Perry Nursery School Accused Of Union Busting

PERRY NURSERY SCHOOL ACCUSED OF UNION BUSTING

by Phillis Engelbert

ANN ARBOR- The Board of Directors (BOD) of Perry Nursery School is engaging in unfair labor practices, including possible union-busting, according to charges filed in May with the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) by the union representing Perry staff workers. District 65, an affiliate of the United Auto Workers (UAW), is accusing Perry's BOD of laying off three workers in April "because of their union activities," not because of economic limitations, as the BOD claims.

Perry Nursery School, located at 1541 Washtenaw, describes itself as "a non-profit, Washtenaw United Way agency for children, ages 2-12 to 6 years of age, from single-parent families in which the parent works or studies full-time. Tuition from parents, as well as a monthly contribution from The Thrift Shop and from interested community members, combines with the United Way allocation to complete Perry's funding arrangements."

The staff of Perry decided to unionize last November in an attempt to more effectively address Perry's financial problems, as well as to address the issue of child-to-teacher ratios, administrative mismanagement, and lack of fundraising. "Working as a pre-school teacher is very stressful work and the wages are very low," according to Perry's union steward Chuck Gattone. "This leads to poor teacher performance. The union is a way of improving conditions for both teachers and kids." District 65 claims that in the states in which it has organized child care centers, it "has been instrumental in pushing through legislation designed to improve the quality of child care and increase funding."

Perry's BOD at first refused to officially recognize the union. A grievance filed in March with the NLRB by District 65 was subsequently dropped when the administration's lawyer, Len Mazor, and the union lawyer made an agreement to drop charges in exchange for a union election to be held by a mutually acceptable third party. Elections were held March 27 and the union was voted in, 11 to 8.

On April 6, a negotiating session was held at which the staff read their 25-page proposal for desired changes to the management. The proposal included: guaranteed jobs, wages, and benefits; more staff representation on the BOD; more money for Perry (through the UAW and lobbying); guaranteed better teacher-student ratio; pay raises and benefits in accordance with seniority; and staff input in hiring new staff. The date for the next negotiating session was set for April 25 but was subsequently cancelled and rescheduled by the BOD for May 10.

On April 22, Liz Gottlieb (a UAW organizer and former Perry teacher) received a letter from Mazor notifying her of the planned layoffs of three Perry staff members, effective April 28.

The laid-off teachers had been working for various lengths of time, and two had seniority over several other teachers. One factor that all three had in common was their support for the union.

On April 25 and April 27, negotiations were held regarding the layoffs. At the first meeting the union representatives presented several proposals. At the second meeting the management rejected each of the union's proposals. They decided to go ahead with the layoffs the following day. They would give each laid-off teacher two weeks pay and job recall rights.

"Due to economic limitations for Perry and over-staffing, it is necessary at this time to lay off part-time staff as of April 28, 1989," said William Oliver (Perry 's current BOD President) in an April 27 memo sent to Perry administration, students' parents, and staff. "The teacher/child ratio for Perry will be at one teacher to six children. The state of Michigan mandates a one teacher to 10 children ratio, so we are well within the given guidelines. . ."Oliver further claimed that the BOD was "mandated by United Way to reduce our staffing costs rather than ask for more funds to maintain our over-staffing situation."

When asked if the United Way had indeed mandated staff reductions, Edward Marsh, Manager of Agency Relations for United Way, denied it. "We just informed Perry Nursery that that statement is in error," he said. "The Board of Directors of Perry runs the agency (Perry Nursery). The United Way does not dictate to its agencies." He then added, "We have notified Perry of our support of the right of its employees to engage in collective bargaining."

Gattone also responded to Oliver's memo of April 27. In a memo to Perry parents, administrative personnel and staff, he asserted, "... we must correct Bill Oliver on the child to teacher ratio, which is the most important issue. Perry will have a total of three teachers assigned to each room, but there will usually be only one or two teachers in a room at any one time. At many points in the day there will be only one teacher in the room, with as many as 18 children. This ratio is in clear violation of Michigan state law." According to Gattone, Perry teachers work in shifts, which, at times, results in an illegal teacher to child ratio.

Gattone and Deb Rosenberg (another of the laid-off teachers) both believe that their layoffs were due to reasons other than economics. "I think that a lol of it has to do with the fact that I supported the union," stated Rosenberg. Gattone concurred, "I believe the layoffs were in retaliation for unionization. There are teachers who they retained who have less seniority than teachers they laid off, but those teachers are anti-union. Because of this they refused to consider any other option."

On April 27, from 5 pm to 6 pm, a rally in support of the laid-off teachers was held in front of Perry. Approximately 60 people including students' parents, teachers, and community members attended. A petition supporting a financial solution for Perry other than layoffs was signed by 25 parents.

On May 6 the union filed charges with the National Labor Relations Board for the second time. The charges against Perry included: laying off employees because of union activities, refusal to bargain in good faith regarding those layoffs, failure lo provide requested budget information to the union, refusal to allow employees to have union representation during their disciplinary interviews, threats to employees regarding union activities, and discriminate enforcement of certain rules, policies, and use of facilities.

Regarding the layoffs, the charge read: 'The employer is well aware of the three employees ' support for the union. . .The personnel policies of the school, which state that in the case of release an employee is to be notified 30 days in advance, were violated in the course of the layoffs. The employees were given no notice."

Gottlieb explained that the union's filings of charges was a "necessary move" that resulted from being backed into a corner. She went on to say that the union wants to help Perry through its financial crisis and to help teachers at the same time. The union members would much rather see all sides cooperating, rather than fighting and that hopefully this can start happening soon, she added.

Mazor, representing Perry, responded to the charges as follows: "I think the school's position will be vindicated. I don't think we've done anything illegal. We've had to make changes for economic reasons."

At press time, the negotiations are continuing. Since the layoffs, two full-time teachers have left. On May 16, a classified ad for a teacher at Perry appeared in The Ann Arbor News. On May 17, Gattone was offered one of the two vacated positions.

Gottlieb is hopeful that progress toward a resolution is being made. "At first they (the management) needed to get used to working with the union. But now, hopefully, they 're starting to realize that we can work together for a contract that's to everyone's benefit," stated Gottlieb. The management also expresses a positive sentiment. 'There's a lot of progress being made toward reaching a collective bargaining agreement" concluded Mazor.

The NLRB enforces the federal National Labor Relations Act. As such, they seek to return situations lo what "they would have been had the charged party not violated the act," according to an NLRB staff person. If the Perry management is found to be engaged in unfair labor practices, they could be ordered to reinstate the laid-off employees with back pay, ordered to bargain with the union, ordered to furnish requested information, and ordered to cease and desist harassing activities. Perry could then appeal any of the NLRB 's rulings in circuit court - the decision could go as high as the Supreme Court on appeal. The NLRB must obtain any orders or injunctions in federal district court.