What may have been a misunderstanding has become a major issue
in the Morgan Hill School District as the classified workers’ union
– Service Employees International Union, or SEIU – filed a
complaint with the district on May 4 against School Board Trustee
Shelle Thomas.
What may have been a misunderstanding has become a major issue in the Morgan Hill School District as the classified workers’ union – Service Employees International Union, or SEIU – filed a complaint with the district on May 4 against School Board Trustee Shelle Thomas.
The complaint alleges Thomas “made demeaning statements about classified personnel;” and “blamed their collective lack of backbone for the layoffs that the board has voted to impose upon classified workers;” and “has violated community board policy #1110.1.”
The policy referred to addresses civility and mutual respect.
Thomas said Wednesday she is very concerned that her intentions were misread.
“I have supported the classified workers, I wanted to find a solution so we could find that money somewhere else,” she said. “I am upset that this has escalated, that the union would file a complaint without talking to me, and that they could think I am blaming them. I don’t like that they have taken so many hits, but this has been blown out of proportion.”
Barbara Williams, SEIU worksite organizer, said she would like to see Thomas resign.
“Given the amount of strife that Ms. Thomas has caused on the board and the number of times she has insulted citizens from her board seat, it is time for her to resign,” she said. “Oddly enough, she should be a friend of classified workers because the union endorsed her. Even board members whom the union did not endorse have never spoken in so demeaning a fashion to us.”
Thomas said she has not insulted citizens at board meetings.
The SEIU endorsed Thomas in her campaign for the board seat in the November 2002 election.
Williams went on to say that perhaps Thomas was urging the union to strike.
“When she says get stronger, I have to wonder whether she is suggesting that classified workers undertake a work action, such as a strike,” she said. “The Education Code does not give classified workers much protection from layoffs except to negotiate their impact.
“Most classified workers would not support a work action because they care too much about the children whom they support through their work.”
The complaint stems from an incident during the April 26 board meeting. Trustees were discussing layoffs and cuts in hours and days to classified workers.
With a projected budget deficit next year of $1.6 million, trustees have been considering budget cuts in order to build their budget for the 2004-2005 school year. One of the cuts that was approved in an earlier meeting was a $56,000 to classified employees that was part of a “consensus” package as a result of three days of budget meetings between representatives of the three employee bargaining units of the district, the superintendent and her cabinet.
During the April 26 meeting, trustees were not discussing whether to make the cuts; the dollar amount of the cuts was already approved. The action the trustees were discussion was how the cuts would be made among classified workers, a plan negotiated between the SEIU and the district.
As trustees were discussing the action before a vote, Thomas said she sensed that the audience, which was filled with classified workers, many of whom addressed the board about the proposed cuts, wanted the trustees to discuss the impact of the cuts on the district, not to simply vote to approve them.
Thomas continued by voicing her opinion that perhaps trustees should consider looking at the elementary music program, a $120,000 program, as she had had discussions with school secretaries, for example, in which they wondered how trustees could cut their positions but keep the music program.
She pointed out that the classified workers have been affected by budget cuts for two years already, and told them that they have been willing to work to make the cuts to help the district.
“I mean, this is the group we come to again and again,” Thomas said. “It’s the better part of valor. We can hit you first, and I’ll have to say that the elegance of it is, that you have been willing, we’ve sat down mutually and said we want to work with you, we want to make this as palatable as possible.
“I don’t know, in some ways I guess I’m saying get a backbone, be stronger. But, you know what you’re doing, you’re doing what you think is best for the district, and I admire you for that, but at the same time, you’re not protecting yourselves enough, and I worry about that at the same time.”
Classified workers in the audience gasped and some walked out. SEIU Chapter Chair Bev Walker said about the complaint filed by the union that she expected a public apology.
“It’s one thing to insult classified workers because we have worked with the district minimize the impact of the layoffs,” she said. “We certainly could not look to the board for protection. It’s quite another thing to tell us that classified workers are damaging the district’s educational mission.
“We don’t vote on programs or expenditures, the board does, so to blame classified workers for harming the district’s mission is absurd. We demand a public apology and an explanation for how classified workers have harmed children’s education.”
The SEIU contract does not call for classified employees to work a certain number of days per year or a certain number of hours per day or week, as does the contract with the Morgan Hill Federation of Teachers. The negotiated agreement for cutting nearly $57,000 from classified includes furloughs and cuts to hours as well as layoffs.
Superintendent Carolyn McKennan said Thursday that district officials are working to make sure the appropriate steps are taken in the complaint process.
“This is a little unusual in that the union has lodged a complaint against a board member,” she said. “We are working together to find the most suitable way to handle this … Typically, if there is a grievance or a complaint, the first steps are to ask those people involved with it to get together to try to come to a resolution. If a resolution cannot be reached, there can be some type of mediation involved.”
McKennan did not wish to comment on the complaint itself.
According to information from Walker and Williams, the next step in the complaint process is a meeting with an SEIU representative, Assistant Superintendent Denise Tate, who is in charge of human resources, and Thomas.
Calls for comment about dealing with the complaint to Tate were not returned by press time.
