Teachers, union leaders press Mount Diablo Unified board for fair contract and smaller class sizes

A chorus of teachers, bargaining-team leaders and community members told the Mount Diablo Unified School District Board of Education on Aug. 27 they want a stronger contract that reduces class sizes and increases pay and supports for specialist staff.

Speakers at the public-comment portion — including classroom teachers, long‑time district employees and the co‑chair of the Mount Diablo Education Association (MDEA) bargaining team — described large class sizes (reports in testimony ranged up to 37 students for some secondary classes), growing caseloads for nurses, counselors and speech‑language pathologists (SLPs), and routine unpaid work on special‑education documentation. Several speakers cited a district reserve figure of $213,000,000 when urging the board to allocate more toward classrooms rather than outside contractors or communications firms.

MDEA co‑chair Julia Jamieson said the union asked the district to add contract language guaranteeing “a respectful working environment that is free from discrimination, bullying, harassment, and intimidation,” and that the district has repeatedly rejected that language. “If you are aware that your team has repeatedly rejected this language, what possible reason could you have for denying your educators a contract that protects them from bullying, harassment, and abuse?” Jamieson said.

Teacher speakers gave personal examples. Stacy Florsheim, speaking for a local chapter, urged the board to negotiate “reduced class sizes” that the chapter recommended after summer observations. Eric Clifton, a 24‑year district teacher, described long careers in the district and said teachers deserve “a fair contract” and respect for their work. Several speakers asked that special‑education staff be compensated for completing Individualized Education Program (IEP) paperwork outside classroom hours.

Union representative Melissa Ortega told the board that schools built or renovated last year still lack some ceiling tiles; that desks, bookshelves and window coverings remain unpaid for at some sites; that not all classrooms are cleaned daily; and that some kindergarten teachers were being asked to administer a new assessment without formal training. Ortega criticized use of outside vendors and described the district’s communications and outside‑lawyer spending as priorities that appear to come at the expense of classroom needs.

Some commenters identified specific contract details: one speaker said the district’s latest proposal included 2.3% in the first year with a possible reopener in later years and an employee medical contribution split referenced as “eighty/twenty” during testimony. Another speaker said aides were offered $1 an hour to help with toileting under a new MOU, calling that amount below the poverty line.

Superintendent Thomas Clark addressed some budget questions during his superintendent’s report later in the meeting, saying roughly 90% of the district’s budget is for salaries and benefits and that the district is working to remain fiscally solvent while bargaining in good faith with multiple employee units. Clark said the district has retained outside counsel for bargaining historically because of the scale of the opposing association’s resources and defended certain communications spending as a tool for broader transparency and community engagement.

Why it matters: Teachers and specialist staff told the board they perceive classroom working conditions and pay as insufficient to recruit and retain educators. Those issues influence instruction, special‑education supports and school climate across the district’s 55 schools.

Discussion and direction: Speakers repeatedly asked the board and superintendent to prioritize classroom staffing and to return to bargaining with improved offers that address class size, compensation and working conditions. The board did not take action on bargaining terms during the meeting; bargaining remains with district negotiators and MDEA.