Teachers, union leaders criticize board’s move against collective bargaining at Manassas meeting

Several teachers, support staff and union leaders used the May 15 public-comment period to criticize the Manassas City Public Schools board over its April vote to ban collective bargaining and to press members to engage directly with employees.

David Keller, an Osborne High School English teacher who said he recently accepted a position elsewhere, told the board he felt “betrayed” after officials previously encouraged teacher voices but then voted to ban bargaining. "This betrayal hurts," Keller said, and warned that staff departures follow when employees feel ignored.

Anna Demaria, president of the Manassas Education Association (MEA), said the union’s campaign to explore collective bargaining began after several board members indicated support. She said the board moved without adequate discussion and that the April resolution banning collective bargaining was “a preemptive move to silence your employees.” Demaria said the MEA had not completed fact-finding about what members would want in a contract and asked why the board put the item directly on the action agenda rather than on a discussion agenda.

Other speakers echoed concerns about working conditions and accountability. School counselor Shaniqua Williams criticized board silence on alleged racially charged remarks by a member and said the April vote undermined the board’s statements of support for staff. Jordan Herbert, a decade-long teacher in the district, described classroom safety and support shortfalls that nearly caused him to leave and said, “Collective bargaining is how teachers will get the actual support they need.”

Tammy Potts, another teacher and resident, repeated a request first raised at a prior meeting: make work-session recordings public at no extra cost. She also criticized the district’s recruitment of outside legal counsel and questioned potential hires tied to labor relations if bargaining moves forward.

Board members did not take action during the public-comment period; several members later reiterated that they are willing to meet with staff through existing channels and defended the board’s decision to pursue a “meet and confer” approach rather than collective bargaining. The April resolution prohibiting collective bargaining remains a prior action referenced throughout the comments; meeting speakers said staff turnover and morale are concerns going forward.