Negotiators’ pay upsets SJPAE
Published 12:00 am Friday, April 21, 2000
ERIK SANZENBACH / L’Observateur / April 21, 2000
RESERVE – Plans to pay members of the St. John School Board negotiatingteam have upset the St. John Parish Association of Educators.Superintendent Chris Donaldson on Thursday submitted a budget for the negotiations that are to begin next month between the school board and the SJPAE to hammer out a new labor contract.
The budget establishes a time line of 100 hours for negotiating which would all be done after business hours. Included in the budget are the salaries forthe six administration negotiators and a note taker.
Herman Clayton, president of the SJPAE, told the school board the idea of paying the administration’s negotiating team was in poor taste.
“We have teachers and other school employees that stay late and work hours above their call of duty,” said Clayton, “and they are not compensated. Weask that you not pay the administration negotiators.”According to the budget, total salaries would be $15,898, with the chief negotiator making an hourly rate of $25 an hour and the other team members making $20 an hour. The note-taker would get $13 an hour. Thetotal budget based on 100 hours of negotiation would be $22,898 and would include travel expenses, meeting rooms, legal fees and a personal computer.
In a letter to the board, Donaldson wrote, “The hourly rate of the chief negotiator is the same rate paid a teacher for LEAP remediation this summer. The team members’ rate is $5 less than the chief negotiator andthe note-taker is the average secretary’s hourly rate.”Board member Matthew Ory wanted to know if contract negotiator was in the administrators’ job description and why the administration had given a specific time line of 100 hours.
“The time line was for budgeting only,” replied Donaldson. “I was hoping thatthe negotiations wouldn’t take more than 100 hours. We tried to establish atime line and budget to expedite the process and cut down costs.”In answer to the issue of job descriptions, Ann LaBorde, supervisor of personnel accountability, said contract negotiator was not a part of anyone’s job description.
“Negotiations is not a job description,” LaBorde told the board, “but it is a responsibility.”Annette Houston, vice-president of SJPAE, told the board, “Again we set a policy of double-dipping. Why is there such a difference? We have teachersthat take on other responsibilities that aren’t in their job description and they don’t get paid. We are setting a double-standard.”Ory then withdrew his motion to accept the negotiator’s budget, and immediately, board member John Crose re-introduced the motion.
C. J. Watkins wanted to know why the any of the negotiators were gettingpaid at all.
“I was under the impression that negotiation was part of their yearly salary,” said Watkins. “My understanding is that the negotiators didn’t make anymoney.”Crose replied, “Do we make this voluntary, or do we hire a professional negotiator? I think that $22,000 is a lot less money to pay than what it would cost to hire a professional negotiator.”Crose wanted to know if the negotiation team members were allowed to participate if it wasn’t in their job descriptions.
Donaldson said, “I believe they can. Their contract calls for other duties, andI can decide what those other duties are.”However, board member Patrick Sanders was not convinced.
“We are sending out a negative message to the public,” Sanders said. “Thisteam is negotiating for the school board, not the administration.””And we are trying to cut down on costs,” replied Donaldson.
Sanders then moved that the issue be tabled until the next regular school board meeting.
However, the motion to table was defeated 5-4 since six votes were needed to table the matter. Watkins, Ory, Sanders, Clarence Triche and FelixLeBoeuf voted to table the matter, and Richard DeLong, James Madere, Howie Gendron and Crose voted against. Leroy Mitchell abstained, and GeraldKeller was absent.
A vote was then taken on accepting the negotiation budget, and it passed 6- 2 with Ory and Sanders voting against the budget and Watkins and Mitchell abstaining.
After the meeting, a disappointed Clayton commented, “It’s hard for us to accept payment for what will benefit all of us. The administration isbenefitting from the same contract.”Sanders echoed that thought.
“Every time there has been a pay raise, the administration has benefitted.
They are working for the system and the school board, not themselves,” he said.
Return To News Stories