Lakewood School Board Approves Teacher's 2 Year Contract

[Jim O'Bryan]

This morning at a special meeting of the Lakewood School Board, they approved a two year contract with the teachers.

In the contract there is a 3% raise, on top of the 4% step they are already getting.

The teachers have agreed to pay 10% of their health care costs.

This was done during the intense two-week negotiation on the 200+ page document.

More in a moment.



.

[Bill Call]

If true this is wonderful news!!

Bill

[marklingm]

[Diane Helbig]

are the principals covered under this agreement?

[marklingm]

are the principals covered under this agreement?

No.

[Dee Martinez]

There was a little quote at the bottom of the Sunpost's story about the teacher contract that really disturbed me.

"LTA officials did not return phone calls seeking comment."

I have written too many words supporting Lakewood schools and teachers and have felt very much alone in the endeavor. This comment is not the first time I have sensed that some of us care more about teachers livelihood than the teachers themselves. While I believe teachers earn their money, I also have long sensed a certain sense of what...arrogance? entitlement?...in their attitude toward the general public.

Is "we dont have to explain, just pay up" really the attitude of Lakewood teachers? Both the school board president and treasurer commented for the article. Are the teachers too good to speak to us? Remember, this is a teacher SUPPORTER writing this.

[Amy Bennett]

Please do not confuse humble silence with arrogance. I think Mr. Rice said it very well when he wrote, "One of the problems about communication these days is that there are very strict guidelines for people involved in a situation, whether for the schools, teachers, or even corporations, regarding dealing with the public."

We are very grateful for the support and respect that the community of Lakewood gives to us.

[Phil Florian]

I agree with Amy. The Union and School representatives reached a tough agreement in just 2 weeks. That speaks for itself.

[Dee Martinez]

Ms Bennett, ,if you could take the time to post here, and it was legal for you to do so, why couldnt your union put out a statement supporting the contract?

Regardless of what Mr. Rice said, certainly SOMEONE in the teachers union is legally empowered to speak for the union. The contract was done, it was no longer a matter of negotiations in progress. One simple little comment, like the ones Geieger gave to the LO and both he and Berdine gave to the Sunpost.

There was not even a comment from the union in the districts own release that Mr Marklnjg posted here. No one could be bothered to provide two sentences of support for this?

Again I recall my early days in Lakewood when there was very little communication between the schools and the community. Residents were simply expected to vote a new levy every 3 yrs and keep quiet in between.
The dismissive attitude was prevalent not only at school board meetings but down to parent teacher conferences.
Then the district lost a couple of levies and the schools realized very fast the need for informing the citeizens about what they were doing and how things worked.

Thats been good policy for the last 13 years and I hate to see it backslide. Believe me when I say that, if a levy or two fails, laws or no laws,your kids teachers will start communicating VERY openly, including to your kids and in class. I do support the schools, vote for levies regularly, and have tried to provide some data here to base decisions on
Building and maintaining a positive image for Lakewood schools isnt something you can suddenly do 2 weeks before an election, or AFTER a failed one. The time to establish and preserve lines of communication is now, and that includes teachers.

[Phil Florian]

Dee, I agree about open lines of communication but while the fiscal realities of teacher contracts are important to the community, I don't see why a comment or not is important from the Union in this matter. If it were contested and there was a feeling that one side was having more problems than the other, I bet we would definitely hear some comments (see tougher negotiations lately, like the UAW or Writer's Strike).

This has nothing to do with a teacher communicating to parents, does it? If this is the case, are you saying you would feel comfortable walking into a classroom and asking how much the teacher made that week? Or any other aspect of their compensation? Why? Are the teachers not communicating to you about your kids? That would be a big issue and one worth worrying about but a lack of a comment on a successfully negotiated contract is almost like you are looking for a problem (not to put words in your mouth). One can interpret the lack of communication in any way that one likes. I could, for example, feel that the Union agrees with the Board and Dr. Estrop's comments and feel there is nothing to add. Or it could be they would like to be seen not separate from the Board on this but together and to have one statement could imply that.

I am not trying to be insulting (seriously!) but I think this interpretation says more about you than about the Union. Not in a bad way, of course, as it just points to your level of concern with the schools right now. You need some reassurance that things are going okay, maybe. Who knows.

I am just glad this is behind us right now. I am more worried about the lack of follow up on some comments by Dr. Estrop around his decision to seek employment elsewhere. Maybe this says more about me, but his comments to the Sun Post that are hanging out there the like the Sword of Damocles is what worries me.

[michael gill]

I don't think it's fair to impugn the teachers' communication with the community over that simple and neutral line. It doesn't say "declined" to comment.

Bear in mind:

That meeting happened Monday morning.
The Sun schools reporter is not a full timer.
When I worked at Lakewood Sun Post, the news was written, edited and finished by early afternoon Tuesday. The schools reporter's deadline is certainly earlier than that.
More than likely he called the LTA rep and didn't hear back by his deadline.

That's not worth ranting about the teachers' willingness to communicate.

[Dee Martinez]

I am not trying to be insulting (seriously!) but I think this interpretation says more about you than about the Union. Not in a bad way, of course, as it just points to your level of concern with the schools right now. You need some reassurance that things are going okay, maybe. Who knows.

.

I will respond, and then keep my peace, that in the mid-1990s you had an educational community in this city that got used to having its levies passed without exception or question. They believed that was their birthright and that no effort was required on their part to communicate with the voting public.

A contingent of anti-taxers sprung up, very much like Mr. George, with very much the same litany: Economy is bad, teachers make too much, etc.
The result was a series of failed levies. It meant the end of free partricipation in extra curricular activities, arts and music classes, many foreign languages, and other things that made Lakewood schools special. It did not help the community as a whole. There are some, other than myself, who beleive Lakewood schools never really were the same after those cuts.

All of a sudden, everybody woke up. We had the "Contract with the Community," coffeeklatsches, teachers telling students to tell their parents they HAD to vote for the levy or the teacher would lose her job (true story, I had a second grader in tears) Eventually the schools got the confidence of the city back but it was a long, divisive struggle.

Mr. George and Mr. Ball have made what they believe to be a compelling case against teacher compensation, and to their credit, they have done some convincing homework. Not a single voice has been raised to counter their claims, other than mine. Again, everyone can sing Kumbayah all they want, but the mid-1990s were anything but Kumbayah time in Lakewood. Maybe Im being paranoid but I see a pattern repeating itself.

Think about this. Perhaps what Dr Estrop is referring to is the rise of a movement to challenge the next levy? Can you undertand where a superintendent would rather go to a district guaranteed funding rather than lead a fight for a levy that he might lose?

Mr. Gill. I take extreme exception to your use of the term "rant". You are a reporter, are you not? Is this the kind of standard you use in your reporting?
Mr. Gill, if you have been at all thorough in your evaluation, you will note that I have been steadfast (and alone) in voicing my support for Lakewood teachers. I am not levelling criticisms at individuals but at what I believe is an instituitional attitude. It appears you just parachuted into this topic. I did not see your participation in the other threads. I am not "ranting" but your comment IS personallyu insulting in the extreme.

[michael gill]

You can be insulted if you like.

[Dee Martinez]

And thank you for reminding me what true arrogance is.

Teachers on their worst day cant hold a candle to reporters

I thought the LO didnt go in for insulting others.

[Ivor Karabatkovic]

Whether Mr.Gill is a reporter or not doesn't matter, because he is posting here as a citizen, not as part of his occupation.

And Dee, why do you always take quick offense to things?

You can rant all you want. But when a point is made, you cry "foul!"
Yes, I said rant. Because three weeks of ranting about education and teachers pay is more than enough for most of us who come here to be entertained and informed.

When the Dennis Kucinich article thread was live and active, I didn't even mention you or your name, Dee, and you for some reason took my post extremely insulting.

If you're going to ask questions, and press for answers, be prepared to face some heat. Especially when other's don't want to put up with it. I took the heat when you called me out on the article, but we can't call you out on your claims? Why is that? Do you qualify for special treatment while someone like me gets publicly ridiculed over 5 pages worth of discussion?

What Mr.Gill pointed out is true journalism. The teachers union didn't get back in time for the deadline, meaning the journalistic way of representing the other side of things when they did not comment or call back is to say so.

I don't see what the issue is.

Mrs.Bennett is a teacher and her post should be taken as a post of the whole, that humble silence shouldn't be confused with arrogance.

Do you think that teachers are kicking and screaming because a contract was done in 2 weeks? Do you think that a statement is even necessary?