The union representing Williamsburg-James City County Public Schools staff wants a collective bargaining process put in place in the division.
But comments made by school board members during a discussion of the topic in early September foreshadow it could be a tough sell.
“It is … very bad timing for our school division,” said Sarah Ortego, board chair.
The board is expected to vote Sept. 17 on establishing a committee that would craft a resolution permitting collective bargaining in the division.
“We began our campaign more than two years ago now,” said Marco Sardi, president of the Williamsburg-James City Education Association.
“We felt strongly that if you want to build a competitive work environment that has a high degree of employee ownership, that increases employee retention and builds a classroom that employees can have real voice in shaping, that collective bargaining was the best way to go through that process.”
The union submitted an affidavit to the school board at the end of May requesting the vote. If approved, it would start the process of establishing collective bargaining for licensed full-time staff – one of the union’s three bargaining units – and detailing what that would look like for the division.
Sardi said the resolution would set the ground rules for what can be discussed during collective bargaining, as agreed upon by the resolution committee.
“A school board (could decide) that you can talk about … things like a defined work day, setting a number of hours that you’re allowed to work, or even something as basic as if you have duties assigned to you at lunch or before or after school,” he said. “You can assign those things to be in the permissible category and say ‘But you can’t discuss specific pay raises.’”
According to the affidavit, 52% of the division’s licensed full-time staff supported collective bargaining. Upon receipt of the affidavit, the school board had 120 days to vote on the matter under Virginia code.
Virginia in 2021 legalized the process of collective bargaining for public employees, including in school divisions. The law does not require public entities implement collective bargaining processes, though, and leaves the crafting of the process up to localities.
As it stands, collective bargaining could be a non-starter for the board. Members expressed concerns ranging from fiscal responsibility to whether they had the public’s mandate to disseminate authority vested in the board.
Board Member Michael Hosang worried it could create an adversarial atmosphere in the division, drawing from his experience with federal personnel.
“I’ve seen … what unions can do, what unions can’t do, how we work with the unions,” Hosang said. “It’s rarely been in a positive light.”
“I don’t see why they can’t sit down with the administration and talk with them, or sit with some of the board members and work through the issues that they have.”
Board member Andrea Donnor questioned whether implementing a collective bargaining process would hinder other avenues of communication with administration in the division.
“Our teachers have good access to the superintendent and to board members,” she said. “If we go to the point of collective bargaining, I feel like those avenues get shut down because we’re only going to talk when it’s time to negotiate something.”
The possibility of the division breaking up – and the financial implications of that – also loomed over the board’s head, further cooling members’ interest in approving bargaining for school employees.
“We still don’t have an answer on what our school division will look like in just a few short years,” Ortego said. “There’s just a lot of uncertainty that we’re looking at right now.”
Not all of the board was against moving forward with a resolution committee. Board Member Randy Riffle was interested in seeing a committee that could work constructively toward a bargaining structure.
“I think this is some of our workers saying something to us, and we are not giving them maybe the best chance to go about this because it’s just not the right time or it’s going to be really hard for leadership,” he said. “We were elected to do tough things.”
Much of the board, including Amy Chen, also supported exploring a more robust employee input process should the majority reject collective bargaining on Sept.17.
“If we’re going to say no, then I feel like we need to offer something where teachers do feel like they have a voice,” she said. “Whether it be an advisory committee or something.”
Sardi was disappointed after the board meeting. He acknowledged and praised multiple avenues of employee input that exist in the division, saying superintendent Olwen Herron and administration in general are very open to listening to their issues.
But Sardi said it’s about more than just input for him and those he represents.
“There’s a difference between being open to feedback and working with someone,” he said. “(Collective bargaining) is a way to share power, and it’s a way to make it a truly collaborative discussion.”
Sardi noted a list of lingering issues that the union hopes could be worked out together in a collective bargaining agreement, including guaranteed on-the-clock planning time for teachers and maximum work hours.
“Our contracts are one page,” Sardi said. “That outlines that I have to come to work a certain number of days, though does not specify how long I have to work on each of those days.”
Sardi said his contract stipulates he is expected to work a minimum of seven hours per day, though may be requested to stay at the request of his administrator and that he shall perform other duties as assigned by the school board.
“Do we need an 80-page contract? No,” he said. “But do we want to be able to define what the job is? Yes, I’m a big fan of defining expectations.”
Sardi described enshrining these terms in collective bargaining agreements as a form of security for the division’s employees, though the specifics of what could be considered in an agreement would be worked out in committee talks.
“(The school board) are lovely people,” he said. “It’s just that there might come a time in which Dr. Herron is not the superintendent, the school board is not receptive … and at that point, what do we do?”
Sardi also couldn’t see putting off collective bargaining until the question of whether the division will separate is answered, noting it could take upwards of four years to resolve if separation moves forward.
“The school board is welcome to, in the (collective bargaining) resolution, simply put if there is a split in the division this is null and void,” Sardi said.
“Change is hard, (but) if this wasn’t worth doing, if we did not believe so firmly that bargaining was in the best interest of the entire community, we would not have gone down this road.”
Note: Williamsburg-James City County Public Schools is a member of the Hampton Roads Educational Telecommunications Association, which holds the broadcast license for WHRO. Multiple members of the WJCC School Board sit on WHRO boards and committees.
