Teacher's union denies complicity in 'sick-out'
Some teachers may face disciplinary action

By Christy Scott
The Alpine Sun
     El CAJON — The Grossmont teacher's union has denied that it encouraged hundreds of teachers who were absent from the Grossmont Union High School District last month in what district officials called a “sick-out” to protest stalled contract negotiations.
     Now, many of those teachers are facing disciplinary actions from the district for the unauthorized absence.
     “It seems that the district has chosen to punish every absent teacher, not just those who took part in the sick-out,” said Grossmont Education Association president Bruce Seaman.
     On Monday, April 24, about 300 teachers were absent from GUHSD classrooms, about 200 more than a usual day, said a district representative. The schools that were affected by the numerous teacher absences include Grossmont, Granite Hills, Santana and West Hills high schools.
     "This was an excessive amount of absences in one day,” Grossmont district spokeswoman Catherine Martin said. “The missing teachers will be questioned.”
     Martin said the district required teachers who called in sick to provide a doctor’s note. Those who used personal leave are being required to prove that there was truly an emergency. Teachers who did not comply with the district's orders were told they could face discipline, including loss of pay, for that day and a note in their file.
     "This was an illegal withholding of services," Martin said. "If there is no appropriate excuse for a teacher calling in sick, then they could be written up and be docked a day of pay."
Though GEA officials say a labor strike is still a distant possibility, teachers voted April 28 on how they would make that decision if labor negotiations with the district fail. 
     “We needed to vote to adopt some sort of strike policy,” Seaman said, “75 years in the district and we’ve never needed one.”
     Hundreds of teachers voted whether to allow their union's 60-member representative council to make that decision or hold a vote for all members.
     The vote was 91 percent in favor of allowing members to vote on possible strike actions. 
"GEA will do everything possible to avoid a strike," Seaman said. "It's a sad day that we're being forced to do this by this administration."
     The teachers' union has been critical of the district's efforts to prepare for a strike while a mediator is working to resolve their dispute. District administrators recently held a strike planning meeting.
     GUHSD Superintendent Terry Ryan said the district wants a settlement but must be prepared for the possibility of a work stoppage.
     The April 24 “sick-out,” as it has been deemed, would test the district’s preparations.
"We've been prepared for this kind of activity to ensure students will receive a quality and rigorous and relevant curriculum," Martin said.
     In addition to the 140 substitutes who were hired, vice principals, counselors and teachers who came to work also filled in.
     Martin said the district held the Grossmont Education Association responsible for the absences and claimed that district officials found literature urging teachers not to show up for work.
     "Our teachers union is encouraging teachers to engage in an illegal withholding of services," Martin said. 
     GEA leaders denied any involvement with the absences, describing them as unsanctioned, individual teacher actions. However, the union leaders said they understood the teachers' actions. 
     "They're frustrated at the lack of progress in negotiations," Seaman said. A state-appointed mediator has scheduled a May 19 session to try to facilitate some sort of agreement between the union and the district.
     The Grossmont Education Association, which represents over 1,000 members, has been locked in a labor dispute with the school district since September.
     The teachers union is seeking a four percent pay raise, but the district is only offering a one percent raise. Teachers did not receive a pay raise last year, and have been working without a contract since June 30, 2004, officials said.
     Ryan has repeatedly said the district cannot afford the union's demand for a four percent salary increase and other contract proposals without hurting the district financially.
     He said the union's leaders have refused to participate in the budgeting process where they could recommend which programs could be cut to free up funds to meet their proposals.
                                                        E-mail the editor