Present: Lydia Lee (chairing the meeting), Tom Madden, Chris Stewart, Peggy Flanagan
Emma Hixson, Bill Green

Emma starts the meeting passing out something that summarizes a recent administration proposal for “transfer and reassignment”.  Emma says that the administration took this step because the administration tried to get MFT to work with them (in the negotiation conversations) on the design of a new staffing system, but this met with no enthusiasm or takers, so the administration decided that the best way to get the conversation moving was to make a specific proposal.  Accordingly, the administration redrafted Article XVI, which is what was just passed out.

Emma says that if MFT ever has an actual discussion about this, some things might be modified, but the proposal describes what the administration sees as an ideal system, in terms of administration control of the process. 

Emma describes the elements of the administration’s proposal: 

• They would look at not only licensure qualifications for a position, but also program qualifications, such as language training, Montessori, or IB training.

• The proposal would continue to do “staff reductions from a building” in the same way, first canvassing the building for volunteers in the shortage area to excess themselves, and if there are no takers then the least senior person would be “displaced”.

• All vacant positions would be posted and then it is up to the site team, with the principal as the final authority, to decide who they want to interview.  The site team would recommend a choice to HR to make the final selection.

• They wouldn’t post the position externally until this process was exhausted and as long as there are teacher who are excessed or eligible for recall from layoff, they would “work with” those internal pools.

• “The really big one” as Emma describes it, is that layoffs would be based on seniority, except “where the Superintendant determines that doing seniority-based layoff would disrupt an educational program”.  In that instance, the proposal says that if a teacher loses an assignment, the same number of least-senior teachers as who had been exempted from seniority-order layoff would be placed in “in some other assignment at full pay until they were selected for a vacancy” and if they still had not been selected after two years, they would be terminated.  Emma says that this would give the district some kind of cost control, because in considering how many teachers to exempt from layoff, they would have to consider the costs of having teachers in such “other assignments”.  Emma says that this is a part of the proposal that she wouldn’t expect the union to agree to “without massive revision”.

Emma says that at this point, MFT did not want to discuss any specifics and that the entire proposal was first met with “stunned silence”, then after they had overnight to look at the proposal, there were “angry speeches”.  Emma says that these speeches were not only a reaction to the current proposal, but also to other earlier discussions about teachers working longer days for parent conferences and working some time in the summer for “textbook adoption institutes” and such, so “the whole thing together felt really ugly to the teachers”.   Emma says that they promptly took those other issues off the table because “we didn’t want them to get worked up with this”, but it ultimately didn’t help.

Emma says that they really didn’t get anywhere in the last negotiation and that they are in “another cooling off period, unofficially”.  Emma says that “the relationship between all of the negotiators is good enough that nobody really wanted to call a halt to the whole thing”.  Emma says that the administration team did not want to declare that an impasse had been reached right at the beginning of school.  Emma says that the subcommittee focused on teacher transfer and reassignment is planning to meet with a BMS facilitator on September 5.

Bill asks Emma to explain why the 20th is a “pretty good date to resume discussion and is a possible time when we can take this up a notch”. Emma explains that they postponed negotiations for the first few weeks of school because it is a busy time for everyone and they had originally picked September 13 to resume negotiations, but later realized that date was Rosh Hashanah.  Emma says that by the 20th “things will be fairly well stabilized”.  Emma says that when school is back in session the negotiation discussions have to occur in the evening and that “it is a lot to ask of teachers that they meet into the evening after a long day at school”.

Emma says that she didn’t anticipate that they would be getting along as well as they are.  Emma also says that she thinks teachers are realizing how resolute the administration is in this negotiation and how focused the administrations is on redesigning the system of transfer and reassignment.  Emma says that she thinks that this realization might lead MFT to move on this issue.

Bill says that he has recently been in meetings with large groups of teachers for back-to-school things.  Bill says that in each instance there were positive feelings about him and about “what we are trying to do”.  Bill wonders if that means that they don’t know what is going on in negotiations (which he thinks is very likely), or if there isn’t complete and full support “in the delegation that they have”.  Bill says that his point with this comment is that the teachers as a whole seem to be doing pretty well, and this suggests that the MFT negotiating team may not be in full accord the community of teachers.  Bill invites the others in the room to “feel free to go to schools”, and to reach out to teachers and “to embrace what they are doing”.

Chris says that if he had a concern, it would be that what’s ideal for the district to have in the contract is beyond the goodwill of the teachers.  Chris says that their self-interest would kick in at some point, even if they are not in complete agreement with the union leadership. Bill asks Chris to explain.  Chris says that with respect to some of the proposed options for the strategic plan, he can think of six options, five of which “far exceed” what is defined in the present contract.

Bill invites an examination of interview and select, which “right now seems to be the bane of Rob, et al’s existence”.  Bill says that he has met more teachers who feel that interview and select is a good thing than teachers who think it is a bad thing.  Bill says that teachers support interview and select because they “have created learning and cooperative experiences in their building based on the people in that building and they fear that the present contract will dismantle that”.  Bill says that while relationships may change and that attitudes may become more polarized, we shouldn’t assume that we are there yet or that things will get worse with the main teacher corps.”

Chris says that he is concerned about this particular contract and if it is enough to achieve all of the things that are envisioned by the district, particularly as part of the strategic plan.  Chris says that they are doing multiple things at once, including “seriously revisioning the schools” and negotiating the teachers’ contract. Emma says that if there is something specific that needs to be adjusted in the contract that wouldn’t be served by the staffing pieces they are already seeking, then she should know about it so that they can incorporate that in the negotiations.

Emma notes that the superintendant does have “the fresh start authority” and although that’s not something they want to use for staffing, it does provide “large reshaping power”.  Chris says that he thinks “that” has a large part to play in some of the things that have been proposed.

Emma says that she wants to make sure that what she has proposed so far is in alignment with what “you” are envisioning as the ideal outcome of negotiations, although the district clearly won’t get everything that was proposed.  Emma says that especially the layoff piece is going to be “highly problematic for them to solve with their members” and that it “will be enormously threatening”.

Tom says his experience is similar to what Bill reported about teachers liking interview and select.  Tom says that the word has gone out about this sort of system, through places like Whittier.  Tom says that “the word has gotten out that this is a really cool thing”.

Tom asks about the final approval of HR, wondering if HR would overrule the choice of a site team and principal. Emma responds that HR would really just ensure that the selected teacher had the appropriate licensure, and other such technicalities.  Emma says that one thing that could happen would be if someone who wasn’t selected was alleging discrimination and HR had some information relevant to such an accusation, then they might hold off on affirming the selection until they could look into the situation a little more and “make sure there isn’t some exposure”, such as someone on the interview committee saying something that they shouldn’t have said.  Emma says that this has happened even under the current system.

Tom asks about hiring to fill a position created by laying off the least-senior district teachers.  Tom wonders if in interviewing to fill this position the site team could interview both excessed and laid-off teachers.  Emma confirms that this would be true.

Emma says that “a very ideal system would be to have all vacancies open to the outside” as well as to the internal candidates.  Emma notes that there are some models out there like this, but she doesn’t know if district that have such systems are in situations generally like MPS’s situation.

Emma says that “there’s just no way I felt like we could propose that”, and that “this [the proposal under discussion] goes a lot further than my comfort level, with putting something out there that the union won’t just totally shut down on, and to go to that extent [a system where all vacancies are open to outside applicants], given the scope of layoffs that we’ve had, just seemed to me like it was not something we should do.  However…”

Tom replies that he understands Emma’s point, but he suggests that “we don’t negotiate with ourselves before we go in with our proposals”. Emma says that you have to start a proposal somewhere, and that looking at all of the models out there, and understanding the Board’s interest in interview and select, she understood that all of the discussion focused on working with the internal teacher pools first, so she did not present a proposal were vacancies would be open to all.  However, Emma says that this is something she “could get more direction on if the superintendant and the Board want to do it differently”.

Tom says that he is not suggesting that Emma’s proposal should make all vacancies open to any applicant.  Emma says that such a proposal could be an option.  Emma says that they could pull the current proposal off of the table and put something else back in, since they are not even discussing it in any detail yet. Tom says that the district has put a proposal out there so now is a time to shut up and see what they have to say.  Emma says that they are stonewalling now, and that “we’ll” see if we get any further when the subcommittee meets on September 5th.

Tom says that “they came and yelled at you” but that this is a normal part of the process and that the next session will be the telling one.

Bill says that tactically, the timing of declaring an impasse is important and that there is a benefit of doing this “early enough for the second phase of these discussions to roll out”.  Emma says that she was thinking originally that it would be better to have an impasse even earlier than the end of September, but September 20th still leaves enough time for “things to evolve before we get down to the wire”.  Emma says that there are a number of other things that they want to get through with the teachers besides the transfer and layoff piece and they would like to have some of those done before an impasse is reached.  Emma says that “the timing on all this is pretty delicate.”

Lydia says that “we” had itemized a number of programs that were exempt from the seniority layoff process, but she wonders about fresh start schools.  Emma says that it would make a lot of sense to exempt fresh start schools and the current proposal gives the latitude to the superintendant to do such exemptions. 

Emma says that one thing she likes about the proposal is that the provision about laying off unplaced excessed teachers after two years is the thing that will “draw the fire” but is a place they have “some flexibility”, so she hopes that the provision about superintendant-determined exemptions will survive, because it would be better than trying to list all of the exemptions up front, and that the power to make such exemptions should be with the superintendant.  Emma says that “we” have had “a lot of teachers” who were interview and select-ed at fresh start schools, but who were later laid off, and that’s highly unfortunate.  Lydia says that some of those teachers thought they were protected, but they weren’t.  Emma says that they thought they were protected because of the school’s AYP status, which was true under the last contract, but that expired and MFT was not interested in renewing that provision prior to negotiations.

Chris asks Emma what she would think about drawing up an ideal contract, everything that the Board and the superintendant would like, then having a conversation with MFT about the Superintendant’s ability to fresh start the entire district, then handing the teachers the ideal contract.  Emma says that she thinks this would be damaging to the relationship between the teachers and the district.

Emma says that the current proposal is the wish list. Chris says that it is a reduced wish list, but Emma disagrees.  Emma says that if the district got everything in the current proposal that “we would have a dramatically different district in terms of the staffing processes, it would be basically principal control over selection and superintendant control over layoff.  I think that is ideal.”  Emma says that she wouldn’t want to use some kind of a threat around fresh start unless the time was right for that.  Emma says that they could start with hints about this.

Chris says that the reason he asks is that eventually, the district is not going to have any choice about this with some schools, if some of the schools keep “perishing”.

Chris says that from the notes he has received, it seems like the administration has done a good job about trying to get MFT to see that we are in “a collective bad shape”, and maybe that hasn’t been taken seriously.  Chris says that he read that Peggy came with numbers and MFT’s response was to question those numbers.  Emma says that is true and that they are still questioning the numbers.  Chris says that it irritates him that you even have to make the case that it might come down to being forced to fresh start some schools.  Chris says that “when Peggy comes in and gives you numbers…if I was a 10th grade teacher from South… Peggy is one of the last people whose numbers I would question”.  Chris says “we are wasting time here”.

Tom says that the point is we are talking about a $110 million deficit here, so what if we are off by $50 million, it “is still a disastrous situation”.  Chris says that he is more concerned about just the response of MFT.  Chris says that the administration was doing a good, structured job getting them to see our collective situation.  Chris says this response shows the lack of seriousness about where we are and where we want to go.

Chris says that some of “the teacher data that we got back showed that they were the group that who thought most everything was okay” at least in their own building.   Chris says that “you are not negotiating with adults when you have to make a case in 2007 in Minneapolis that we are in really bad shape that requires us to all to sacrifice and come together and do some pretty phenomenal things here”.

Emma reminds everyone that she said earlier that Rob is in another reality.  Emma says that she has to keep reminding herself that Rob is not the MFT.  Emma says that it is unfortunate he is their chief spokesperson because with some things, like the budget piece, there seems to be a denial of reality.  Emma says that the other teachers at the negotiating table are “long-time respected members of the union” leadership and they are not saying these things about the budget, for instance.  Emma says that Rob is trying to understand the budget and the truth is that the budget is hard to understand.  Chris says that this is why he trusts Peggy.  Emma says that they are practicing patience with this process and Chris says that the administration negotiators should be sainted for the amount of patience that they have shown.

Emma says that the relationship with the MFT is important to the administration is important because they are the primary workforce, they are closest to our kids and “we need them to come into the school year and do an extraordinary job all year long”.  So, Emma says “I’m okay with it”.

Chris asks about diversifying the workforce and if there is some provision that will allow this in the proposal, not just on ethnic lines, but also older/younger and other forms of diversity.  Chris asks if there is anything in the district’s proposal that would allow layoff in some way other than the way it has always been done.  Emma replies that this is the exemptions under discussion and that the proposed exemptions would give the superintendant pretty broad authority about what sites and programs to exempt for layoff.  Emma says that the selection process gives the authority to diversify the workforce, because teachers would get selected based not on seniority, and teachers that were unselected for some time would get laid off, unless they were affected by the exemption process.  Chris clarifies that the selection still would happen from the existing pool and Emma confirms this.

Chris says to Emma that “if you have to make a case to them that we are in bad shape, they are not ready to help us go where we need to go”.

Tom says that the district shouldn’t threaten anything that they wouldn’t follow though with, so he wonders about “scenario planning”, including everything from “they give you a big kiss” in response to the proposal, to the possibility of a strike.  Tom specifically asks what the Board’s role in the various scenarios would be.  Tom says that at some point he would hope that the board could “publically help this situation along”.  Emma says that it is her preference that if they reach impasse they should “not do anything other than announce that they have reached an impasse on this particular issue and explain the district’s position”. 

Emma says that “we” should let MFT decide if they want to file for mediation, or “try to get their membership to vote to do a strike”.  Emma says that she thinks there is very little chance of a strike, but “I could be wrong”.  Emma says that if it looked like a strike, we would have to do more detailed planning, and we would have to be given notice of a strike.

Tom says that his point wasn’t what happens if they call a strike, but the broader question of what would happen in various scenarios and what the board’s role would be in each scenario.  Tom says that he doesn’t think a strike is realistic, nor does he think the getting a big kiss response is realistic.  Emma says that “there would very much need to be a communications plan in any event”.  Tom agrees strongly, saying that the district should be preparing such plans in place so that they are ready for any possible outcome.

Bill says that earlier that day he, Steve Liss and Jim Grathwol were meeting with the Minneapolis City Council Intergovernmental Relations Committee about facilities reuse, and at the end of this Councilmember Paul Ostrow pulled Bill aside, away from reporter Steve Brandt, and “he wanted to avail himself to doing whatever we felt would be useful for them to do in providing more leverage or participating in this”.  Bill says that we, along with the team, should talk about what role they could play.  Bill says that they don’t want to do any harm, but that this is a chance to consider what role the Board and other elected officials could play.

Bill says that the administration will talk about this and bring it back to the Board.  Chris suggests that the Board should talk about this too. Bill replies that they will bring back some things.  Bill says that he is “very concerned about…in the spirit of helping us, there are a lot of people who aren’t a part of the overall theme”