Joseph J. Matula is an assistant professor of educational administration at Governors State University in Chicago and a former school superintendent.
As new board members prepare for bargaining, here is a list of 10 lessons that reflect practical experience gained in 26 years of being a superintendent in Illinois and 10 contracts bargained as the main board spokesperson for eight of them in three different school districts.
1. Have a bargaining agenda.
The first year I led the board's bargaining team, I realized the starting point was the teachers' list of bargaining demands. The board's only option was a defensive posture in reacting to the teachers' priorities.
In all future bargaining situations, I poured over the contract looking for issues that needed improving and which would become the board's own demands. Examples were to raise the starting teachers' salary more than the higher salary steps, to increase the teachers' workload by requiring they work monthly curriculum hours, and to make extra-duty pay more understandable and equitable. Some may have been throwaways, but most of them were substantive improvements from management's perspective.
2. What teachers think and what the union thinks may be two different things.
Often board members are surprised at how militant and money-focused some teachers can be. I had to counsel board members that sometimes issues are pushed by the union and often by their statewide associations. Issues raised by the union often do not have all the teachers' support.
I also needed to explain what a large faculty meeting looked like. Most faculty meetings for union issues do not have perfect attendance. Picture three or four one-to-one side conversations going on at the same time the speaker is explaining a bargaining issue. Not everyone even hears what they are voting on.
Frequently, the majority of teachers may not understand the implications of some issues, particularly pension issues when they are not near retirement. This can result in a handful of teachers controlling what the rest of the teachers think.
3. Can I use the "Are you insane?" response?
During the bargaining process, teachers often will make an outrageous demand or counter-offer. Behind closed doors, in a board team caucus, I would say: "Our response should simply be, ‘Are you insane?'" Then, a more rational board member would say, "Now, Joe, you know we can't say that." Caucus sessions can provide some needed therapeutic benefits.
4. You have to play the game.
The rational board member referenced above would frequently ask, "Why can't we just say, ‘This is all we can afford. If we give more it will come at the cost of other needed expenses.'" My response is answered in the next question, but basically both sides have to play the "offer" and "counter-offer" game.
5. Don't say it's your best offer unless it's your best offer.
What if the board team says this is the very best we can do and the union does not accept it? Then you either lose credibility and you make another absolutely best, last, for-sure final offer, or you stay firm and force them to back down. Helping the other side to "save face" is part of the game.
6. Know teachers' proposals and who wants what.
A dilemma for teachers is how the bargaining team tactfully tells the few teachers who want a certain item that "nobody else cares." Most unions will survey their teachers as to issues they should fight for. In many cases, they will get a long list. Union leadership then needs to cull the list and prioritize what they seek.
If a vocal minority wants something, the leadership may say there is not enough support for it or they will put it on the list and see how things go. The board team needs to know just what the priorities are. This usually becomes apparent as the items receive a response and the board says no. If they keep reappearing, you know that either the leaders support it or they are just showing this vocal minority they are fighting for them too.
7. New money is a raise regardless of what the union calls it.
Most teachers are paid from salary schedules, with a step increase or increment paid annually for an additional year of experience. Teachers feel this is paid because they are more experienced or "better" teachers. Certainly, a second-year teacher is "better" than a first-year teacher, and a third-year teacher is "better" than a second-year teacher. But does that annual difference end at some point? One cannot prove a 30-year teacher is "better" than a 29-year teacher based only on experience.
The union usually looks only at the money received over and above the step increase as a "raise." The board sees any "new" money as a "raise." It is not worth the time to argue the definition of a "raise."
The board can make a salary offer by providing a salary schedule and saying: "Here is our offer" regardless of what you call it. The union can respond with a schedule and say: "Here is our counter offer." This can go on and on until agreement is reached. Then you have the actual salary schedule so there can be no misconceptions over the percentage.
It also eliminates arguments over "a percentage of what?" The board can say to the teachers: "We don't care what you tell your union members, but we will tell the press and the public that any percentage we use will refer to the percentage increase to the average salary or new money."
8. Focus on the issues and just the issues.
Some people find it difficult to be "issues" focused, but it's a must. The negotiations table is not the place to get involved in personalities. If the main spokesperson cannot stay focused on the issues rather than the people sitting around the table, he or she should be replaced. If things get personal, bargaining can deteriorate into an endless argument, as much fun as that can be, and go nowhere.
9. If they bring a hired gun, we'll bring one too.
In the bargaining sessions I have been engaged in, the smoothest were those where only insiders were involved. They know the climate the best and usually are aware of the district's bargaining history. Once one side brings in an outsider, the other side feels inadequate, so they need to bring in an expert too. These "hired guns," often statewide union reps and board attorneys, don't know the situation, so time is wasted in trying to bring them up to speed on the history of the key issues.
Some districts find it helpful to have professional negotiators involved, but that has not been my best experience.
10. The superintendent as the board's bargaining spokesperson
I have attended numerous bargaining workshops and read many articles that say never use the superintendent as the main bargaining spokesperson. The interesting thing about this is that most of those workshops and articles were written by attorneys, the group most often tapped to be the board's spokesperson.
The rationale is that the superintendent doesn't want to be in a position of alienating the teachers should he or she need their support for a future educational improvement. I completely disagree.
No one is better informed as to the "big picture" of district operations than the superintendent. The board should know the community best, principals know their schools best, the business manager knows the finances best, and the curriculum director knows curriculum best. But the superintendent should have the best overall picture of the whole school district.
The most important point is that the most knowledgeable person in the district should be the main spokesperson. This avoids relying on the opinions of others.
It's a waste of time to have all the principals sitting in an office while bargaining goes on and on for hours. If the principals take turns, then you are asking one principal to speak for all the others, which never makes everyone happy.
As for needing the support of teachers in future educational improvements, what better way to impress the teachers as to the superintendent's fairness and focusing on the issues than for the teachers to see you "in action." It's a positive opportunity, not a negative one.