George Springer, Administrator, Washington Teachers’ Union
Superior Court Declaration asking for injunction against DCPS for withholding teachers’ raises
July 11, 2003

DCPSWatch Home

Major Areas
DC Public Schools
Special Education
State Education Office
Vouchers
WTU

Calendars
Board of Education
School Year

Columns
Ron Drake
Erich Martel
Nathan Saunders

Directories
Schools

Letters

Links

Organizations
Parents United
Proposition 100%

Press

Search

DCWatch Home

AMERICAN FEDERATION OF STATE, COUNTY AND MUNICIPAL EMPLOYEES, AFL-CIO, DISTRICT COUNCIL 20, and its LOCAL 2921 and WASHINGTON TEACHERS' UNION LOCAL 6, AMERICAN FEDERATION OF TEACHERS, AFL-CIO, plaintiffs, 

V. 

DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA PUBLIC SCHOOLS and DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA BOARD OF EDUCATION and PAUL VANCE, SCHOOL SUPERINTENDENT, Defendants. 

Civil Action No. 03ca005031

I, George Springer, in lieu of an affidavit as permitted by 28 U.S.C. $ 1746, declare as follows,

1. 1 am the Administrator of the Washington Teacbers Union, Local 6 of the American Federation, of Teachers, AFL-CIO ("WTU") My duties as Administrator include responsibility for administration of the collective bargaining agreement between WTU and the D,C. Board of Education ("Board").
2. On April 1, 2003, the Board issued a "Proposed and Emergency Rulemaking" to amend Sections 1113.5 and 1113.9 of Title 5, Chapter 11 of the DCMR having to do with compensation of D.C. Public School ("DCPS") employees. The rulemaking freezes step increase raises and the accrual of service credit towards future step increases.
3. The Board has justified its rulemaking on a financial emergency, It is my understanding that at least part of this financial emergency is one which has been facing the Board since the fall of 2002 when the Mayor of the District of Columbia directed the Board to cut $30 million from its budget, The Board took few to no measures to make the budget cuts until close to the end of the school year.
4. I attended a public meeting of the Board on April 16, 2003. At this meeting, I noted on the record the WTU's concern and objection to the Board's Rule to freeze stop increases.
5. WTU and the Board are parties to a collective bargaining agreement which is currently in effect, with an effective date of October 1, 2001, to September 30, 2004. A copy of the collective bargaining agreement is attached as Exhibit A.
6. The contract is signed for the Board by Peggy Cooper-Cafritz, President of the Board.
7. As set forth in the collective bargaining agreement, WTU is the exclusive collective bargaining representative for DCPS employees in two occupational units: (1) all full-tine and part-time employees who work at least one-half time in the following job classifications; attendance officer, audio-visual coordinator, child labor inspector, counselor (elementary school), counselor of Education, The Council of the District of Columbia approved the contract as (secondary school), curriculum development specialist, hearing therapist, job coordinator, librarian (elementary school), librarian (secondary school), placement counselor, pupil personnel worker, psychiatric social worker, reading specialist, school psychologist, school social worker, speech and language pathologist, teacher (elementary school), teacher (secondary school), junior ROTC instructors (holding at least a bachelor's degree); and (2) and all full-time employees in the following job classifications: counselor, education technician, guidance counselor, instructor, teacher (adult education), teacher (bilingual education), teacher (secondary education), teacher (special education), teacher (vocational education), teacher coordinator, training instructor, training specialist, vocational rehabilitation specialist, junior ROTC instructors (without a bachelor's degree).
8. Article XLI "Compensation" of the collective bargaining agreement provides for within-grade salary increases at specified intervals for employees covered by the contract. Article KU specifically states at paragraph E that "[e]mployees will advance on the pay scale up to and including Step 7 upon receiving a rating of `meets expectations' or better for the previous year."
9. WTU has an ongoing collective bargaining relationship with DCPS in which they are supposed to address day-to-day issues like discipline, as well as larger systemic issues such as contract interpretation and compensation. In fact, Article XXXIII of the collective bargaining agreement states that DCPS agrees to meet at least monthly with the WTU "to discuss school policies and problems relating to the implementation of the Agreement."
10. Neither CPS nor the Board ever approached WTU about re-negotiating compensation or to give WTU any advance notice of the rulemaking to deny employees their step increases and service credit.
11. The Board's adoption of its rulemaking denying employees their step increases and service credit is causing severe harm to the collective bargaining process which requires mutual trust in the parties' willingness to enter into and be bound by their agreements. WTU's confidence in the good faith and sincerity of the commitments of the Board and DCPS are greatly undermined because the Board maintains it has the right to nullify its contractual commitments by the simple expedient of administrative rulemaking.
12. The Board's actions also have the effect of undermining WTU's credibility in the eyes of the employees it represents because it makes WTU appear unable to deliver the wages and benefits which should be binding on the Board and DCPS by contract.
13. In my experience with DCPS, if DCPS is permitted to implement the wage freeze, it will be impossible to later restore the status quo if the Court finds that the Board's rulemaking is unlawful. DCPS is an agency that is plagued with persistent difficulties in maintaining current and accurate personnel records, and I believe it will be impossible for DCPS to correct step increases freezes if they are implemented for anytime longer than a short while.
14. By way of example of its administrative incapabilities, DCPS has repeatedly cited administrative problems to explain why it has not yet paid the teachers their retroactive raises that were first due October 1, 2002, according to the Board's collective bargaining agreement with the WTU.

I declare under penalty of perjury that the foregoing is true and correct.

Executed on July 11, 2003

George Springer