Path: bloom-picayune.mit.edu!snorkelwacker.mit.edu!americast.com!americast.com!americast-post Newsgroups: americast.twt.metro From: americast-post@AmeriCast.Com Organization: American Cybercasting Approved: americast-post@AmeriCast.com Subject: Teachers union OKs 3-year deal with 11% raise Date: Wed, 18 Nov 92 16:10:35 EST Message-ID: \SE B;METROPOLITAN \HD Teachers union OKs 3-year deal with 11% raise \BY Darryl Lynette Figueroa \CR THE WASHINGTON TIMES The Washington Teachers Union put an end to more than two years of bitter negotiations and yesterday ratified a three-year contract that will give teachers an 11 percent raise. The contract ratification came the same day that parents were criticizing a proposed 1994 school budget that would increase class sizes and cut 633 full-time jobs, including 430 teachers. The 1990-93 contract was approved on a voice vote by about 1,800 teachers after about an hour of discussion at Coolidge High School yesterday, union President Jimmie Jackson said. The contract, like one rejected by union members in the spring, calls for an 11 percent raise for teachers over the three years. But the new contract calls for a joint committee of teachers and school board members to devise a teacher-evaluation procedure, rather than give the board final say. It also guarantees that a union group will not be replaced by new school restructuring teams. Other highlights of the contract are biweekly paychecks and two days of bereavement leave for teachers, Ms. Jackson said. She said teachers were anxious to resolve the current contract so that they could move ahead with a contract for 1993-96. "There was the need for closure," she said. "It is our responsibility now to make the Board of Education fulfill its obligation." In his proposed 1994 budget, Superintendent Franklin Smith talks about the school system's responsibility to fund increased benefits for union members. But the bulk of the $40 million that will be needed for raises for teachers and principals, who ratified a separate contract in the spring, must be appropriated by the mayor and D.C. Council and approved by Congress. His proposed budget calls for elimination of 633 jobs, including 430 teachers, 50 administrators and 100 food-service, custodial and maintenance positions. The budget came under fire from parents' groups at a D.C. Finance Committee hearing last night. The teacher cuts would be made by increasing average class size by three students, according to the superintendent's report to the Board of Education. The Nov. 12 report has not been released, but a copy of it has been obtained by The Washington Times. "How dare you even think about cutting teacher positions?" said Bernice Smoot, co-chairman of Parents United, at last night's hearing. "I ask each and everyone of you, how can you sleep at night when you look at the history . . . of lousy education in this city?" Some of the board members at last night's hearing took issue with her testimony. "I would like Mrs. Smoot and Parents United to know that I sleep very well," Ward 4 board member Sandra Butler-Truesdale said. She reminded the panel that she voted against the furloughs ordered by the D.C. Council, another of the parents' major complaints. Cuts in school programs under Mr. Smith's proposed budget total $9.6 million. Hardest hit are community schools, which would lose $1.8 million; schools of distinction, $1.2 million; dropout prevention, $843,700; and values and multicultural education, $831,100. Before- and after-school programs would be cut by $600,000, and summer-school programs would lose $254,700. "I am angry, and I apologize for my perceived disrespect," Robert Handloff said of the plan. "But each day thousands of D.C. school students head off to schools that have broken doors, . . . arrogant principals, insufficient supplies, inadequate books," he said. "That is not simply disrespectful. That is a sin." At-large board member Karen Shook reminded parents that Mr. Smith will give the board a more thorough budget package Monday. Ward 3 board member Erika Landberg told parents that their insistence on addressing a $33 million deficit solely through administrative cuts seems unrealistic. The school system has been knocked in recent years for overspending on administration while cutting school-based programs. This article is copyright 1992 The Washington Times. Redistribution to other sites is not permitted except by arrangement with American Cybercasting Corporation. For more information, send-email to usa@AmeriCast.COM