The Mesa County Valley School District 51 Board of Education is set to begin its annual negotiations with the Mesa Valley Education Association (MVEA) at the start of May, but the groundwork of these negotiations will be discussed at tonight’s business meeting at R-5 High School.
The school district’s share of the MVEA president’s salary will be among the topics of this year’s negotiations, which will take place from May 2-4 with further negotiation sessions on May 10 and May 11 if necessary. However, a discussion on the topic has been added to the agenda for today’s evening at 5 p.m., with both the school board and the MVEA anticipating a substantial teacher turnout.
According to section 8.7.2 (association leave of absence) of the most recent agreement between the school board and the teachers’ union last year, the MVEA president may be granted one half or full-time release from their duties upon MVEA request, receiving salary, insurance and retirement benefits as if they’re a full-time D51 employee. If a half-time release is granted, the MVEA will reimburse the district for the cost of half of the president’s salary and benefits.
It is uncertain whether this discussion will debate the previously agreed-upon contract spanning from 2023-2026 or impact future D51-MVEA agreements.
In a D51 Board of Education document and letter to MVEA forwarded to The Daily Sentinel, it was stated that the board had received information pertaining to an MVEA member survey regarding the board’s request to discuss the salary of the MVEA president — currently Amy Sue Javernick — during this year’s negotiations.
The MVEA survey stated, “We take this as a sign that the D51 School Board seeks to diminish the voice of educators in the valley,” a sentiment the board pushed back on in its letter to MVEA, calling the statement “unfounded, misleading and divisive in nature.”
“The board made the intentions of their request clear through our Chief Human Resources Officer (Nikki Jost), who discussed it with the current MVEA president as early as Feb. 8. Additionally, D51 staff discussed it at professional council on March 25 and assured them this request would not impact the voice of the educators in the valley,” the board’s letter reads.
“It is our understanding that MVEA leadership has opted to refuse discussing this topic with district staff, and has only mentioned that they were already planning on increasing membership dues starting next year, and would have to increase them even more if they had to pay the full amount of the MVEA president’s salary.”
The board’s letter to MVEA continued by stating that organizations such as the MVEA should be independent entities whose leadership roles are funded by their members.
”When the members support the leadership’s salary, it ensures transparency and accountability in decision-making processes and representation. Separation of financial interests allows the leadership to prioritize the needs and concerns of their members. Conflating this position’s compensation with broader issues of educator representation undermines the complexity of negotiation processes and misrepresents the intentions of the board.”
HAITZ, JAVERNICK COMMENT
D51 Board President Andrea Haitz told The Daily Sentinel that the board added the topic to tonight’s agenda after being told that teachers in the MVEA would be present “in force,” adding that the board wants to have a public conversation for clarity’s sake.
“I think what was concerning to us is they keep talking about fighting for their contract, but we’re a little bit confused because we renewed their contract last year and we extended it for three years, which is another confusing point because they’re saying we’re not listening to educators or advocating for educators. If we weren’t for educators, I don’t know why we would have extended the contract,” Haitz said.
“We are for educators. We’ve given them two of the highest raises that they’ve had in the last 30 years in the last two years, so I’m really not sure why they keep bringing up this sort of fear that we’re not for teachers.”
Haitz added that there was a board consensus last year to broach the topic of their financial obligations to the MVEA president, but they decided to wait because of the complicated nature of last year’s negotiations and contract extension.
Javernick provided a statement to The Daily Sentinel on behalf of the MVEA:
“Mesa Valley Education Association and District 51 have been in a strong, collaborative partnership to support the students in our community for more than 50 years. MVEA is and has always been made up entirely of educators who work with and for the students of this valley. Our priority is to advocate for the compensation, benefits, and working conditions of D51 staff while ensuring the high quality education outcomes for our students. MVEA looks forward to continuing this long held collaborative partnership with District 51 through the 2024 negotiations process.”
