III. Processes for Negotiating and Other Forms of Engagement
How associations engage with employers to address workload and other issues related to COVID-19 will depend on their state’s legal and regulatory environment. Locals in states where educators have collective bargaining rights will approach the issue differently from locals in meet-and-confer and non-bargaining states. See for example, ”ISTA wants right to negotiate working conditions as COVID-19 adds to teacher stress,” Washington-Times Herald (Nov. 18, 2020).
Discussions around COVID-19 working conditions will also be influenced by local labor-management relationships and practices. Irrespective of bargaining rights or status, the framework for discussions will depend on whether the association and employer use a collaborative problem-solving process or if the relationship is governed by more formal and positional practices. Moreover, many associations, have also engaged with state and local officials to advocate for laws, executive orders, and public policies to curb out-of-control educator workloads. See for example, “Gov. Walz aims to lighten load on teachers with executive order: New guidance on live teaching, planning time, face masks, more,” Twin Cities Pioneer Press (Nov. 5, 2020).
Negotiate COVID-19-Specific Agreements
Impact bargaining -- under formal or informal procedures -- plays a critical role in shaping COVID-19-specific policies. In many situations where employers refuse to engage with the association in operational decisions such as the instructional model and the safe return to in-person instruction, the association can demand to bargain the impact of those decisions on terms and conditions of employment. As the pandemic continues, many locals have reached one or more MOUs to address a host of issues, including those related to educator workload.
Whether through bargaining, meet-and-confer-opportunities, or general advocacy, locals have had success influencing everything from which instructional models are employed and how and when educators communicate with students and parents to the availability and expectations placed on school nurses and other SISPs, bus drivers, maintenance staff, and other educational support professionals (ESPs). As the school year continues, and schools revise policies and procedures -- returning to in-person instruction when circumstances permit, resuming all-virtual instruction when necessary, addressing budget shortfalls, and otherwise addressing the hardships created or exacerbated by the pandemic -- additional opportunities exist for locals to shape policy and respond to workload issues.
Locals entering full contract negotiations for expiring CBAs will need to determine which negotiated terms and conditions are specific to COVID-19 and are thus applicable for a defined period and those that will outlast the pandemic. This will help to inform whether the language is included in the body of the CBA or as a separate MOU.
Collect Member Data Regarding Workload
Continuing to monitor and assess educators’ working conditions is critical to effective advocacy. Member surveys completed in the spring or summer may retain some useful information; but updating those surveys and other member outreach to get critical input and feedback will allow locals to gather information on educators’ current experience as initial reopening plans have been executed and, in many cases, revised, and the reality of the school year has come into focus. Ideally, survey data will be collected in a way that allows for disaggregation based on identity indicators to ensure the experiences aren’t different based on those indicators. Anecdotal evidence will also help identify troubling patterns (e.g., meal and planning periods ignored; unreasonable expectations on how quickly educators must respond to parent emails; promised technology never provided). Armed with that information, locals are in the best position to build member and community support, then return to school boards, city councils, state agencies, and governors’ mansions to bargain or otherwise advocate for necessary improvements.
Enforce Existing Rights
It is critical to monitor compliance with, and seek enforcement of, existing workplace protections spelled out in collective bargaining agreements, individual contracts, board policies, and laws and ordinances. Formal enforcement options include filing individual or group grievances under collectively bargained procedures -- including grievances to force employers to adhere to joint labor-management committee provisions contained in existing CBAs, even where those committees have been underutilized or inactive; initiating appeal-and-relief procedures established by local school boards; filing charges with state labor boards; and filing legal complaints in court. In some instances, less formal procedures may provide a better, or in some cases the only, alternative to address workload issues. Providing members with information about their rights and encouraging them to first bring concerns directly to appropriate school administrators and association representatives, can result in quick and fruitful responses. And even when that step does not produce results, it may help the local as it seeks to bring matters to the attention of the school board or to the public.
Engage in Concerted Activity
Planning and engaging in concerted activity addressing educator workload issues advances many goals. It serves as an organizing tool as we seek to engage members and build community support. It shines light on the challenges that educators face, which directly or indirectly impact students. It puts pressure on administrators and school boards to confront and answer for the unacceptable and unsustainable conditions under which educators are working. And it builds a foundation on which to engage in a progressive campaign of escalating activity until issues are addressed. Common examples of concerted activity that can be used to address workload and other issues include mass presence at board meetings, letter-writing campaigns, informational picketing, petitions, media engagement, votes of no confidence, and decisions to work to the rule.
The collective action taken to address workload will help affiliates to confront an education funding crisis in many parts of the country. Members engaged on local issues are more likely to remain engaged as state legislatures address the fallout of cratering state budgets and face pressure by right-wing groups to enact anti-labor and anti-public-education legislation. And in states with a receptive audience, member engagement can help pressure legislatures and the executive branch to enact laws or issue executive orders and rules that can address workload issues and other matters critical to educator success.
Labor-Management Collaboration
In bargaining and non-bargaining settings alike, associations and employers can use collaborative processes to tackle the myriad problems and concerns caused by COVID-19. Many local associations have negotiated COVID-19 MOUs that include language on new or repurposed labor-management committees to address ongoing workload issues. Locals that do not formally bargain have adopted collaborative, interest-based processes to address employee concerns. See for example, ”Safely Reopening Schools Requires Collaboration, Education Stakeholders Agree,” NEA Today (July 1, 2020).
Forming strong labor-management partnerships can be quite effective in helping mitigate workload challenges. For example, although Arizona does not have a collective-bargaining statute and affords public employees only limited meet-and-confer rights, the Sunnyside Education Association in Tucson, Arizona, conducted informal negotiations with district administrators to address safety concerns and how to handle in-person versus remote workload issues. The SEA and school district strengthened their relationship over the spring and summer when SEA’s outreach to its members and potential members became the best source of information for the district on educator attitudes about the pandemic. These efforts helped to influence important decisions, such as educators assigned to remote instruction having no additional duties that required them to be physically on site; unlike other Arizona districts that required educators to teach both on-site and remotely in some hybrid models, a juggling act that has increased planning time and stress.