Pattye Benson

Community Matters

TE School District response to the Affordable Care Act — Reduce employee hours

June 7, 2013
57 Comments

Now that the dust begins to settle on yesterday’s announcement that the TE School District will not outsource jobs of aides, paraeducators and substitute teachers for the 2013/14 school year, residents and employees are again left with more questions than answers.

My initial reaction upon hearing the news that 260 District jobs were saved from outsourcing was enthusiastic; but now in hindsight, I admit it was probably premature. I was thrilled for this group of employees, believing that the School Board had finally recognized their value and commitment to the District’s children, in making the choice not to outsource.

However, after spending a few minutes reviewing Burak’s email to the employees in addition to phone calls and emails, the celebratory mood quickly changed. The statement reads that the “District will restructure the work hours” of the employee to comply with the Affordable Care Act and “does not result in new costs or penalties to the District”.

What we learn from Burak’s words is that the School Board’s way around the ACA compliance issue it to reduce employee hours. The ACA does not require the District to provide health insurance to those employees working less than 30 hours a week – so the District’s answer to the Federal law is simple… cut hours. TESD is the only school district in the area that does not provide health insurance for their employees – Great Valley, Radnor and Lower Merion school districts all offer healthcare coverage to all their employees.

Does the School Board want the community to feel good about what they are doing? Is this an acceptable solution? Where is the plan for the future … the vision … leadership?

Keeping healthcare coverage out of the hands of the least paid and oh, by the way, we are reducing your hours to comply with Federal law. This same Board gave the District administrators salary increases and bonuses and in less than 4 months is now cutting the hours of aides and paras. But don’t forget the Board also gave this group of employees a 1% raise. If you are an employee making $10/hr., with your 1% raise you will now make $10.10/hr. However, don’t get too excited District employee because we now must reduce your hours below 30 to avoid offering you health insurance.

Let’s review; the Board gives bonuses, raises and a Cadillac health plan to the highest paid District employees but provides no insurance coverage and cuts the hours of the least paid District employees. Seems hardly fair or equitable.

I had a phone call last night from a District aide who works 37 hours a week and cannot afford for her hours to drop below 30 hours. Her family’s health insurance is covered through her husband’s employer and they do not need coverage from the District. Her question to me — would she still be able to work the 37 hours a week in the District because she does not need the health insurance from the District. Of course, I could offer no definitive response. What would she have to do, sign an agreement with the District saying she wouldn’t take the health insurance if they offered it to her? This aide also wanted to know ‘when’ this matter would be resolved, what was the timeline for knowing if she would have 29 hours or 37 hours? Again, I don’t know and School Board President Buraks offered no details, except to enjoy the summer and he’d see them in the Fall.

I recall previous suggestions about reducing the hours below 30 hours so that the District would not have to offer health care coverage and comply with the Affordable Care Act. Dan Waters response was immediately negative to that suggestion, stating that the kids would suffer with the reduction in hours. Yet magically a month later, are we now to believe that the kids will no longer be in danger with a reduction in the hours of the aides and paras?

Beyond the personal effect on the employee in reduction of hours, how exactly does the District expect to make up the discrepancy and provide adequate coverage for the students? Is the plan to hire additional part-time employees to make up the missing hours? If so, at what cost?

Addressing the District aides, paras and substitute teachers in his email, Buraks states, “… we greatly value and appreciate the contributions that you make to our students and staff every day.” – To that, I’d say that you certainly have an odd way of showing it!

Bottom line … there are many unanswered questions and the employees and the residents deserve answers. Finance Committee meeting is Monday, June 10, 7 PM at Conestoga High School. I hope that the Board and the administration is prepared to respond to the questions.

Share or Like:
        
 

White Ribbon Campaign no Longer Needed — TESD Not to Outsource!

June 6, 2013
63 Comments

The TE School Board held an executive meeting last night and have decided against outsourcing of aides, paraeducators and substitute teachers for the 2013-14 school year! This is great news for the District’s children and their families, the employee and the school district community!

Below is the email from the Kevin Buraks to the employees:

June 6, 2013

Dear T/E School District Aides, Para-educators and Paraprofessionals,
I write to you on behalf of the T/E School Board to inform you that the Board will not outsource our aides, para-educators and paraprofessionals in the 2013-14 school year. This action is in response to what we learned from you on our visits on May 21, 2013.
The District will restructure the work hours of the aides, para-educators and paraprofessionals in a manner that complies with the Affordable Care Act and does not result in new costs or penalties to the District. The 2013-14 approved Proposed Final Budget does not require adjustment and continues to reflect a 1% raise for all aides, para-educators and paraprofessionals, as well as associated PSERS benefit costs. In addition, the School Board is not required to take any action since the budget is unaffected by this authorization. As I shared with you on May 21st, we greatly value and appreciate the contributions that you make to our students and staff every day. I wish you the best for a successful closing of the school year, a fine summer and look forward to seeing you in the fall.
Sincerely,
Kevin Buraks
President
Tredyffrin/Easttown School Board
Share or Like:
        
 

Say No to Outsourcing in TESD … An Outsourcing Alternative

June 6, 2013
4 Comments

The decision about outsourcing the aides, paraeducators and substitute teachers should not only be about money. It should be about doing what’s right — these employees are part of our community and deserve to be treated fairly. The outsourcing sales pitch may seem like the answer but it’s not a panacea. I hope that the Board and the administration will re-think the proposed outsourcing … tripping over dollars to pick-up pennies is not a solution.

Following the May 13th TE School Board meeting, the community was left with many unanswered questions related to the proposed outsourcing of the aides, paraeducators and substitute teachers. Requirements of the Affordable Care Act (ACA) and the effect that compliance will have on the District are at the core of the situation. The aides, paras and substitute teachers are the only group of TESD employees not currently receiving health care benefits. As of January 1, 2014, the ACA will require the District to offer these benefits to all employees working 30 hours or more.

Since the last School Board meeting, the aides, paras and substitute teachers, representing all 8 District schools, have met three times and I attended the meetings. The mission of the meetings was to disseminate information and discuss acceptable alternatives to outsourcing. The meetings were intended to provide a ‘safe’ forum where affected employees could express their concerns and ask questions, yet some did not attend, fearing workplace retribution for their participation.

At my request, Neal Colligan attended the meetings and helped us understand how the District could comply with the ACA without resorting to outsourcing. I want to be clear that neither Neal nor I represent these employees – we are simply residents seeking a solution to a community issue. Through the discussion with the paraeducators and other members of the community, an outsourcing alternative evolved. As part of the collaborative effort, Neal spoke with health care experts to better understand the requirements of the ACA and what compliance would mean for the District.

The parameters of the ACA requires that the school district offer health insurance to its employees that work 30 hours or more that is both affordable and of minimum value. Currently the only group of employees in the District not receiving health care benefits is the aides, paras and substitute teachers. The ‘affordable’ test means that the employee cannot be asked to pay more than 9.5% of their household salary for insurance. The insurance plan is of minimum value if “the plan’s share of the total allowed costs of benefits provided under the plan” is at least 60% of such costs.

Given the information available, Neal created a conceptual outsourcing alternative that would comply with the law and keep the jobs of 260 employees from outsourcing. (Click here for copy of the outsourcing alternative). The alternative was presented to the aides, paras and substitute teachers in attendance at this week’s meeting and copies were sent to the administration and school board members for their review (in advance of Monday’s Finance Committee meeting).

Neal provided the following explanation of the outsourcing alternative for today’s Community Matters post:

As the District has spent all of its time on a plan to outsource to avoid the Affordable Care Act (ACA); we based our plan on the idea of complying with the new Federal Law. With the help of community members and industry experts, we were able to price a health care insurance offering that is Affordable and meets the minimum standards required by the ACA. You will see in our analysis that complying with the Law (and offering a health care option) should be far less expensive to the district and its Taxpayers than paying the fee attached to outsourcing. We’ve also done some work on PSERS costs as it relates to this employee group and have devised a plan to neutralize those cost increases to the District.

Please know that this is a conceptual plan only. We did not have all of the information needed to develop “hard” numbers. The District, if it decides to investigate this option, would not be limited by estimates. Further, the cost of our insurance offering was also estimated. We believe this to be a conservative estimate as the District is a large insurance client and may be able to secure this type of plan at a more competitive cost. The new insurance plan offered (in our analysis) may be considered discriminatory as it is not of the caliber offered to the other District employee groups. Certainly it is no more discriminatory than the current situation where this employee group is not covered at all. We also believe the District is not in danger of violating the discriminatory parameters of the ACA as they do not meet the test of “fully insured employer” (they are partially self-insured…this may be too mush inside baseball for many).

We ask the District to consider this conceptual approach. We believe an alternative to outsourcing along these lines can and will produce a more cost-efficient and sustainable solution while keeping this employee group as District employees.

If you oppose outsourcing the jobs of the District’s aides, paraeducators and substitute teachers, please plan to attend these meetings:

  • Finance Committee Meeting: Monday, June 10 at 7 PM, Conestoga High School
  • School Board Meeting: Monday, June 17 at 7:30 PM, Conestoga High School
Share or Like:
        
 

Against outsourcing in TE School District – Join the White Ribbon Campaign to show your support

June 4, 2013
12 Comments

white ribbon

The TE School District is currently exploring outsourcing the jobs of all aides, paraeducators and substitute teachers in our School District.

It saddens me that vulnerable, dedicated employees have become the school district pawns, at the mercy of the School Board and the administration. ‘To outsource or not to outsource’ and the future of approximately 250 District employees (approx. total of aides, paras and substitute teachers) will be discussed at the June 10 Finance Committee meeting and then voted upon by the School Board at their June 17 meeting.

Without the benefit of a collective bargaining organization, there is little that this group can do to fight back against the outsourcing of their jobs. Although many TE School District employees in this group are also Tredyffrin or Easttown residents, they have virtually no say in the decision-making process. This community values the aides, paraeducators and substitute teachers for their dedication and caring support of the District’s children. As employees of the TE School District, this group of people deserves better treatment from the administration and the Board.

A lack of transparency and openness from the administration and Board has continued during this outsourcing process, to both the residents of the District and to those most affected — the aides, paraeducators and substitute teachers. Misinformation or lack of information remained following the outsourcing presentation at the May 13 school board meeting. Although some of us learned that the District’s preferred outsourcing vendor, STS, withdrew their proposal, there is no information on the District website or press releases from either the School Board or administration indicating the change. I only learned the details myself by speaking directly with the president of STS, Jay Godwin.

Bringing awareness of the proposed outsourcing to all residents of the school district is paramount. Parents need to know that the best interests of the District’s children are the priority of the Board and administration. District employees need to know that the Board, administration and the community value them.

Support keeping the jobs of TE School District aides, paraeducators and substitute teachers in our District. If you oppose the District’s proposed outsourcing of this important group of employees, show your support with a white ribbon. Tie a white ribbon on your tree, mailbox or light post. If you are District employee, wear a white ribbon in support of the aides, paraeducators and paraprofessionals. If you are a student in the District, maybe you can wear a white arm band or white ribbon to indicate support for the District employees whose jobs are threatened.

We only have a week until the Finance Committee on June 10 — let’s show our support for the aides, paraeducators and paraprofessionals!

—————————————————————————————————————————————————————————–

Just spotted this ‘Say NO to Outsourcing in T/E ” in the Great Valley section of the District!-

Say NO to outsourcing in TESD

Share or Like:
        
 

TESD District Policy Series 9000 … Use of Consent Agenda by the School Board

June 1, 2013
13 Comments

Over the last few weeks, much attention has focused on the possible outsourcing of aides, paraeducators and substitute teachers – the lowest paid group of employees in the TE School District. I have spoken with a number of the employees that are facing an uncertain future. They continue to question ‘why’ the School Board gave the District administrators pay increases and bonuses, then turn around, and consider outsourcing the jobs of those least paid. District employees, whose jobs are now on the cutting block, do not understand how the administrators received raises, without any public discussion, as part of a consent agenda. If the school district’s financial situation is driving outsourcing, why did the School Board give the administrator raises and bonuses a few months ago?

For those who may not recall; at the TE School Board meeting on January 28, resident Ray Clarke questioned the inclusion of the administrator salary increases and bonuses in the consent agenda. He asked for public discussion of this specific issue and was told by the School Board president that any public discussion would occur ‘after’ the vote was taken rather than before.

The purpose of a consent agenda is to group routine, noncontroversial items together to be voted on under one motion. It is understood that items on the consent agenda should be routine items that do require further information before the board vote. The assumption is that the consent agenda purpose is not to purposely hide important issues or stifle discussion – yet in the case of the administrator salary increases, that is exactly what happened.

With upcoming important District votes related to outsourcing, it is important to review the District’s policy related to public discussion. Under District Policy Series 9000: By-Laws of the Board, is 9311 Order of Business of Monthly Board Meetings that clearly spells out the parameters that govern the School Board’s use of the consent agenda.

District Policy Series 9000: By-Laws of the Board

9311 Order of Business of Monthly Board Meetings

VIII Consent Agenda
A. Approve Minutes
B. Receive Financial Reports
C. Personnel
D. Curriculum and Instruction
E. Business Office
F. Staff and Students
G. Transportation
H. School Board

Now that I look over the District’s consent agenda policy, it is unclear under which category the Board used the consent agenda approval of administrator raises and bonuses. Originally, my objection was the administrator salary increases and bonuses were not ‘routine’ and, therefore should not have been included in the consent agenda. However, when reviewing the list of approved uses of the consent agenda, it is not clear to me which category the School Board actually included administrator raises and bonuses. Interesting …

Share or Like:
        
 

Harassment, intimidation and bullying have no place in our schools …

May 31, 2013
43 Comments

The troubling stories of intimidation by the TE School District administration continue, as does the School Board’s silence regarding this issue. After “As I See It: Tredyffrin Easttown School District … Intimidation to Silence” appeared in Main Line Suburban, I received additional phone calls and emails from former and current District employees, describing our schools as a workplace which seeks to control and silence. A former TE teacher wrote, “Employees have noted for years that they felt bullied and targeted when raising any questions or concerns regarding building and/or programming changes.” From a current District aide, “The negativity and lack of respect from the administration is always present.”

What is really going on behind the walls of our schools – the morale continues to plummet but other than bringing awareness to the problem, there is no indication that anything is changing or that anyone on the School Board is actually listening. Disappointingly, there has been no response to either of the two emails sent to School Board President Kevin Buraks in regards to this matter. Some may suggest that Buraks does not respond because he is in re-election campaign mode and does not want to risk his quotes appearing on Community Matters. If that is the case, I wonder what excuse is offered for not responding to the concerns of other School District residents. How about a press release suggesting that the School Board is addressing employee concerns and claims of intimidation? The employees need to know that their contributions are valued and that they have a right to a working environment free from harassment and intimidation.

By speaking out, employees feel that their jobs are threatened. Following the School Board meeting, the administration suggested to certain TENIG members that they had no business attending the meeting. These individuals did not speak at the meeting (although if TESD residents, they have that right); they merely attended the meeting. I find this level of control by intimidation from the administration extremely disturbing. All employees deserve a supportive working environment not a place where they fear losing their jobs for raising questions or concern.

With the level of discontent, negativity and lack of respect that many District employees are indicating, I simply do not understand why the School Board does not investigate and find answers. Why should employees fear retribution from the District administration for speaking out or … in the case of some TENIG workers, for just showing up a public meeting? When a District employee speaks as a citizen at a meeting, does the First Amendment not protect them? How is it possible that a school district is allowed to exercise control over an employee’s private speech.

There are examples of intimidation and low morale of the employees from all areas of the District — the kitchen staff, the custodians, the aides and the teachers. Large segments of the employee community feel disconnected from the District leadership; leaving them to question why the School Board seemingly does not care. How do the members of the School Board rationalize and not react to what District employees are saying? I will say it again, this is not some isolated, disgruntled employee looking for attention but rather the new reality of what it means to be a TE School District employee. Respect and support should be commonplace on the education ladders of TE schools, regardless of whom you are or whom you know.

There’s no magic wand to make this simmering problem within our schools disappear. Increasing awareness suggests that our award-winning TE School District needs a thorough internal examination and review to look at what is really going on inside our school walls.

——————————————————————————

Footnote: In a quick Google search, I found ‘School Perceptions’, an independent research company that collects data, conducts internal examinations, professional development, benchmark surveys, etc. and measures feedback from community, parents, students and staff in public and private schools. According to their website, their mission is to “help educational leaders gather, organize and use data to make strategic decisions” by measuring what matters. I understand the economics of the School District and I realize that School Perceptions, or a similar company, does not come without a price tag however … this situation requires action. One solution is an independent examination and review of the working environment of the District employees.

Share or Like:
        
 

Great Economic News — Shire changes its mind, not moving from Tredyffrin Township!

May 30, 2013
1 Comment

Last fall, we learned that Shire was planning to move its headquarters from its current Chesterbrook location to Atwater Business Park in neighboring East Whiteland Township when their lease expired. Located in Chesterbrook since 2004, Shire planned to build a new large office complex on Trammel Crow property at the intersection of Rt. 29 and Yellow Springs Road, moving their 1,500 employees out of Tredyffrin. Shire’s decision to relocate meant the vacancy of four large corporate buildings in Chesterbrook.

Today’s Philadelphia Business Journal reports that Shire has reversed their decision to move their headquarters from Chesterbrook. After analyzing its ‘global footprint and its real estate presence, Shire’s new CEO Dr. Flemming Ornskov, concluded, “We feel fine where we are.”

Shire had a signed development agreement and plans were well underway for the company’s move to East Whiteland. According to the article, the real estate project was to construct 10 buildings totally 1.15 million square feet of office space on 110 acres. Phase one was to be four buildings at an estimated cost of $175 million. Although certainly good economic news for Tredyffrin, East Whiteland not only loses this major development project but also the financial rewards of 1,500 new employees paying earned income tax. Does make me wonder what cancelling the agreement cost Shire … but certainly a lot less than $175 million!

Beyond the obvious economic impact, Shire is a great community contributor and supporter — the summer concert series, annual fireworks, Shire Pavilion in Wilson Farm Park, Tredyffrin 300 sponsorship and the list goes on and on. Shire has been there for the Tredyffrin Township community whenever needed and it’s exciting that they are staying here!

Responding to Shire’s decision not to leave the township, Tredyffrin Towsnship Board of Supervisors Chair Michelle Kichline offered the following comment —

The Board of Supervisors is pleased that Shire has decided to remain in Tredyffrin Township. Not only is Shire a world class pharmaceutical company; it is an outstanding community partner. Shire is a long time major sponsor of our Fourth of July fireworks and our summer concert series.

The Township will continue its efforts to attract and maintain businesses, like Shire, that help improve the quality of life in our community and provide jobs to our residents.

Michelle Kichline
Chairman of the Board of Supervisors

Share or Like:
        
 

End of VFMS tennis court saga – Zoning Hearing Board approves variance

May 24, 2013
7 Comments

The tennis courts at Valley Forge Middle School received their reprieve at last night’s Zoning Hearing Board. After 4+ hours of listening to various appeals, finally at 11 PM, the TE School District presented its case for a variance that would permit the additional parking spaces and keep the tennis courts. The combined impervious coverage of the additional parking spaces and the tennis courts is slightly more than the township stormwater permits. The District’s application to the ZHB sought a variance for the additional impervious coverage.

The fate of the District’s tennis courts was contingent on the ZHB ruling. Had the ZHB denied the variance to the District, the VFES tennis courts would have been demolished. After testimony from the School District attorney and architect plus members of the community, including impassioned remarks from VFMS neighbor Don. Detweiler, the ZHB members rendered their decision in favor of the variance. With a 2-1 vote (chair Dan McLaughlin dissented), the tennis courts appear to have been saved. Previously the Facilities chair Pete Motel voiced concern that to save the tennis would cost the District $14K to the contractor not to demolish the tennis courts. The Board of Supervisors waived the ZHB filing fee of $2K to the District. With the approval of the ZHB variance, presumably the School Board will approve the ‘saving of the tennis courts’ and the District will move ahead with the summer parking lot expansion at VFMS.

The audience was told that the decisions of the Zoning Hearing Board are not precedential to other appeals, so … does that mean that others seeking relief from stormwater requirements will not be able to cite the tennis court decision? Just asking the question …

Share or Like:
        
 

The School District spins the roulette wheel on outsourcing vendors – What’s going on in TE?

May 21, 2013
156 Comments

The saga of outsourcing continues in Tredyffrin Easttown School District … Last week at the infamous TE School Board meeting, we listened as the Administration and School Board members presented the case for outsourcing of aides, paraeducators and substitute teacher positions. The business manager Art McDonnell, personnel director Sue Tiede and superintendent Dan Waters provided the background and the reasons for choosing Substitute Teacher Services (STS) as their preferred outsourcing vendor.

At the meeting, I asked McDonnell for the names of the other four outsourcing vendors and he was unable to remember the complete list. I do recall Kelly Services was one option however; the services and fees of the other vendors were not presented to the public. I asked McDonnell if we could assume that STS was the low bidder at a rate of 22.5%. Although McDonnell responded that the District was not required to accept the low bidder because no RFP (Request for Proposal) was required, he did offer that STS was indeed the lowest bidder. McDonnell further stated that the 22.5% was a negotiated rate, down from 34%.

Tiede, McDonnell and Waters repeatedly told audience members that STS would provide a great opportunity for our employees, that they would make more money with the outsourcing company, have the ability to contribute to a 401K, keep their same jobs and on and on. We heard that even though STS was the largest employer of its type in the country, that the District would retain complete control over who worked in our schools and that interviews would be conducted on site, etc. Waters volunteered that an administrative employee of STS would actually have an office in the administration building! In other words, the public sales pitch of STS knew no bounds.

During the District in-service training for aides and paras today, Waters announced that STS is no longer involved in the proposed outsourcing, stating that the company had pulled their proposal. Eight days since the School Board meeting and the preferred outsourcing vendor is no longer a consideration and that replacing STS is CCRES (Chester County Regional Education Services). Why the change … this made no sense to me. Little over a week ago, the Administration led the community to believe that STS was the best fit for the employees and that the company offered the most experience and maximum cost-savings to the District.

Absent any details from the School Board or the District to explain this outsourcing vendor change, I contacted STS and spoke for 45 min. to Jay Godwin, the president of STS. Although Godwin would have liked to work with the TE School District, his decision to remove his outsourcing proposal was two-fold.

The first reason that Godwin offered for withdrawing his proposal was the School Board’s decision to delay the vote on the outsourcing plan until June 17. Godwin did not believe that there is adequate time between June 17, the earliest date that the Board could approve the outsourcing agreement and July 1, the start date of the agreement to meet all the necessary State documentation requirements.

According to Godwin, Pennsylvania state law requires school district employees provide certain documentation, including Act 34 (Pennsylvania State Police Criminal Background Checks), Act 114 (PA Department of Welfare Child Abuse History Clearance) and Act 151 (Child Abuse History Clearance). Unless TESD employees had this required background checks within the last year, all necessary background checks, etc. are required.

When asked, what he thought the adequate time frame to accomplish the necessary ‘paperwork’ to move 175+ employees to an outsourcing plan, his response was 3 months. Had the School Board approved the outsourcing plan at the May 13 meeting, although less than his preferred 3 months time frame, Godwin felt he could accomplish the task. However Godwin was of the opinion that a 2-week turnaround timeline was not possible for his company, STS. He was unwilling to say whether another outsourcing vendor could meet that 2-week requirement.

The second reason for withdrawing the STS outsourcing proposal was based on TE School District resident and employee sentiment. Godwin was overwhelmed by the anti-outsourcing feelings of the public and the employees. Typically, when a school district is considering outsourcing, there is a longer timeline for public discussion. The District plan to outsource the aides and paras took the residents, parents and employees off guard; and was met with swift and immediate opposition. If you couple the short timeline with misinformation and inaccurate budgetary numbers from the District, the reaction should have come as no surprise to the School Board and Administration.

As much as Godwin wanted to be a part of the TE School District, he said that he knew there would be unhappy employees and an unhappy community, and that was something that he did not want for his company. Based on the sentiment of the residents (and employees, many of which are also residents) Godwin is of the opinion that this “is not the time for outsourcing in TE”. Godwin has worked with many school districts and the community’s anti-outsourcing response is the loudest and most significant he has seen in his career.

We discussed the uniqueness of TE School District and the education and background qualifications of our current aides and paraeducators. Godwin acknowledged that the high level of education and commitment of these employees was not typical and would probably not be achievable by an outsourcing company. I do believe that Godwin intended to hire all our current TE School District employees – I think that he truly understood their value and credentials. Personally, I think Godwin feared that he would lose many of our current TE employees if the District outsourced and, may have been concerned whether he could replace them with the same high standard.

Godwin and I discussed how helpful it would have been for the outsourcing company (in this case STS) to meet with the aides and paras before the School Board meeting. Such a meeting would have given the employees an opportunity to ask questions, voice concerns, understand the benefits, healthcare, etc. etc. School Board and Administration transparency was discussed, with Godwin agreeing that an issue as important as outsourcing needs all options thoroughly vetted, and discussed in public, as part of the decision-making process. Godwin was forthcoming and extremely willing to answer all my questions — his candor much appreciated.

Based on my conversation with Godwin, I am left with many questions including:

  1. If the School Board approves the outsourcing plan on June 17, how is it possible for any outsourcing company to meet the deadline of July 1?
  2. If STS was the preferred vendor offering the best cost-savings to the District, where was CCRES on the ranking?
  3. How does CCRES propose to complete the necessary background checks, etc. within 2 weeks, should they receive the contract?
  4. The Administration is not meeting with CCRES until tomorrow, when will the aides, paras, substitute teachers be given the proposed plan?
  5. When does the School Board intend to explain that STS, the preferred outsourcing vendor has withdrawn their proposal?
  6. Presumably the fee schedule, cost-savings, benefits change with a new vendor, when is the public given this information?

The taxpayers deserve to know what is going on in this District. Where is the leadership of the School District?

Following the last School Board meeting, I sent two emails to School Board president Kevin Buraks. The emails voiced concern on two topics – my opposition to outsourcing of aides, paras and substitute teachers and the issue of intimidation by the Administration towards the employees of this District. My first email ended with the following, “You must lead … the employees of the District deserve your support, they need your help. It is no longer acceptable for District employees to live in fear of their jobs.”

I closed my second email to our School Board president with, “We need governance, we need leadership. To say nothing and to do nothing is not an acceptable solution.”

For the record, there has been no response from Mr. Buraks. Today is Primary Election Day and Kevin Buraks is on the ballot seeking re-election.

Share or Like:
        
 

TE School District … Intimidation to silence

May 16, 2013
138 Comments

I am not writing today based on an isolated email from a disgruntled school district employee. I wish that were the case. Phone calls, text messages and emails have come to me from teachers, paraeducators, custodians, kitchen workers, support staff and aides all painting an eerily similar picture of the work environment inside our award-winning TE schools.

If you want to control someone, all you have to do is make him or her feel afraid. It appears that the TE School District is now an environment of intimidation with administrators calling for loyalty, demanding public silence and leaving employees fearing for their jobs.

From the outside, the school district appears the image of excellence by any standard – impressive test scores, high achieving students in all areas – academics, athletics and the arts, supportive parents and caring teachers and staff that believe in putting education and students first.

However, those working inside our schools describe an atmosphere far differently … a place of fear and intimidation … a place where our District employees, fearing retribution, do not feel like they have a voice. One poignant email read in part, “We have signs all over about anti-bullying, yet the staff gets bullied.” Another email contained these words, “If you speak out and they (administration) don’t like what you’re saying, and you’re not a ‘yes person,’ then you will literally … you could lose your place there. You could lose your job.” I just read a comment posted on Community Matters that says TENIG employees were rebuked by the Administration for attending Monday’s School Board meeting. If true, this level of harassment must stop. School Board meetings are public meetings and all employees are welcome to attend. There is a policy that only TESD residents may speak at Board meetings with the exception of TENIG and TEEA union presidents.

The TE School District is committed to a safe and civil education environment for all its students that is free from harassment, intimidation or bullying and the same right is extended to all District employees. TESD Policy, Regulation 4330 “Unlawful harassment by and of TESD employees” provides the procedure for an employee to report unlawful harassment to their immediate supervisor, or to the Superintendent of Schools, if the complaint involves that supervisor. But herein lies the problem – if the District employees are scared of the Administration, and fear retaliation and possible loss of their job, how are they supposed to speak out? And where do they take their message?

This discontent between administrators and staff that has led to low morale in the schools did not just begin this week. Although certainly exacerbated by the proposed outsourcing of aides, paraeducators and substitute teachers, there is an unsettling picture that is beginning to surface; a workplace shrouded by fear and intimidation.

The School Board Directors of Tredyffrin Easttown School District need to lead. The taxpayers of this community pay the administrator salaries of the School District and we elected you as the overseers. Now the community is respectfully asking you stop deferring all your decisions to the Administration, and to simply … govern.

Share or Like:
        
 
Community Matters © 2025 Frontier Theme