Settlement ends teacher pay disputeFew happy with contract, butall pleased discussion is over

Teachers say they are also upset that as one of the conditions of the settlement, they must acknowledge that the district will need to make program cuts next school year because of financial shortfalls.

Many say they voted for this contract because they thought it was the best one they could get.

"We're happy that we got something but nobody is happy about the whole thing," said one Foster City elementary teacher who wished to remain anonymous. "We felt that we couldn't get much more than the negotiating team. It was going on and on and we weren't going to get money. The money would get spent."

"I think that there's some people that agreed because they felt like they didn't really have a choice. A lot of people are still unhappy with it," said Nancy Hammer, a Baywood Elementary School teacher who has led past negotiations as the former teachers' union president.

Contract negotiations opened last May when the state handed down $3.9 million in one-time funding, part of which the district earmarked for salary increases. Teachers held out for a 10.3 percent raise throughout the fall, demanding that district officials recognize that anything less will mean more loss of staff to neighboring school districts.

A week before a tentative agreement was reached in late January, teachers were poised to work only to contract, which meant that they would limit their working hours to the seven and a quarter hours spelled out in their contract. Some teachers began to think about a possible strike -- the first one since the early 1980s.

Meanwhile, district officials held firm to their offer of a 3.5 percent raise for teachers, support staff, and administrators, saying that anything more would put the financial security of the district in trouble and require heavy program cuts.

The final agreement has teachers and the district meeting halfway.

Many on both sides agree that now that the teachers' salary negotiations are over, it is time to mend fences and move on.

"Now we can get on to other things that are equally as important. I'm glad both negotiating teams did a wonderful job under difficult conditions, putting together an agreement that's acceptable for the board and staff -- and I'm excited about that," said Superintendent Rick Damelio.

"Now we have to find ways of coming together and working as a unit towards the ultimate goal of educating children," said one teacher.

But many also say that the wounds are still open and there are still struggles coming up -- like decisions about what programs to cut.

Teachers have been adamant that they do not want cuts that will hit close to the classrooms, but Damelio has made no public comments yet about what programs he will recommend to the board on March 1 to go on the chopping block. In past years discretionary funding for classrooms and support-staff jobs were proposed for cuts.

"I'm glad that it's been accepted but we still have a lot of hard work ahead of us because we still have to deal with the superintendent who has his priorities messed up. We still have to convince him that people should come before programs," said Jim Remington, president of the San Mateo Teachers Association.

Remington added that teachers are also facing the decisions of two board members, Georgia Helthall and Jack Coyne, who they consider to be "anti-teacher" and will be influential in determining program cuts during the budget-review process.

And although negotiations are over for now, teacher contracts could be open again as soon as October because they expire in June 2002.

<