Problem
The COLLECTIVE BARGAINING AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE SHALER AREA SCHOOL DISTRICT AND FULL-TIME AND PART-TIME SECRETARIES, CLERKS, AND AIDES TEAMSTERS LOCAL 205 (the “CBA”) is negligent in regards to properly handling one-on-one aide assignments for children with special needs.
According to the CBA, an employee with more seniority can bump anyone with less seniority from their position, even if that position is working with a special needs student that requires one-on-one attention throughout their day. Many special needs children have trouble with transitioning. Even the slightest disruption in their daily routine can cause stress and anxiety that not only hurts the child directly affected but can create a distraction for their classmates as well. A policy that routinely replaces an aide that a child has become familiar with, where the aide is in tune with their individual needs, is completely unacceptable in today’s society.
The language in the CBA allowing for this negligence was drafted in the 1970s and is long overdue to be changed.
No one in the school district is in favor of this policy, but the union refused requests to change.

Solution
Issue an amendment to the 5-year contract signed in 2018, that protects against bumping a 1-on-1 aide for a special needs student from their position.

Quite simply, make the quoted language below that is already in the contract NOT subject to being trumped by the bumping policy and seniority. The following is language in the same CBA, but is blatantly disregarded in favor of the bumping policy: “ANY EMPLOYEE AWARDED A PARAPROFESSIONAL BID FOR A ONE-ON-ONE STUDENT WILL REMAIN WITH THAT STUDENT AS THEY TRANSITION FROM GRADE TO GRADE AND BUILDING TO BUILDING. EITHER THE EMPLOYEE OR THE DISTRICT LEADERSHIP MAY REQUEST A CHANGE OF ASSIGNMENT WHEN A STUDENT MOVES FROM BUILDING TO BUILDING TO BE MUTUALLY AGREED UPON BY BOTH PARTIES.” (ARTICLE NO. VII- SENIORITY, Section F. of the CBA)

Personal story
My child is on the autism spectrum and requires a one-on-one aide to be successful throughout her school day. She is in a mainstream classroom for the majority of the day, and transitions to a learning support classroom for core classes.

In 2017, she started kindergarten without a permanent, full-time aide and struggled for the first two months of the school year. It was not until she finally had a full time aide assigned, that she finally settled in and had a great first year of school. She established a good relationship with her aide, and her aide became attuned to her unique needs and behaviors, which proved to be a very successful working relationship.

She was set to begin 1st grade with with her aide in place, which was very fortunate as she was moving to a new school building, however, due to the thoughtless policy set forth in the CBA between the Shaler Area School District and the Teamsters Local Union No. 205, the aide that she worked so well with was bumped from her position working with my child.

After being informed of this situation, I reached out to the school district superintendent to voice my frustration and see how the situation could be resolved. I was assured the school would do everything they could to help my child be successful, but that they had to adhere to the policy set forth in the union contract. The district was not happy with the policy either, but nonetheless signed a new 5-year contract with the union in July 2018, without addressing this policy and would not seek a change until the next contract negotiation.

Since a contract was just signed weeks earlier, my next step was to reach out to the union.  I spoke to the recording secretary who was most familar with the contract at Shaler.  He informed me that the bumping language in the contract was from the 1970s and his membership was not interested in changing it (though it was not put to a vote by the entire membership nor was my actual request correctly presented, which was ONLY to not make one-on-one assignments subject to bumping).  I was not asking to remove the bumping policy completely.  My ask was merely to not allow the bumping policy to overrule this section of the CBA: “ANY EMPLOYEE AWARDED A PARAPROFESSIONAL BID FOR A ONE-ON-ONE STUDENT WILL REMAIN WITH THAT STUDENT AS THEY TRANSITION FROM GRADE TO GRADE AND BUILDING TO BUILDING. EITHER THE EMPLOYEE OR THE DISTRICT LEADERSHIP MAY REQUEST A CHANGE OF ASSIGNMENT WHEN A STUDENT MOVES FROM BUILDING TO BUILDING TO BE MUTUALLY AGREED UPON BY BOTH PARTIES.”

As the school year was soon approaching, and realizing no change was going to happen prior to the first day of school, we prepared our child for the new school year as best we could.  She visited her new school twice and even had the opportunity to meet her new aide before the first day of school.  There were some minor bumps in the road as her new aide became accustomed to her needs and wants and how she communicates.  Now, after 2.5 months of school, with multiple aides shuffling positions throughout the district, my child is now without a permanent one-on-one aide during a 20-day trial period.  She may have a new aide before the end of the calendar year, but even if she has someone new assigned to her, the bumping can begin again and disrupt her learning environment all because of an out of date policy that totally ignores special needs children.  There are numerous other children dealing with the effects of this negligent policy as well.  These children have enough obstacles to deal with to try to stay on pace with their peers, the last thing they should need to worry about is a union contract from the 1970s.  Children should come first.