Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Labor Relations topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Union leaders tell Torrance board LMU process has not built districtwide trust; allege surface bargaining
Summary
Representatives from the Torrance Teachers Association, other bargaining units and trade locals told the board they hear regular reports of poor communication, disrespect and bargaining practices they described as "surface bargaining," and urged adoption of professional collaboration tenets districtwide.
Multiple labor and bargaining representatives used the public-comment period to press the board on labor-management relations, bargaining pace and workplace trust.
Carlos analer, identified as president of the Torrance Teachers Association, said union members support professional collaboration but do not feel the Labor Management United (LMU) process has produced districtwide change. "We find that problematic," he said, urging that the LMU's principles be implemented with fidelity across sites.
Sanre Pew (identified in remarks as a chapter president for bargaining unit 845) told the board that negotiations begun last July have made little progress: "We began negotiations in July 24; it's been six months and we are no closer to settling," the speaker said, and accused the district of "surface bargaining" when tentative agreements are later rejected at the table.
Other speakers echoed concerns about disrespect and trust. Mary Beth Barowski, a middle-school TTA executive-board representative, said district collaboration often feels like a box-checking exercise and described administrators asking staff to implement programs without training or resources. Thomas Grant, a district trades worker, described repeated instances in which staff felt dismissed and accused administrators of providing inaccurate information in bargaining.
Speakers requested greater transparency, more consistent adoption of professional collaboration tenets, and fairness in negotiation practices. Board members acknowledged the comments; the transcript records no formal board response or immediate policy action during the meeting. The public-comment period was the main forum in the meeting where these labor grievances were aired on the record.
