First, let me reiterate what I have said before, that I am all for all our School District’s teachers in the classroom, but much less so for the union now representing them.
I would like to comment on the yellow “informational” sheet that David Mielke, the president of the Culver City Federation of Teachers, president, handed out at last week’s special meeting.
My concern is with the latest description of the 1 percent raise that the certificated employees received last year.
I was there in the audience when Mr. Mielke got up and, with what seemed like true amazement, thanked the School Board and District Administration for their 1 percent raise.
He admitted that the union had gone into negotiations that year not really expecting anything in the way of an increase in teachers' salary. He, as a union representative, truly seemed genuinely appreciative.
Now, a year later,and in the midst of bargaining for a new contract, it seems the union’s public “appreciation” of the past, unexpected 1 percent windfall, has somehow now depreciated in value.
If this was such a “sub-standard raise,” as it is now being portrayed, why didn't the union leadership reject it outright and hold out for more?
Either Mr. Mielke called on his many talents as an actor to play the part of the appreciative union leader when he really was not or what was printed in the handout was a distortion of the past, a ploy, in order to gain some advantage in this year’s salary negotiations with the School District.
What Savings? Where?
The handout states that the teachers are already saving the district $767,000 annually by taking/settling for the “substandard” 1 percent raise and thereby they have already given their fair share in salary cuts. The fact is the School Board gave the certificated employees an unexpected 1 percent raise. The Union did not take or settle for 1 percent.
My question to the Union leadership is ,
What $767,000 are they talking about?
What $767,000 did the Teachers Union save the District last year when the District did not even have $767,000 to be saved in the first place?
I Know It When I See It
As union president, Mr. Mielke keeps himself very well informed about District matter.
He could probably run circles around anyone in community, including me, using District facts and figures to prove any union point he chooses to make.
But I know propaganda when I see it.
This section of the handout is pure double-speak. It is a blatant misrepresentation of the facts as I know them to be. I was there.
In these extraordinary times of state-forced budget cuts, the Teachers Union should be coming together with other employee groups in the District in search for an equitable budgetary solution for all.
The union should not be engaging in isolating itself and its members from the inevitable cuts that are coming.
If I were a teacher, I would be ashamed to be associated with an organization for using such a divisive tactic, even if it was being used for my future benefit.
Mr. Laase, a Culver City parent, may be contacted at Gmlaase@aol.com
