Negotiations vs. District's Vision

Before the negotiation process ever begins in a school district, both sides need to step back and think about what is truly their mission. Ultimately, it should focus squarely on the shoulders of its students in the district. The students often seem to get lost in the shuffle when both sides have heated and often contentious debates. Often the debates become personal and both sides have difficulty backing down because it may show that they are not staunchly protecting their respective group.

In my small district, although I wasn't part of the negotiating team, I often heard the petty arguments that came from the previous night's negotiation meetings. I thought to myself, 'If those teachers put that much passion into the classroom, we would be a School of Promise on annual basis.' Don't get me wrong, I respect our negotiation team for standing up for us, but it all comes down to priorities. What can be done to accommodate the adults that will not have a detrimental effect on the education of our students. The one area I told our negotiaton team to be passionate about is the retention of new teachers. We've had a problem about keeping new teachers, and this turnover rate hurts the continuity in the classroom. A huge way students can connect with teachers is through their interactions at school, building up that trust. Seeing the same teachers each year and talking to them at school builds this trust. If students feel that they can trust the adults, they will likely perform better in the classroom. With a high turnover rate among the newly hired staff, that trust factor is difficult to establish, especially in my district which is comprised of nearly one-half Native Americans.

So how could the negotiation process be beneficial? It all centers around collaboration - both sides sharing a common vision and not letting the process get personal. I know it's difficult to establish, but the negotiating team should be a good representation of the staff in the district (male/female, younger/older, etc.). This would the first proactive measure taken. If you have one member who has a particular "hot button" issue, they will be virtually useless to the negotiation process. If you can select members that would be interested in the totality of education, especially the importance of putting students first in the negotiations, that would be a great starting point.

I've always felt that transparency is the only way to conduct negotiations. If the opposing side thinks you're hiding something, the stakes will simply get higher, and they'll dig their heels into the the ground a little deeper. If you can be honest about the issues and not try to pass an issue through by skirting the truth, it will help streamline negotiations and result in fewer people getting their feelings hurt. Hopefully, this will result in a better education for all the students.