Dearborn Teachers, Administrators Still Sparring Over Contract

When it comes to the almost two-year conflict between the Dearborn Board of Education and the Dearborn Federation of Teachers, there have been several shots across the bow, but few remedies to be found.

And as negotiations have stagnated between the district and the DFT, which represents 1,200 teachers and non-instructional staff at the schools, the exchanges are beginning to look less like a heated debate and more like a battle, according to those in the fight.

"We've made many concessions in the past, and we've brought ideas to them that we feel would help save them money, but they won't listen," said DFT President Chris Sipperly. "We were making progress at the bargaining table with the negotiation committee, but it comes time for the school board to make a move, it's always no."

For its part, spokesman David Mustonen said the district would not comment about the specifics of ongoing negotiations, but he did release this statement:

"The negotiation process is not about the character or the quality of the teachers in our classrooms. Rather it is about reaching a mutual agreement that maintains the financial stability of the district while at the same time providing fair compensation over a given time frame."

The district claims that no actual proposals have been made since 2009, just discussion at meetings between DFT and the board.

Both sides don't agree on much regarding the contract, but the one thing that appears to be certain is that no deal will be reached by the end of the year.

"It's become a stressful situation for teachers, who have their own budgets and their own families," Sipperly said.

Contract by the numbers

The bargaining between the district and the teachers began in June 2009, when the collective bargaining agreement expired. Since then, both sides have extended the contract while negotiations are ongoing.

Teachers are paid using a "step" system, which determines the rate of pay based on an educator's experience and education. For the duration of the current contract, teachers accepted several step-pay freezes, which means they did not receive a raise for those years.

The district, however, is proposing teachers accept provisions that were accepted by other unions, which tie salaries to changes in per pupil funding. Sipperly said the district would like teachers to accept a 4.8 percent pay cut.

The district also is asking teachers who are enrolled in a Preferred Provider Organization insurance plan to pay up to $700 per month for family coverage, Sipperly said. "That's a huge sum for anyone," she contended, "but especially for teachers in the lower steps who depend on the coverage."

Because there has been no agreement reached between the district and teachers, the decision was made by both sides to go to fact-finding, a process by which a third party assesses all of the issues and facts and renders a non-binding opinion. Those recommendations are expected to be available in January.

Sticking points

Teachers have picketed school board meetings on and off for about the last year, and Sipperly said anger among the ranks is increasing the longer the situation remains unresolved.

The main points of contention are wages and benefits costs for both the district and the teachers.

Sipperly cites savings the district is incurring because of a loss of teachers in and of themselves: Sipperly said that about 60 teachers and non-instructional staff retired last summer under a state-sponsored plan to all eligible teachers at Michigan public schools.

Additionally, Mustonen said the district offered a $25,000 mid-year retirement incentive that pared another 26 teachers from the roster. All of the teachers that were laid off have been called back, Mustonen said.

Like many other Michigan schools, finances have been a problem for the 18,511-student district. For the 2009-10 school year, the district was $8 million in debt, and when that was taken care of, they received another $10 million cut mid-year. Some of the money was restored by the economic stimulus, but not nearly at the levels that were taken away, Mustonen said.

The district did receive a boost in the number of students it educated for 2009-10 to the tune of 146 students, which flooded more than $1 million into the district's coffers. For 2010-11, the district anticipates an increase of 134 students after its February head count. Per-pupil funding is determined using a blended number from September and February counts.

For 2010-11 the district's per pupil funding from the state is $8,808 per student, Mustonen said. But, for 2011-12, the federal dollars will be gone, and the district's per-pupil grant will be about $8,532, unless other funding is found.

Teachers at the forefront

Many Dearborn teachers feel that the district has painted an inaccurate picture not only of the issues at hand, but of the teachers themselves.

Jane Mazza, a 21-year veteran of the district who teachers kindergarten at , said she believes the hardest part of having an unsettled contract is rhetoric from the board that makes the negotiations solely about compensation.

"They (the board and the bargaining team) make it look like we, as teachers, are only about the money," she said. "It's not about money; if we wanted to make a lot of money, we wouldn't teach. We've worked hard to give back to the district–we took pay freezes when the cost of living was going up.

"We also have other concerns like class size, and issues we think need to be addressed for the students," she said.

At recent Board of Education meetings, various teachers have complained that class sizes have risen above 30 students, making it hard to give students the individual attention they need. The district says that no new teachers can be hired without implementing the proposed pay cuts.

For Bruce Liepe, who has taught at the district for nine years and currently teaches pre-school at , the ongoing debate is a matter of fairness.

Liepe, who holds a master's degree, said he's seen new hires brought into the district at a pay step based on their experience that teachers who have worked at the district for the same amount of time are unable to achieve because of step freezes.

Liepe said he started at the district nine years ago at an annual salary of $36,206, and has moved up only six steps–to $51,804 yearly–because of freezes. But recently, he claims, a teacher with similar experience and a master's degree was hired in at about $56,000.

"How can a district that says it doesn't have any money do that?" he questioned. "If a bunch of teachers are looking for work, why don't they make them all start at the first step? When someone who is just hired can earn more than the people who have been here, it shows that loyalty will not be rewarded."

In its statement, the board re-iterated its support for teachers. "During this process the Dearborn Board of Education continues to support the hard work that Dearborn teachers are doing in the classroom," according to the statement. "Their commitment to the students and in contributing to the success of the district is unquestioned."

The current contract does allow the district some leeway in terms of step system when it comes to new hires, but when a person is hired two or three steps ahead of people already working for the district, it throws up red flags to current employees, said Sipperly.

The teachers and district entered fact finding in November. The board believes the process will benefit negotiation process.

Though she said picketing will likely continue until a resolution is found, Sipperly stressed there definitely will not be a walk out of any kind.

"Our teachers are professionals," she said. "We're waiting for the results of fact-finding. "It's a stressful situation for our teachers, and we're hoping to have an agreement soon."

Local Editor Jessica Carreras contributed to this report.