As a past School Committee member and former member of the bargaining subcommittee, I would like to provide an additional perspective regarding recent and previous teacher contract negotiations.
During the last contract negotiation with the Andover Education Association, the School Committee embarked on a two-year, extremely contentious negotiation process that included numerous negotiation sessions, a lengthy mediation process, a second mediation process prior to fact-finding, fact-finding, and following the issuing of the fact-finding report, a final negotiation process. During these tumultuous two years, we experienced “work to rule,” when the teachers performed their responsibilities strictly to the limits of the contract and set up picket lines in front of all the schools.
Teachers refused to write letters of recommendation for college applications, disrupted meetings and picketed the place of employment of one School Committee member.
Through the process the School Committee earned the right to implement a teacher’s contract unilaterally, which would have been the first time in Massachusetts history. As a result of this effort, the School Committee gained back critical management rights that had been previously negotiated away. Teacher productivity at Andover High School was increased by changing the schedule from a 3-and-2 to a 3-and-3 block schedule, increasing the teaching load from five to six courses per academic year.
Additionally, critical changes in the teachers’ professional development program were negotiated resulting in a more rigorous professional development system and an increase in the time it takes teachers to move through the track system, thus reducing the rate of salary increases. Finally, there was a 5-percent COLA increase over the course of three years, a lower rate of increase than had been negotiated over the previous 25 years.
During the following 18 months prior to the beginning of the most recent contract negotiations, an agreement that reflected a change in statute and guidelines regarding teacher evaluations was negotiated and implemented. The new evaluation process improves the accountability of the teacher evaluation and enhances the school district’s ability to adequately address the situation of an under-performing teacher.