Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Evaluations And Grievance Process topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Negotiators trade data requests over evaluation rubrics and representation in improvement-plan meetings
Summary
Bargaining teams discussed whether certain specialty evaluation rubrics should be included in the negotiated agreement and whether a union representative (KNEA) may file grievances on behalf of employees; the district agreed to provide rubrics and historical data dating back to 2017 for further review.
Negotiators spent substantial time clarifying which staff groups are evaluated under contract rubrics and which use separate specialty evaluation forms, and they debated language that would allow a union to file grievances on behalf of individual employees.
The association asked why the adapted physical-education evaluation was included in the contract while rubrics for social workers, counselors and instructional coaches remain separate. District negotiators said they would compile and provide the missing rubrics and fix broken staff-site links so the parties could compare forms not currently in the agreement. District staff said they could search records back to 2017 for nonrenewals, probationary renewals and any improvement-plan-based actions and would share those data.
On article 20 (representation during improvement plans), the association proposed that any professional employee placed on an improvement plan may bring a bargaining-unit representative of their choice to the initial meeting and to the final meeting reviewing the outcome; the proposal said the five-day written-notice requirement would not apply to the initial and final improvement-plan meetings and required a 24-hour notification of the named representative.
District negotiators expressed caution about allowing KNEA to file grievances on behalf of employees (article 9). They said automatic third-party grievance filing could remove an individual employee's choice about whether to file, while association negotiators said fear of retaliation sometimes prevents employees from filing and that union representation can be necessary in those instances. The association declined to give public examples of such cases to protect confidentiality but said there were recent instances motivating the request.
Both sides agreed to share requested rubrics and data and to reconvene with more information rather than adopt immediate language changes.
