ESTA UPDATE

East Side Teachers Association/CTA/NEA 888 So. Capitol Ave San Jose, Ca 95127 December 5, 2002

Don McKell, President Julie Pratico, Vice Pres Carla Holtzclaw, Secretary Ralph Giannini, Treasurer

mckelld@esuhsd.org fax: (408) 272-7569 voice: (408) 272-0601 website: www.EastSideTA.org

ESTA ELECTIONS

I am gratified that ESTA members stepped forward in record numbers to stand as candidates for Site Officers and Assembly Representatives positions in our recent elections. I was pleased to see that many sites actually had contested seats, in that there were more candidates than vacancies. This is in no way to say that I am dissatisfied with our current site leadership, but only to underscore my belief that democracy is a tool best suited for frequent use.

The results of the elections are that we have a greater number of representative slots filled now than at any time in our history. Nineteen ESTA members will be serving either as first-time delegates or in positions new to them.

The list below names the individuals (newly elected and continuing) who will begin terms on January 1.

P=President, VP=Vice President, AR=Assembly Representative, GR=Grievance Representative

AHHS: Wendy Stegeman (P), Bob Dickerson (VP), Dave Johnson (AR), Julie Hoving (AR), Keegan McLoskey (AR), Bill Mustanich (GR)

DO: Susan Zaslaw (P), Adrienne Golden-Stone (VP), Barbara Taylor (AR)

EVHS: Marisa Vera (P), Sally Lussier (VP), Maria Vargas (AR)

FHS: Manny Nascimento (P), Janice Mallard (VP), Jenny Ludwig (AR).

IHS: Allan Roberts (P), Bernie Norris (VP), John DeLange (AR), Karen Winchester (AR), Bill Kirk (AR & GR), Peggy Jabri (AR)

JLHS: Mike Gatenby (P), Kat Hannah (VP), Margie Kelley (AR)

MPHS: Bob Rumph (P & GR), Rick Torres (VP), Bob Ashley (AR), Linda Rallis (AR), Liz Chaboya (AR)

OGHS: Kim Schaupp (P), Rich Alsbury (VP), Jolie Swann (AR), Elaine Ceballos (AR), Rick Caton (AR), Janet Goldhamer (GR)

PHHS: Marilyn Cox (P), Paul Landshoff (VP), Jason Race (AR), Michelle Wheldon (AR)

SCHS: Larry Johnson (P), John Seimas (VP), Wil Henninger (AR), David Rosenblatt (AR), Jerry Dyer (AR), Ralph Giannini (GR)

STHS: Theresa Flores (P), Launa Carlson (VP), Neil Wilson (AR), Don Yellum (AR), Chris Tsuji (AR), Rosalind Taylor (GR)

WOHS: Ellen Pyeatt (P), Ron Cueba (VP), Eleanor Aguire (AR), Jim Frazee (AR), Laura Alfaro (AR)

YBHS: Blanca Espinosa (P), Dan Leong (VP), Stevie Moody (AR), Nancy Galindo (AR), Meghan Engle (AR), Deb Yelverton (GR)

ESTA’s next scheduled election will be in the spring of 2003, at which time we will be choosing both local and state delegates to the National Education Association Representative Assembly and CTA State Council. The next RA will be in New Orleans in July, 2003.

SPECIAL EDUCATION STUDY

Among the many changes in district finances shown in the interim financial report delivered to the school board on December 4, it seems as if the encroachment into the district’s General Fund by the costs of providing Special Education services is going to be even higher than was originally budgeted. Higher by over $1,136,000. That’s no small discrepancy, and brings the total encroachment to just over $5,200,000.

No area of the crazy quilt of federal and state laws is more convoluted than that of providing services to children with special needs, and it seems that there are few unexplored choices remaining open to local governing boards in following the mandates of those laws. IDEA, the federal Individuals with Disabilities Education Act, mandates guaranteed levels of service to school children, while Congress provides less than 20% of the funding to meet those needs. Closer to home, California itself has become one of the more liberal states in service guarantees, and the combined impact of unfunded requirements is staggering. If the total encroachment into the general fund represented by that $5.2 million were distributed equally to all 2,000 district employees, your share would be $2,600. At issue is FAPE, or the mandate calling for a Free and Appropriate Public Education, in the least restrictive environment, to children with special needs.

Those needs can run the gamut from seating the child at the front of the classroom to providing more time on exams to providing an adult aide to placing a child in an expensive non-public school. All on the district’s dime. Against this backdrop, ESTA has consistently tried to bargain changes in working conditions for the large percentage of our members who work in Special Education, and the rest of us who must teach children with special needs in mainstreamed regular education classes. Sadly, our bargaining efforts have met with little success.

Whether this is due to finances or something else is not clear. Certainly, any reduction in Special Ed case loads or class sizes or will likely translate into higher costs, but the flip side is that our failure to meet the needs of some of our Special Education students has and will continue to cost us dearly. A single student placed in a private institution can cost $50,000. A lawsuit could cost a great deal more.

Stemming from contract talks earlier this year, ESTA has at least convinced the district to enter into what we hope to be a cooperative study of issues surrounding Special Education. Three knowledgeable and well respected ESTA members (Sally Lussier, Jo Anne Savage, and Jolie Swann) have embarked on a series of meetings with three district officials with extensive Special Ed backgrounds (Felton Owens, Dan Moser, and Bill Yamaki). It is ESTA’s hope that these six will craft an ideal plan for improvement of both working conditions and service delivery that can be passed along to the Bargaining Teams for serious negotiation.

BENEVOLENT ALLIANCE

For a little over a year now, the Benevolent Alliance of East Side Employees has been quietly bootstrapping itself into operation. At last count, just over 500 district employees had voluntarily become contributors to BAESE, making regular donations ten times a year through payroll deduction. BAESE members stem from all categories of district employees, including administration, certificated and classified; both regular high school and Adult Ed. Help from BAESE can come in the form of an interest free loan or an outright grant. To date, BAESE has received applications for financial aid from 15 individuals and has been able to fund nearly $10,000 in assistance. As a result, the fund balance has dipped pretty low, but the Alliance didn’t form with a goal of holding on to vast sums of money. Perhaps in the spirit of the upcoming Season, more district employees will make the decision to become contributors. For less than the cost of a dinner in a nice restaurant, you could help make a difference the next time a colleague is faced with dire financial straits. Normal contribution amounts to $30 per year, in $3 monthly increments, and are tax deductible. We have a long way to go before reaching our goal of 100% employee participation, so please seek out your school’s librarian for a BAESE membership form, or speak with one of the Alliance’s Directors for more information. They are: myself, Chris Evans, Cathy Giammona, Chip Bright, Nancy Schwalen, Tom Gerin, Sherie DeSimone, Susie Caton, or Debbie Russell.

SICK LEAVE BANK

Don’t forget that if you plan to participate in, and therefore qualify for the benefits of, the newly-created Sick Leave Bank, you must notify Doug Emerson at the District Office in writing no later than the last day of classes this month: December 20^th. That day is now less than two weeks from now.

SCHOLARSHIP APPLICATIONS

Also don’t forget that CTA offers two separate ways of applying for a $2,000 scholarship (for members and for dependents of members pursuing higher education) in addition to the annual ESTA Scholarships for children or grandchildren of members. Get the forms from Dorothy or Ly at the Mt. Hamilton CTA office. Deadline for the CTA applications is February 15, and for the ESTA applications is March 1.

FIRST SEM CLASS SIZE WAIVERS

The table shows data on class size waivers for schools for which the district has provided information.

 

 

USE OF FORCE

The California Ed Code and common sense outlaw the use of corporal punishment in schools. Section 49001 of the Code defines corporal punishment to be "the willful infliction of, or willfully causing the infliction of, physical pain on a pupil". So don’t do that. If you do, even one instance of that kind of behavior from a teacher could lead to criminal charges, lawsuits, and dismissal. Pretty serious stuff.

But contrast that prohibition against our duty to maintain a safe working and learning environment, and potential conflicts arise. The same section of the Ed Code goes on to state: "An amount of force that is reasonable and necessary for a person employed by or engaged in a public school to quell a disturbance threatening physical injury to persons or damage to property, for purposes of self defense, or to obtain possession of weapons or other dangerous objects within the control of the pupil, is not and shall not be construed to be corporal punishment within the meaning and intent of this section."

A further piece is found in the current ESUHSD Parent Handbook, which states: "It shall be the right of any qualified staff member to use reasonable and appropriate bodily restraint as may be necessary in order to � Maintain attitudes of attentiveness, respect, and courtesy on the part of unruly students; ‚  Enforce commands given in keeping with his/her responsibilities in loco parentis (parents/guardians away from home); ƒ  Enforce detention or assignment to a room or to an administrative official; „  Act in self-defense or in defense of another staff member.

The question of the definitions of what is "reasonable", "necessary", and "appropriate" are no so easily known, and must occasionally come under the judgment of a school or district administrator. An example occurred recently in which a teacher placed himself in the doorway of his classroom to more easily enforce his directive that no one leave until all of the class materials had been collected and accounted for. A female student made an attempt to move past him and in the process pushed a textbook into his ribs. The teacher momentarily restrained the girl, holding her by her arms and moving her back into the classroom. (The severity of carrying out the two underlined words form the basis of the district’s reaction to this incident and how ESTA came to be involved.) Later that day, after the girl showed a set of bruises on her arms to other staff members, a mandatory report was made to Child Protective Services and the teacher was placed on administrative leave (with pay) while the district carried out an investigation of the incident.

The teacher in this incident made a decision to physically engage a student. Was he justified? Were his actions reasonable? appropriate? necessary? We may never know; even the students who witnessed the episode gave different accounts of what they had seen. ESTA became involved when it became apparent that the district might mete out discipline to the teacher that we felt to be too harsh. That matter has been resolved in a way that will not be discussed here.

But questions remain: How is a teacher to know what degree of physical force is reasonable and necessary in a particular situation? What would have been the ideal behavior of the ideal teacher faced with a similar set of circumstances? Teachers need these answers.