Tacoma schools, union leaders look back at what prompted strike

Throughout the course of the eight-day Tacoma teachers strike, questions were raised by families, taxpayers and others about what was behind it.

In separate interviews Friday, one day after teachers voted to end their walkout, The News Tribune sat down with Kurt Miller, president of the Tacoma School Board, and Andy Coons, president of the Tacoma Education Association union, and got some answers.

Teacher reassignments, pay and class size were the oft-­stated points of contention during labor negotiations. But the deeper answers are more complicated.

Miller and Coons agreed that last year’s launch of middle school reforms with millions of dollars in federal grants created an environment in which teachers became anxious about job stability. So did the closures of Wainwright and McKinley elementary schools, which displaced more teachers.

They agreed that Tacoma is an innovative school district where exciting changes are being pioneered.

But innovation, it seems, can breed distrust.

KURT MILLER, SCHOOL BOARD PRESIDENT

QUESTION: How did we get into this situation, in your view?

ANSWER: There were some situations over the last few years that ... mistrust developed between the union and the district – the (federal) School Improvement Grant (SIG) schools, the school closings. The two entities didn’t work hard enough together to help bridge that gap. And it just spread more and more.

QUESTION: Why did you hire Washington Employers Association (to handle labor negotiations with teachers)?

ANSWER: There was a lot of mistrust and animosity over the SIG schools having to rehire so many teachers, and school closures. The board felt that, due to that mistrust, to have the assistant superintendent for human resources doing the negotiation – the environment was toxic to begin with – would not be in the best interest of either party.

We have 13 bargaining units. It’s difficult to keep bargaining one after another and still run a school district. A third reason is the lack of resources due to budget cuts in HR. With Washington Employers, we were able to get experienced negotiators, plus the support staff.

QUESTION: What about the allegation that the district negotiator said there was no interest in securing an agreement before the start of the school year?

ANSWER: What he probably said – and was misinterpreted – was that a lot of times when the contract expires, organizations keep continuing negotiating. That’s not unusual at all. How it was interpreted is another thing.

There were some discussions around staffing, and when the district can consider external candidates for open positions.

We can bring in external candidates after 40 percent of the displaced teachers are placed.

QUESTION: Why is being able to consider external candidates important?

ANSWER: Say, for a Montessori program, or the Lincoln Center. You want somebody that has experience in an innovative model, perhaps. You want somebody that can teach math in a different way that’s been successful. Maybe you want to bring in a brand new teacher that brings something to an established school. There’s a lot of reasons to bring in a new staff member from outside the district, especially if you’re starting up a new program.

We want a mix of experienced staff and new staff, which makes a healthy environment.

We find that experienced teachers know how to manage classrooms. They know how to make curriculum exciting for kids. And new teachers learn from them. So you need a mixture in a building, I believe. As teachers retire, you need somebody to take their place.

QUESTION: What were you feeling after teachers voted to return to work?

I saw someone at (district offices on Friday) and he said, “You look five years younger.” I said, “I feel 20.” A weight was taken off the shoulders, but yet there’s so much work that needs to be done.

There is so much Tacoma has yet to do that can make a difference to the students.

We have to build upon the innovation that’s in this contract.

QUESTION: The governor is saying that education is going to be on the chopping block again.

We know there are going to be more cuts in the next couple years. We needed to be prepared for anything. That’s where the fund balance comes in. That’s going to cushion us. The district has done a wonderful job to protect the education of our kids. We have a savings account.

QUESTION: I asked you how we got into this situation. How do we get out of it?

It starts at the (school) building – if you have the right leader at the building. When you don’t have a strong leader, it takes longer.

At the district level, (Superintendent Art Jarvis) is going to be blamed for this. He’s leaving.

At the board level, board members are going to be blamed for this. We have two new board members coming in.

I feel my reputation has been based on making sure the union and teachers have been treated fairly over the years.

I will continue to do that. My hope is that the teachers see that, and understand it.

ANDY COONS, UNION PRESIDENT

QUESTION: How did we get here in the first place?

ANSWER: The public needs to understand the context over the last two years about working in Tacoma and why (teacher) displacement language was the strike-able issue.

Two years ago, the district received millions of dollars in federal School Improvement Grants (SIG), and with that money came a lot of criteria attached to it. We’ve done a transformation at Jason Lee (Middle School). We closed Hunt Middle School. Giaudrone and Stewart (middle schools) were each turnaround – where staff was replaced and the administration was replaced.

Also complicating the story, Tacoma is actually a very innovative district. We have a School of the Arts, we have a school of math and science, we have schools with alternate hours ... I applaud that innovation in public schools.

What we need is equitable (contract) language to make sure we have matches – where the staff is qualified to teach in those unique schools. We don’t want a one-size-fits-all.

Also last year we had two closed schools, with those entire staffs displaced. We had a lot of tension ... There were months of just sort of waiting in this no-man’s-land of displacement.

It was because of those issues and this opportunity to negotiate a new contract – that was my motivation for running for union president. I wanted to be in on these talks. We knew these were going to be tough.

We were ready (to negotiate) on March 8 ... Finally on May 31, they agreed to meet. It was announced that (consultant) Washington Employers (Association) would be at the table.

We said, who are we bargaining with, Washington Employers or the district? We were told that Washington Employers would be making decisions for the district.

Aug. 4. That’s when a member of their team said, “What’s our drop-dead date?” I said it’s the 29th. I have a general membership meeting. That’s the day before we report back to school, I want to have a contract ready for (teachers) to ratify.

It was at that meeting that the outside negotiator said the district has no interest in settling this before school starts. He said many districts start without a contract.

I called Washington Education Association and said, “You are not going to believe this.”

On the 15th, we had a WEA crisis team, to help with communications, to help with organizing in the worst-case scenairo. That’s when the spin was that this was a WEA plan. It wasn’t even on anyone’s radar. QUESTION: You did take a member survey last spring, and one of the questions was, “Are you willing to strike?”

ANSWER: That came right when they announced they had an outside negotiator. I called the Seattle union president, because they negotiated the previous year with an outside person.

I said “What have you learned?” Her advice was, “These people are being paid, and so they have no motivation to end it.”

Her advice was, “If I could re-do it, I would have had a strike vote before school let out to put pressure on the district to end it.”

QUESTION: When did the teacher displacement language come up?

ANSWER: That came up midsummer. That’s been spun in the press as I’m trying to hold on to seniority. Contrary to what everyone believes, our contract is not that seniority-heavy. Seniority is used as a tie-breaker, with all other things being equal. All our team was asking for was quantifiable things.

Because of those (SIG) schools, we had had some loosened language (for those schools only).

I think the intent of that agreement had been honored in two out of three of our (SIG) schools. In one, there were concerns that there was abuse – if you didn’t get along with the principal, you were targeted.

QUESTION: And that would be Stewart?

ANSWER: Yeah. With that background, the fact that they wanted to put in loose language districtwide, that was alarming.

QUESTION: What about money issues?

ANSWER: In this contract, we have agreed to freezing salaries for the length of this contract. (Three years.) We agreed we would lose one building optional (training) day. If they get funding (back from state lawmakers), it’s reinstated. If not, it’s lost the next year. The third year, it can be re-negotiated.

QUESTION: I asked you how we got into this situation. How do we get out of it?

ANSWER: We know we have healing to do. I think if we focus on what we have in common, which is the kids, that’s the first place to start.