Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Working Conditions topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Bargaining teams push for clearer discipline procedures, protected planning time and training for support staff
Summary
Negotiators discussed adding protections for teachers' uninterrupted planning time during student contact hours, improving training and reporting pathways for support staff who supervise students, and clarifying teacher access to disciplinary records and the statutory process for requesting a student's removal from a class.
A large portion of the session focused on working conditions for both instructional and support personnel, with negotiators addressing planning time, observations versus evaluations, test administration training, and student‑discipline procedures.
Planning time: Instructional negotiators proposed guaranteeing a minimum of weekly planning minutes during student contact time and preserving a portion of that time for uninterrupted, self‑directed planning. In the draft language shown to the table negotiators asked for preservation of 120 minutes of a 150‑minute weekly planning allotment for self‑directed work during student contact time; participants noted that the proposal will be a difficult lift and asked for further review of schedules and local practice.
Test administration training: Bargaining unit members asked that staff administering state tests receive detailed training at least one week in advance, including instruction on individual testing accommodations. Assessment and accountability staff were asked to review the proposed one‑week language and advise on operational feasibility and exceptions (for emergency circumstances).
Support staff authority, reporting and safety: Support negotiators sought clearer language empowering support personnel who supervise students to report disruptive or dangerous behavior and to receive administrative support when they seek assistance. The draft allows support staff to report to the responsible teacher or directly to administration; negotiators discussed whether support staff should be able to initiate discipline referrals themselves (technical and FERPA/access constraints were raised). The district agreed to verify Skyward/Focus capabilities and to consult Student Services (Mr. Goldsby was identified as the contact) about whether support staff can enter referrals or how a teacher's referral should capture an aide's eyewitness account.
Student arrest notifications: The draft added language to notify staff who regularly supervise a student when the district has knowledge that the student has been arrested for a felony; negotiators asked Student Services to confirm who may receive that information under applicable law.
Other operational items: The parties agreed on separating observations from formal evaluations in contract language and relocating teacher duties such as duty‑free lunch and leaving during the school day into the teaching conditions article. Several clarifications about personnel files and public‑records compliance under Florida statute were also confirmed.
The bargaining teams asked HR and Student Services to follow up on two operational items: (1) confirm whether support staff may file discipline referrals or, if not, how the teacher referral should document the support staff's observation; and (2) confirm legal limits on sharing arrest information and required confidentiality protections.
