Transparency goes both ways in Herricks
Joseph Flynn’s letter “Why do Herricks teachers fear transparency?” (2/7/14) touches upon a subject that all Herricks residents should be concerned about.
I agree with Mr. Flynn’s concern for greater transparency in the current contract negotiation. He is right, at least up to a certain point.
At the risk of sounding like a teacher basher or anti-union, let me first make the following points.
I am a current teacher in a secondary school and I have been teaching for almost 30 years. I believe Herricks is one of the finest school districts in the country.
This is largely due to the fact that Herricks teachers have acted professionally, they are genuinely concerned about our children and they do everything in their power to ensure the academic success of their students.
The academic record of this district, be it in the number of students successfully mastering Advanced Placement courses, the number of students excelling in local and national competitions, our school ranking among the nation’s districts or the number of students that move on to reputable institutions of higher learning is a matter of public record.
Much of this success is due to the work of Herricks teachers. Having said this, I would like to make the following related points regarding the current negotiations:
1. The level of transparency we are witnessing in the current negotiations between the Herricks Teachers’ Association (HTA) and the Herricks Union Free School District (at least from the board’s perspective) is probably a first of its kind when it comes to contractual negotiations between teachers’ unions and school districts in New York.
As far as the board is concerned, this it is a move in the right direction.
Generally, such negotiations take place at a level away from public view so that unintended or intervening variables or issues that come up later in the final stages of negotiations, do not interfere with issues in the negotiation process that are close to a tipping point or near mutual agreement.
Serious negotiations between the HTA and the Herricks Board do not seem to have reached this point as yet, if we are to judge from the responses by members from both sides, and when it does, the public should expect that at that point they will be concluded behind closed doors. The decision of the board to make some of their initial proposals known to the public on its website is a valid one because it gives the taxpayers an opportunity to see that issues that were previously raised by parents who may have attended board meetings or through contacts with board members are seen as valid and are being considered for negotiation.
This most certainly brings a sense of relief to the taxpayers, who are witnessing educational changes that reflect many challenges for administrators, students, and teachers. The action of the Board to make part of the Board’s initial proposals on the website available to the public coincides with the wording of Article 5 in the HTA’s contract, which states “the District agrees to make available such information as is reasonable, proper to reveal, and required to be made available as part of its obligation to bargain in good faith.” However, transparency goes both ways, and the taxpayers would be curious to know about the initial proposals from the HTA. In addition, it is refreshing to note that this current Board, with its composition of new members, is willing to play a more direct and meaningful role in the negotiating process, a point that was made in a letter from the Board President to the HTA on January 10, 2014.
2. Here is another issue of concern to parents in this atmosphere of contract negotiation. Article 20 of the current contract makes reference to the possibility that classes can be canceled whenever there is an emergency teacher absence at the discretion of the principal. Both my son and daughter who graduated from Herricks have confirmed that when teachers are absent, classes were indeed sometimes canceled and students end up spending the time in the cafeteria, as opposed to being in a classroom where they can work on class related assignments. This means that on such occasions students are losing valuable instructional time.
At a time when there is so much demands from the state and extensive pressure on students to succeed academically, this problem should be addressed and the phrase should be removed from the contract.
3. I am in agreement with a three year longevity contract, from July 2014 to June 2017, as the board has proposed. It was a terrible mistake in the first place for the previous board to support the current five-year contract.
Not only is a five-year contract unusually extensive, but this was a huge mistake because it leaves the board with little room to maneuver and it holds both parties to commitments that may be difficult to achieve without compromises from both sides during the tenure of such contracts. It was unfortunate that so many good teachers were let go, but the refusal of the union to open its contract or to take a pay freeze like teachers in other districts did not curry much favor from taxpayers who saw the HTA as digging in and adopting inflexible positions during troubled economic times.
It is possible to envision a future where contracts will probably be eliminated; others may even consider a three year contract as too extensive, considering the economic and uncertain climate that currently prevails. A three-year contract is reasonable given the practices of other school districts. Anything beyond a three year contract would be an anomaly.
4. The one major long-standing disappointment we have had with this school district is the lack of a parent -teacher conference after sixth grade. This issue is not even addressed in the board’s initial proposals listed on the website. Two parent teacher conferences are scheduled for elementary and sixth grades.
It ends there, despite the fact that our children will continue to spend another six years in the district before moving on to higher education. There is no question as to the value of formal parent-teacher conferences in the Middle and High Schools. This is borne out by the fact that all surrounding school districts have set aside time for parents to meet with their children’s teachers.
Just google it.
This change may require a modification of Article 29. The board has a great opportunity to act on this matter, particularly since the teacher’s contract is up for negotiation.
By implementing a plan for formal parent-teacher conferences, starting with the 2014-2015 school year, the board will demonstrate its obligation to the community and the teacher’s union may begin to shed its hard line image by agreeing to a plan that will help teachers foster closer relations with parents and students.
We hope Mr. Flynn will join us in the call for these changes which will no doubt have a positive impact on the children who live in the Herricks district.
Dr. Baytoram Ramharack
New Hyde Park
