All Burlington public schools will be closed Thursday as 400 city teachers begin a strike.
The announcement came after the Burlington Education Association and the Burlington School Board negotiated for nine hours Wednesday in a final effort to avoid a strike.
The board said the union rejected a three-year contract that offered 2 percent raises each year for an average total raise of $6,000 during the life of the contract. The union said it compromised on some of its salary and health care requests, but not on schedule changes, particularly for elementary school teachers.
The labor dispute will put roughly 3,600 students out of school.
Each side blamed the other for the breakdown.
The board claims it wants to work collaboratively with teachers to address uneven student achievement, but their actions say otherwise, BEA president Fran Brock said in a press release.
“Today, they had an opportunity to work with us to address the achievement gap in our elementary schools. They did not take that opportunity,” she said. “They had an opportunity to work with us to stem the exodus of teachers by reaching a deal that attracts and retains the best for our city’s students. They failed to do so. And they continued their years-long quest to institute top-down approaches that do nothing for our students.”
A strike originally was scheduled to begin Wednesday, but the sides agreed to negotiate instead. A school board statement said teachers made new demands at Wednesday’s session with mediator Ira Lobel.
“The board entered the bargaining session today understanding the primary obstacle to settlement was resolving operational issues at the high school. These issues were resolved early in today’s session. Subsequently the BEA brought additional demands,” the statement said.
It’s unclear how long the strike will last. The two sides barely averted a strike last year and ultimately agreed on a one-year contract. But the board imposed working conditions on the teachers after an agreement this year on a new contract could not be reached.
Related Stories
Got something to say?
Send a letter to the editor and we'll publish your feedback in print!
Hard to imagine the outcome if both parties did NOT have the best interests of kids at heart.
Every business in America runs on a top down approach, I.e. the supervisor manages the employee. Ms. Brock seems to think she is the boss.
Every business in America runs on a “top-down” basis, I.e. the employer manages the employee. Ms. Brock seems to think she is in charge.
I didn’t know that schools were bonafide businesses. I know Betsy Devos is the Secretary of Education but I certainly wasn’t aware that Vermont schools are already privatized.
$86 million/3600 students = $24,000/student.
Can someone please explain why we can’t fire these ungrateful greedy teachers and hire replacements? Every time the School Board buckles because the teachers are fine striking, they know they’ll get paid after the strike and they make so much money that they can afford to strike. I’d be happy to volunteer to teach the kids for free until replacements are found.
Since the two percent raise isn’t enough for them, please just fire them or negotiate a contract where a teacher can be fired. What a concept!
Seems liked they go through this every year, teachers are money hungry and don’t take the kids into consideration about them having to make the days up during vacation, they could have had a strike before school started but they don’t think of things like that!! I agree they should just fire the greedy ones and hire new ones…
Factoring in the cost of living, Vermont is the third lowest state in the country for what they pay teachers.
Every metric used to measure the education Burlington kids are getting has been decreasing as the salaries of those allegedly teaching them have been increasing.
Since the Statewide test scores have, once again, fallen from last year, NEA logic only dictates that the teachers should be rewarded even more for the defective products they are producing
A serious question – is there anything in the contract with the teachers or state statute that prevents the school board from bringing in replacement teachers while the regular teachers are on strike? That would definitely level the playing field if the teachers couldn’t hold the students and parents hostage by striking.
It has been illegal for teachers to strike in NJ since the late 1970’s and we have managed to develop very successful school districts. I cannot express how relieving it is to know that I never have to deal with this every time a contract negotiation comes up. This can be done in VT without the loss of qualified teachers and decrease in educational outcome. By not worrying about a strike I know that all stakeholders can have year long relationships that only improve the teaching environment. Look at the divisiveness, anger, frustration, this outdated system generates year after year.
Jim M., you cannot blame the teachers for falling test scores. The demographics in Burlington have changed dramatically in recent years, with a large influx of legal immigrant refugee families. These families generally highly value education but there is a language barrier and the standardized tests assume native fluency in English. Not that there’s anything wrong with that; immigrants should learn English as part of the assimilation process. But it doesn’t matter if an immigrant has been here 10 years or just got off the proverbial boat yesterday – the standardized tests are administered at same time each year. This doesn’t mean the legal immigrant refugee children are not intelligent or hard-working but it does mean increased failing test scores.
Also, Burlington generally attracts many lower income demographics because it is the only place in Vermont and the North Country with significant social and nonprofit/charity supports. Charities funded by donations and subsidized by tax dollars distributed from Montpelier help these organizations offer free meals (Red Cross; Food Shelf); free food/groceries; free housing (COTS); subsidized housing (although some other communities provide subsidized housing); discounted, subsidized internet not available to middle class; etc. Certainly not always the case but lower income demographics sometimes have family stability and mental health issues that can challenge child development, and thus lead to lower test scores.
You will see high test scores from elite private schools where politicians send their children in Washington, DC, such as Episcopal Academy or Sidwell Friends, which have very token populations of the above demographics. You may see higher test scores in South Burlington or Essex, which has some of these demographics, but less overall. You may see lower test scores in Winooski, which has similar demographics to Burlington. It does not mean there are not a lot of great teachers in Winooski.
Teachers are not gods and have to work with the student population in front of them. They cannot control family history. It is what it is.
I don’t disagree with this reason for falling test scores. This underscores the need for the administration to manage teachers’ time.
Unfortunate. Would Superintendent have been more invested in encouraging the School Board to find a resolution if he actually lived in Burlington and enrolled his own children in Burlington schools? Instead of misrepresenting during job interview that he would comply with decades of Burlington law requiring department heads to live in the city? And then, after accepting job, moving to South Burlington, enrolling his own children in highest-paying district in Vermont?
Preventing this exact scenario was the reason for decades of the residency requirement and why Burlington voters rejected its proposed elimination at the ballot box repeatedly. For accountability, credibility and investment for decision-makers in the city. So they would personally live by and be impacted by their own decisions. Yaw Obeng’s family did not have to scramble for child-care this AM.
Instead of holding Superintendent accountable for his misrepresentation, City Council chose to go around the will of the voters and weakened the residency requirement. Magically making “must live in Burlington” = live anywhere in Chittenden County.
At least immigration shenanigans seem over for now. Obeng and District lawyers misrepresented to immigration authorities that reason he was coming to the US from Canada was to work as adjunct professor at UVM (and not because he was hired as Burlington Superintendent). UVM cooperated with this nonsense by conveniently hiring Obeng, after-the-fact, when his original visa application for “extraordinary ability” was rejected. And conveniently, when Superintendent & District needed bailing out, UVM never bothered to even post the position nor consider any other candidate. Obeng now has different, 3-year visa, that expires in 2019, and conveniently has left UVM faculty job that was supposedly primary reason he came to US.
Burlington students certainly learning many different lessons from School Board; Superintendent; and City Council.
There is something wrong on this page, since all I see is gibberish.
The requirement of living in the City of Burlington has merit but hasn’t been followed for a long time. Jeanne Collins lived in Shelburne while she was Superintendent.
Chris S: The proficiency scores are dropping statewide and i doubt it’s the immigrants and free lunch kids who are dragging everyone else down with them. Burlington’s graduate proficiency is abysmal and the rest of the state is terrible. Less than HALF of our graduating students statewide are ‘proficient’ in Math as they are being sent out into the real World; and you know the definition of ‘proficient’ that they are using is likely dumbed down to start with. If i produced a widget with as many inconsistent defects and issues as these kids have with a basic well rounded high school education i would no longer be in business.
Jim M, interesting point. I did not realize it was a statewide problem. My understanding is under budget pressures to fund ESL and special education, Burlington has cut math classes, to the extent that some parents have tried to organize to teach some of the math concepts Burlington no longer is willing to support. Although this will never truly substitute for the eliminated math classes.
What do you think is the cause of this statewide?
So, Burlington has 400 teachers for 3600 students. Each teacher has fewer than 10 students? Classes this small have been proven to have a negative effect on student learning. Average class size is 23-24 students. Why do we have so many teachers on our payroll?
This situation may offer some insight into why a high percentage of Burlington students are doing so poorly on basic proficiencies. The student population shrinks, yet teachers aren’t fired. Why? And the band plays on as we all continue to be smothered by the single-minded greed of BEA and Fran Brock, the chief enforcer of punishment to Burlington students and taxpayers when we don’t meet her demands.
Do Vermonters get what they pay for in the public education monopoly? Consider this:
Vermont student proficiency sees slight drop
https://vtdigger.org/2017/09/13/vermont-st…
It’s a good thing its only a ‘slight drop’ in academic performance. As it is, half of Vermont’s graduating seniors don’t meet minimum standards.
According to Education Secretary Rebecca Holcombe, “[w]e need to support our schools and teachers as they figure out how to support better learning outcomes…”
What? Do we pay other professionals to figure out what they’re supposed to do? Never mind that teachers have been receiving compensation for ‘in-service days’, ‘professional development’ stipends and salary ‘step increases’ for years.
And now they’re going on strike for more pay? Go figure.
Penelope, the normal classroom size is more like 22 to 24. There are other non-classroom teachers for music, art, physical education, etc., although those classes are also generally 22 to 24. In upper grades, class size is generally similar but teachers have more specialization (history; math; science, etc.) The extra teachers for smaller groups are mostly special education and ESL. One-on-one para-educators for special education students. Huge ESL program for the legal immigrant refugee children.
What this suggests is that per student spending is not equal. That what is currently termed “typically developing” students (as opposed to special education students or ESL students) are getting less dollars per student for their education than others. Mary Jay Mullowney posted a figure of $24,000 per student, based on a budget of $86 million divided by 3,600 students. It would be helpful for the District to provide more transparency and explain per student figure for typically developing students; special education students; and ESL students.
I have no idea what the actual break-down is because I am not aware if Burlington School District discloses the true figures. Just making this up but would it be $15,000 per student for 2,400 typically developing students; $35,000 per student for 900 ESL students; and $45,000 per student for 300 special education students?
The special education law and ESL mandates are well-intentioned to try and give every child the opportunity for an education but there is a conflict in that there are only so many dollars to go around.
The ESL cost, and its drain on district resources, is exactly why some Rutlanders were against the Syrian refugees; and they were called callous and racist.
The teachers need a taste of the real world. I know many such as myself who have not had raises in years and see our benefits get smaller and smaller each year. Not to note, our health insurance keeps increasing every year.
No, you teachers need to understand what we the taxpayer faces each year! It is the taxpayer that funds your raises and health insurance at the expense of our own!!!!
No, you need to live our world for a while. So, Burlington, don’t back down and in fact fire each and everyone of them and hire some staff who are motivated which in turn will maybe have high school kids coming out of school who can function!!!!!!
BDS facts to facilitate this discussion:
Average annual compensation for a BSD teacher is $66k per year + $40k in retirement = $116k per year (assumes 30 year employment)
Average annual paid vacation is 12 weeks
Average annual district spend per student is $24k vs. average annual spend nationwide of $13k per student
Note teachers are demanding a 3% raise, however this bumps up retirement pay by 2%,(retirement pay is based on salary last 3 years of service), so the demand is actually for a 5% raise (to $122k average pay)
This is truly getting ridiculous. School closed again on Monday?!! Are you kidding me?! How are the two sides unable to come to a compromise? You had an independent, neutral fact-finder who made final recommendations in August that required compromise on both sides and the Board rejected these recommendations. Why have a clause requiring an independent, neutral fact-finder; and then pay the fact-finder with people’s tax dollars if you are only going to ignore them?
The teachers say the final sticking point is paraprofessionals/teaching assistants should do door duty; lunch duty; and recess duty. The Board says the teachers need to do all 3 because the teachers know the kids best and can spot escalating bullying. General classroom para’s that are not assigned 1-on-1 to special ed. kids often know the kids well too. Make a compromise. Teachers do recess duty; and para’s do door duty and lunch duty. This really is not rocket science!
Won’t someone please think of the children.