in another’s shoes b. Being empathetic c. Reflective d. Situational Awareness: show that You Get “It” e. Personal Awareness: You Get “Them.” f. Solution Awareness: You Get Their Path to Progress 3. Commitment a. Both parties making all efforts to keep meeting dates, deadlines, etc. b. Staying committed to the process 4. Honesty a. Telling full truths b. Full disclosure c. Honest with all parties (CTEA members, public and BOE members) 5. Integrity a. Related to honesty b. Deals more with actions vs. words c. Don’t say one thing, and then do something different

  • 6. Joint Statements

a. “Preamble” from developed statement – emphasize “What” and “Why” a. Summary of Accomplishments b. Actions from meeting c. Future Goals = Dates / Agenda d. End on a positive note – collaborative and cooperative

  • 7. Respect

a. The way we speak to people using tone, words and body language b. Accepting others rights, needs and differences as okay and legitimate c. Attentive listening when others are speaking d. Avoiding gossiping or putting others down e. Showing interest in others about how they feel and what they think f. Keep agreements with others or living as your word g. Being sensitive to thoughts and feelings of

  • thers

h. Working constructively to resolve problems and differences i. Listening to and accepting feedback j. Making changes to our behavior if we fail to respect others k. In addition to bulleted points (above): i. Accepting and understanding other’s point of view ii. Open-mindedness a. Respecting and supporting final decisions of group through actions, words, and deeds b. Both individually and as a group(s) = Respectful actions: R-E-S-P-E-C-T c. Arriving on time

  • 8. Seeking to Build Trust

a. Correlation between trust and respect b. Earned through actions, as well as through words c. Communication is key to developing and maintaining trust d. Belief that both sides have good intentions

  • 9. Time

a. Factor for moving forward and assists in managing timelines b. Sharing timelines c. Respecting one another’s time d. Moves quickly, needs to be respected, and things change through time e. Despite time moving and being difficult, we need to be cognizant to “stay the course”

  • 10. Working Collaboratively

a. Give and take toward a common goal, respecting different perspectives b. Requires leadership to guide each member’s unique perspectives

slide-78
SLIDE 78

QUESTIONS FROM THE PUBLIC

Why does the Board only hire one labor attorney?

It is fiscally responsible to only have one labor attorney.

This is a standard in New Jersey.

Board believes that only one labor attorney is necessary to negotiate a contract with the CTEA.

slide-79
SLIDE 79

PRESENTATION OBJECTIVES

1.

To facilitate communication between the Board of Education and the public

2.

Allow people to understand the collective bargaining process

3.

Identify economic challenges facing New Jersey public school districts today

4.

To answer any questions involving the collective bargaining process

5.

Remove any confusion about the facts surrounding collective bargaining

slide-80
SLIDE 80

AGENDA

Introduction

Overview of Collective Bargaining in New Jersey

Vito Gagliardi Jr., Board Legal Counsel - Porzio, Bromberg and Newman PC 

Board Preparation for Collective Bargaining Process

Maria Grant – Board President 

Key Components and Considerations in Negotiations

???? 

Rising Healthcare Costs – Premiums

Brian Rizor – Senior Vice President, Employee Benefits - Brown & Brown Benefit Advisors 

Salary Guide Structure and Considerations

???? 

Current Negotiation Status – Board of Education and Clinton T

  • wnship Education Association

Phillip E. Stern – Board Labor Representative - DiFrancesco, Bateman, Kunzman, Davis, Lehrer & Flaum, PC 

Basic Question and Answer about Current Negotiations

Phillip E. Stern – Board Labor Representative - DiFrancesco, Bateman, Kunzman, Davis, Lehrer & Flaum, PC

slide-81
SLIDE 81

CONSIDERATIONS IN NEGOTIATIONS

A REVIEW OF PREPARATION, PROCESS AND CURRENT ECONOMIC CIRCUMSTANCES FACING NEW JERSEY PUBLIC SCHOOL DISTRICT NEGOTIATIONS