Are we overstaffed?  Well, the easy answer is yes.  The problem is it may be an easy answer, but it is not a simple answer.  A better question would be why are we overstaffed?  There are lots of reasons, and it’s important that we talk about them.  As we examine the possibility of furloughs, and face an uncertain and ever changing budget challenge thrown at us from the state, people are scared.  Scared people sometimes make decisions based on fear.  According to Dorothy Thompson (American Journalist, 1893-1961), “The most destructive element in the human mind is fear.”  Very true.  So let’s make decisions based on facts instead.

I received an email a week or so ago that caused me some distress.  This person said that if the district had been so ‘irresponsible’ as to over-hire, then those new hires should be the first to go BEFORE we considered any furloughs or further cuts.  During this year, because of the budget concerns, I’ve probably received only three such emails/comments.  Some would say not to worry; it’s not even a statistically viable number, given that we have almost 5000 employees.  BUT where there is smoke there is fire.  That’s why I’m addressing the question. 

First:  We didn’t over-hire.  This year (Fall 2009) we hired 32 teachers.  That’s it.  32.  Of those 32, ten were Special Ed teachers and 17 were secondary.  Five were hired for elementary. 

If – and I want to stress IF—we were to have to lay off teachers, it would be more than 5.  It would be more than 32.  Considering the very specific and strict laws governing the necessary certifications for Special Ed teachers, if we laid off the ten we hired, we’d have to hire them right back to remain compliant with the services we provide to the students we serve.  Secondary education is also an area where specific qualifications are required.  Je parle un peu français, but I sure couldn’t teach it…so we have to hire for positions that we don’t already have qualified folks around to fill. 

Laying-off teachers is something that is outlined clearly in California Ed Code.  Section 44955(b) states in part:  “…when in the opinion of the governing board…it shall have become necessary…to decrease the number of permanent employees in the district, the governing board may terminate the services…of the certificated employees, permanent as well as probationary.”  It goes on to say “…the services of no permanent employee may be terminated under the provisions of this section while any probationary employee, or any other employee with less seniority, is retained to render a service which said permanent employee is certificated and competent to render.”  Translated into plain English, that means that seniority is a factor when layoffs are considered.  However, NCLB compliance and proper credentials are also considered, and in section (c) it says “The governing board shall make assignments and reassignments in such a manner that employees shall be retained to render any service which their seniority and qualifications entitle them to render.”  Administrative transfers would be absolutely necessary and appropriate if this were to come to pass.  People often think that it is the union that dictates how lay-offs are done; not so.  The process is spelled out completely and concisely in Ed Code.

So, getting back to the 32 we hired…based on the statement in Ed Code that a teacher “is retained to render a service which said permanent employee is certificated and competent to render” under a lay-off situation, I’d have to say most of those 32 new hires would very likely be staying right where they are.

Second:  The state changed the rules.  We originally staffed our elementary schools following the 20-1 ratio in 1-3 grades, under the Class Size Reduction (CSR) rules.  The state mandate penalized schools that did not follow those guidelines, and the penalty was huge.  However, the state changed the mandate and the penalty/funding structure of CSR.  With the new flexibility, we were no longer obligated to keep the class sizes at the absolute cap of 20.   The restructuring of our class sizes created an overage of teachers that we hadn’t planned for.   CUSD had made staffing decisions based on the facts available at the time, and then the facts changed. 

There are no easy answers.  These are difficult times.  Pointing fingers won’t solve the problems.  Offering sacrificial lambs won’t save the rest of us.  I’ve heard the story many times, of how Doc brought everyone into the Clovis High Gym and said if things got bad, they’d all turn off the lights, lock the doors and go home…together.  In an email which I shared with the Senate, Dr. Cash stressed the importance of not pitting employees against each other.  I sent an email to the senators last week, in which I said, “Many other districts will simply release teachers to balance their budget.  In the grand scheme of things, that’s the easy way to do it.  We are committed to doing it the hard way, if you will, and that means we need to be realistic about the sheer magnitude of the problem.”

It’s a crazy world…stick together out there.

—-LisaMarie