Carpenters and union members press Inglewood Unified to revive PLA; teachers allege pay‑practice changes violate contract

Multiple union speakers used the public‑comment portion of the Aug. 6 Inglewood Unified School District board meeting to press the board to renew an expired project labor agreement (PLA) and to argue that local hiring and apprenticeship pathways provide long‑term community benefits. Separately, certificated staff representatives raised concerns that a district memorandum on extra‑duty and per‑diem assignments departs from past practice and could amount to an unfair labor practice.

John LaFoya, a union carpenter, told the board that a renewed PLA would prioritize local hire and job quality: “Renewing the project agreement is not just a vote for efficiency. It's a vote for equality,” he said. Dozens of other speakers—apprentices, journeymen and community members—gave personal testimonials about training, safety and career pathways that, they argued, PLAs support.

Speakers described how PLA‑linked programs sent local residents into career tracks with union wages and benefits, helped reduce recidivism and supported apprenticeships that feed into the local construction workforce. Carpenter apprentice Brianna Dorsey said extending the PLA would let local workers “build and earn money in a city in our backyard,” citing the practical need to work close to family.

On a related labor front, Aben Gissa, a union member and past ITA president, said a district memo on certificated extra duty and per‑diem assignments was distributed without union consultation and “materially alters long standing practices regarding compensation,” alleging it violates the collective bargaining agreement. “This memo ... violates both the spirit and the letter of the collective bargaining relationship,” Gissa said, adding that some teachers told him they had been promised per‑diem pay but were told they would be paid a flat $40 rate.

Ava Engisa reiterated the claim, invoking state labor law and saying the memo’s changes to after‑school and summer assignment pay are inconsistent with contract terms and past practice; she described the situation as an unfair labor practice and urged corrective action.

Board members acknowledged the concerns and several said they would follow up. One board member asked staff for additional documentation and said she would pursue clarification by email rather than extend the meeting. The board did not vote on the PLA or on the labor claims at the meeting; members asked staff to bring related materials for further review.

The meeting record shows active community engagement on local hiring and compensation policy; no formal grievance or legal filing was recorded in the transcript during the meeting, and the board concluded public comment before adopting consent items and adjourning at 6:32 p.m.