School District Resolves Union Disputes
________________________________
To: All employees of the Taylor County School District
From: Paul E. Dyal, Superintendent of Schools
Re: Settlement agreement with TEA and TCNIA
In an effort to enter contract negotiations in good faith and without adversity, the Board has agreed to a settlement on both Unfair Labor Practices (ULP’s) and the Non-instructional grievance with our collective bargaining units. While we believe we had a strong case to win the ULP’s and the grievance, the process would have been long, involving a significant amount of time and high legal fees. In the end, the outcome would be dependent on the decision of the Public Employees Relations Commission; therefore the Board believes it is in the best interest of the District to settle all issues and move forward with negotiations for the 2009-10 year.
The terms of the settlement include:
- Restoration of the pay rate going forward, of all current employees to the pay rate in effect in
- Non-instructional employees will be raised one step, to the level they would have been as of 7/1/08 under the 2008-09 contract.
- All employees will be repaid the 5% pay reduction that was imposed for the period 2/1/09-6/30/09. We expect this repayment to occur in a separate check to be issued in mid August.
- Contract language changes in the TEA agreement, as previously voted by the Board.
This will cause the District to end the 2008-09 year with less than the required 3% fund balance, so we will continue to be monitored by DOE as an at-risk District. It is critical that we manage our expenditures in 2009-10 to be able to reach the minimum fund balance of 3% as quickly as possible and maintain at least that level of reserve.
________________________________
Congratulations!
Reply to this
Let me rephrase that: congratulations to the employee unions who fought for the employee rights. I believe the board settled because they knew what they did was wrong. Dyal admitted in a budget meeting that he was imposing the 5% salary cuts and other measures because he did not want to be "under the thumb of DOE." Well, as you can see by his memo, the district is still under the watchful eye of DOE. The Board and administration needs to be more transparent than they have been in the past and now maybe they will. LOL!
Reply to this
His point was that the district wouldn't have been "under the watchful eye of DOE" had the cuts been kept. The cuts allowed them to end the fiscal year (which ended June 30th) in the black plus have 3% in the bank like the state wanted.
But now that the district is having to pay back that money, they won't have the 3% in the bank--and personally I think it's even possible that they'll end the year with a deficit.
And here's the reality... The ~$500,000 that the district would've saved with those cuts will simply have to be made up in the new fiscal year that started July 1. That's half a million dollars less that can be spent doing things like hiring teachers and buying classroom supplies. It could even mean more layoffs, since salaries are the district's largest expense.
Reply to this
What a Fiasco, and we now have 3 additional employees. If layoffs are done will it be last hired first fired, like the last layoffs?
Reply to this
You have to give kudos to this blog, it now has Dyal and Company issuing press releases to paint a positive spin on the Dyal fiasco!
Reply to this
It wasn't a press release--it was a memo to employees. And the fact that the district formally communicated is refreshing; normally employees have to come to this site to get their news about the district!
Reply to this
You are right, but there is no denying that Dyal is now trying to "spin" things due to many folks commenting on this blog. In my opinion Dyal caused this mess. Dyal is very aware of the putz factor now enveloping his administration! The only question now about this...is the "spin" the local mullet wrapper will create in Friday's paper, you can bet that old green teeth will have a heavy hand in writing the article.
Reply to this
Dyal "formally communicated" with district employees when he sent out the memo telling them that the next day the district would be taking money out of their checks to cover the district's mistakes. Look where that got him! LOL
He has shown me that what he said while running for the office of superintendent is not what he does while in office. I will certainly campaign against him and every school board member currently seated at the next election.
You have not only been fiducially irresponsible with the taxpayer money but have also not represented the residents you represent. Shame on you and shame on the voters who continue to keep you in office.
Reply to this
when the school board members are elected and the school superintendent's neither body can tell the other what to do
Reply to this