Hollister
– San Benito High School has announced that it will be changing
the daily student schedule halfway through the school year, a move
that will effectively resolve two unfair labor practice cases
brought against the school district by the teachers union.
Hollister – San Benito High School has announced that it will be changing the daily student schedule halfway through the school year, a move that will effectively resolve two unfair labor practice cases brought against the school district by the teachers union.
“I think right now everyone wants to move on and focus on what we’re here for, and that’s improving student success,” Principal Debbie Padilla said.
SBHS sent out letters this week informing parents that as of Jan. 8, the first day of the spring semester, the daily schedule will revert back to the alternating six-block day in use from 1994-2004, with an optional “zero” period early in the morning.
“We know the community is tired of the schedules changing, and hopefully this will help get it stabilized,” Padilla said.
The 2005-2006 school year operated on a seven-period schedule, which was never approved by the teachers’ union, though the district has said both sides had agreed on it informally. Because the teachers felt this constituted a change in their working conditions not reflected in their labor contract, they filed an unfair labor practice charge with the Public Employees Relations Board.
This school year has operated on a radically different schedule, so far. Students attend all six of their classes for one hour each on Monday, then attend three two-hour classes on alternating days for the rest of the week, in addition to a 40-minute “‘Baler Connections” advisory period.
The advisory period is supposed to be used as a home room, study hall, tutorial period and a chance for students to make counseling appointments or decorate the gym for a dance, for example, while not infringing on class time.
Educators had hoped the advisory period would encourage closer relationships between students and teachers and keep students, especially freshmen, from falling through the cracks.
“I’m a senior, so I don’t really go to my advisory. No one does; I think an average of seven people go every day,” SBHS senior Melissa Garcia said. As a senior, Garcia has had to follow a different class schedule every year she has been at the high school. “It looks like the administration is a little confused.”
Though union representatives have said they had no contention with the merits of an advisory period, the schedule change prompted teachers to file a second unfair labor practice charge because, again, the change was not reflected in the union’s contract. The district had been negotiating with the union the year prior, but declared an impasse in June, saying the impasse would prevent a second unfair labor practice charge and the district would use the old schedule instead for the 2006-2007 school year. But when classes resumed in the fall, the new schedule was utilized anyway.
Teachers say that, because they are required to stay for a half hour before and after school, the addition of a 40-minute period coupled with a longer school day has them working an extra 96 hours a year, with no additional compensation. The union has said the district need not necessarily compensate them for this time in money, but has suggested other additions to contract language such as binding arbitration, which means both parties would be mandated to follow the recommendations of a third-party arbitrator when disputes arise.
“This has never really been about the money,” union president Chuck Schallhorn said.
Padilla said the district decided to revert to the old schedule in order to avoid the costs associated with two prolonged legal battles as well as to smooth over relations with the teaching staff. Teachers who taught a first-period class during the 2005-2006 school year will receive $500 for each semester they did so, and teachers will be compensated for their work with advisory classes at a rate of $17.50 per hour.
“Most of it is based on the negotiations process,” she said.
Despite the change, Padilla said, the advisory period was working quite well and the decision to switch back to the old schedule had nothing to do with disappointing results.
“Actually the (overall) student GPA is up a little bit from this time last year,” she said. “So we want to work on incorporating some of ideas or parts of the advisory that work into the (new) schedule.”
The agreement between the union and district was made possible in large part by Superintendent Stan Rose’s willingness to work with the union, Schallhorn said. This is Rose’s first year at SBHS.
“A change in leadership did definitely contribute to a change in conclusions,” Schallhorn said. “Teachers are looking forward to getting back to work.”
Schallhorn said the majority of teachers – who approved the schedule change and dropping the unfair labor practice charges by a 96 percent margin on Nov. 17 – were relieved that the legal matters with the district are over. Quite a few, however, wish the advisory period would have been implemented successfully, especially the mandatory school-wide reading time.
“I know a lot of my advisory students have said that they’re sorry they won’t see me all the time,” Schallhorn said. “But the teachers who have good rapport with their students will always be able to develop those relationships in class.”
Other students, however, might not be as sad when the advisories disappear next semester.
“I’m glad it’s going to be gone,” Garcia said. “This way I can get a zero period and get out at 12:40 every other day. I think most seniors will like that a lot better.”
Students are being asked to indicate their choice of classes for the spring semester if the change in schedule affects them. Others are being asked if they would like a zero period and to be released early on alternating days. The forms are due Wednesday.
Danielle Smith covers education for the Free Lance. Reach her at 637-5566, ext. 336 or
ds****@fr***********.com
.
