NFT responds to ‘CR’ proposal with questions
LANGHOoNE - The Neshaminy Federation of Teachers on Sept. 13 called the district’s responses “startlingly incomplete” regarding its newest proposal based on the “Council oock contract.”
In a press release to the media, the NFT said that either the school board does not understand the provisions of the Council oock contract, or that it is simply unwilling to give NFT members key information on its contents and said the district’s “engaged in a massive exercise of obfuscation, misdirection and obstruction.”
Negotiating teams for the NFT and the school district met Sept. 13 for contract talks. The focus of the session was the board’s responses to numerous, key questions the union had submitted on Sept. 12 regarding the district’s latest “Council oock contract” proposal.
NFT President Louise Boyd said, “I am deeply disappointed to say that the district’s responses were so vague and unclear that they shed no light on most of our members’ key questions about this offer.”
On Sept. 13, the NFT negotiation team said it provided the school board a list of 44 “straightforward” questions concerning provisions of the Council oock contract.
Boyd said, “For obvious reasons, we sought clarification with respect to the monetary and non-monetary terms and conditions of the Council oock contract so that we could accurately inform our members accordingly.”
The questions, which had been compiled from issues raised by the membership concerning the offer’s impact, were clear, concise and relevant, said Boyd.
The responses by the district, however, were “startlingly incomplete and ambiguous. In what can only be characterized as a sign that the district does not consider their ‘Council oock offe’” to be a serious and viable alternative toward settlement, the Board failed to provide any sensible or coherent responses requested by the NFT, said Boyd. Instead, she said the district provided a series of responses in which it failed to directly answer any questions.
Boyd said, “nuestions that elicited a simple ‘yes or no’ response were met with answers so convoluted that they provided no clarification whatsoever. As a whole, the responses provided by the district were essentially worthless.”
NFT sice President Anne Schmidt said, “Perhaps the most obvious indication of the District’s insincerity is the fact that they were unable to provide any information regarding potential costs and savings of their offer. We were simply shocked to learn that the District made the offer without even costing out the contract.”