NORWICH – The leaders of Norwich teacher’s union deny their actions violated, in any way, the letter of the law governing the prolonged contract negotiations between their organization and the Norwich City School District.
While the district’s administration and board stated they did not plan to take action against the union based on these allegations, the NEO’s leadership wants to clear the air.
“What was said at the meeting was misleading,” said NEO First Vice President Erika Kwasnik, of the Jan. 6 Board of Education meeting where Superintendent Gerard O’Sullivan read a letter from the district’s legal counsel, John Lynch.
According to Lynch, certain actions by the Norwich Educators Organization could be construed as improper practice on the part of the union, thus violating the Public Employee’s Fair Employment Act, also known as the Taylor Law.
The first of two instances identified by Lynch occurred at a Dec. 16 school board meeting. At the meeting, NEO President Dr. Bruce Race distributed a copy of a letter to the editor which had appeared earlier that week in The Evening Sun. The letter was written by high school teacher Dr. Ed Erickson, who, while not a union member, is covered by the NEO’s collective bargaining agreement. In it, he stated that teachers were prepared to stop voluntary participation in activities outside of the classroom.
According to Lynch, if Erickson was speaking on behalf of the union, the letter could be viewed as a threat of a strike or work slow down according to legal precedent set in a 1989 case, Haverling Central School District vs Haverling Teachers Association.
“Ed Erickson is absolutely not a spokesperson for the union,” said Kwasnik.
Race said he had handed out the letter at Erickson’s request. When asked if, in retrospect, he could see how his distribution of the letter could have been misconstrued by the board as an endorsement of Erickson’s position, Race replied: “Hind sight is 20/20.”
According to Race, he did receive a letter from the superintendent asking if Erickson was speaking on behalf of the union, or if the NEO was endorsing the letter over winter break. He had not had a chance to respond prior to the Jan. 6 meeting, he said, but has done so since.
“At no time have we ever encouraged people to do anything that would be construed as a strike en masse,” said Race. The union president said that at each meeting he and the other officers specifically remind members that, by law, they must maintain their past practices.
They are allowed to undertake such activities as demonstrate off campus, enter or exit school buildings as a group, or wear a certain color, without fear of violating the Taylor Law “as long as it doesn’t interfere with work responsibilities,” Race said.
Kwasnik pointed out several differences between the Haverling decision and what occurred in Norwich. First, she said, in Haverling a letter was written by the president of the union, while in this case it was written by a non-member and not endorsed by the union. She also said that the meetings referred to, faculty and staff meetings in particular, were not voluntary for Norwich teachers but ones they are contractually obligated to attend.
Lynch also cited another document Race handed out at the same December meeting as an instance of improper practice. The attorney claimed the document, entitled “Prospective Agreement of the NEO and the Norwich City School District,” was a “willful misrepresentation” of negotiations as it did not accurately describe the deal currently on the table.
Kwasnik denied that was the intent of the document.
“Bruce’s handout was not a representation of prior conversations during negotiations. It was meant to serve as a starting point for further conversations,” she explained.
According to Race, the NEO has been working under an expired contract for 18 months. No pay increases have occurred during that time and take home pay has actually decreased for some because of rising health care costs, Kwasnik added.
“As I’ve said before, people are really hurting,” said Race.
Negotiations on a new contract reached an impasse in November, when the union and district failed to reach an agreement in mediation. The next step will be fact-finding, where each side will prepare position statements which will be reviewed by Clifford Dunn, a state-appointed fact-finder. His findings will become a matter of public record.
Dunn, who served as mediator earlier in the negotiations, helped the district reach an agreement with the Norwich Education Support Staff Association last fall.