Akron teachers union files fourth unfair labor practice charge this year

Akron Public Schools is facing a fourth unfair labor practice charge from the Akron Education Association in under a year, once again accusing the district of supplanting union jobs with non-union ones.

The union filed the legal action with the State Labor Relations Board on Monday. The charge focuses on one position: a new social worker to assist students in the district's APS Online program, an online-only school for grades 6-12 within the district.

The board approved the creation of the new position in July. Board members then voted 4-2 to fill the role last week during a contentious meeting where they expressed awareness that the union had an issue with the position but confusion over why.

Treasurer and CFO Steve Thompson also received a significant rebuke from a top administration official during the meeting as he attempted to weigh in on the matter.

In a statement Tuesday, sent by APS Executive Director of Human Capital Yamini Adkins, the district called the charge "baseless" and accused the union of standing in the way of students receiving the supports they need.

"The AEA's latest charge is sadly another attempt by the union to interfere with the Board's lawful exercise of its management rights," the statement said.

AEA President Pat Shipe said the union is "all for more supports for kids, especially in the area of mental health," but that "the devil is in the details."

"We continue to believe it's unfortunate that this administration refuses to sit down and have realistic conversations about any number of possible solutions to the challenges that Akron Public Schools faces," Shipe said. "AEA will continue to be open to having collaborative discussions and for offering a path forward to support our students and families."

Unfair labor practice charge alleges APS didn't go through union to create new position

The union's previous charge was filed in October, "after an ongoing and aggressive pattern of anti-union behavior by APS leadership, which seeks to undermine the rights and protections guaranteed to AEA members under the collective bargaining agreement and Ohio law," the association said in a release at the time.

The newest issue, according to the documents filed Monday, alleges the administration did not negotiate with the union to create the social worker position, and also created it as a non-union job.

The documents state the district has to negotiate with the union to add new job codes that are used to hire professional, licensed positions. AEA said that did not happen, and that the social worker job encroaches on the work of school counselors, who are part of the teachers union.

The charge accuses the board and the administration of engaging in "an aggressive and concerning pattern of supplanting AEA union member job position, replacing those positions with nonunion 'gray positions,' non-union 'non-administrative professional' positions, or 'gray non-certified professional' positions."

"These actions are an attempt by the Board to rewrite and/or eliminate CBA protections from their existing positions and create new language without the benefit of negotiations while refusing to recognize AEA as the exclusive, certified representative of its members," the charge states.

APS already has contracts with outside agencies, like Red Oak and Minority Behavioral Health, to bring social workers or other kinds of mental health professionals into school buildings. The AEA agreement allows for social workers to be contracted to work in APS schools. But the district has never hired them directly.

According to the charge, the union's contract states, "the Board shall not replace or displace counselors/counseling positions with social workers and/or other licensed mental health practitioners."

The district in its statement Tuesday used that same sentence as proof that social workers are not part of the union and, if added, should be non-union positions.

"Contrary to the AEA's claims, nowhere in the union contract does it state that social workers are in the bargaining unit represented by the AEA," the statement said. "While there are over 45 specific positions identified in the AEA contract as being within the bargaining unit represented by the union, the position 'social worker' is not one of them."

Adkins' statement said "no counselor or counseling position has been replaced or displaced by the Board's hiring of a social worker."

Shipe, however, called it a "flawed opinion" that just because it's not listed as a position in the agreement means that it would automatically be non-union. She said the union agreement has been updated many times over the years to add new positions to the bargaining unit, as education has evolved to include different kinds of personnel to meet students' needs.

Shipe also said a union worker doesn't have to lose their job for the addition of a new non-union position that conflicts with it to be considered "supplanting."

Social worker position paid for with grant funding

Administrators on Monday said this position was for one year because of APS Online receiving additional Title I funding through a supplemental school improvement grant, meant to help struggling schools improve. The district would have to reapply for the grant next year, but it is not guaranteed.

Administrators said the position would not be continued unless there is grant funding to support it. The social worker is slated to start Dec. 2, which means the year will already be halfway over by the time they get started. The cost is $59,796.64, all to be paid for by the $120,000 grant.

Keith Leichty, the director of school improvement, said the district was allowed to use the money to hire new personnel because it was an add-on to what the Akron Public Schools already offered.

"It's extra," Leichty said. "And that's where the team started looking at how can we work with our staff and the principal and the counselor to bring more of the community and the supports to our kids."

In July, the board approved the creation of the position under a new job code that didn't previously exist. The job description board members approved included a stipulation that the position only be filled through grant money.

Last week's meeting shows confusion over the new social worker position

Two counselors came to last week's meeting to speak out about the position and said it was an example of the administration supplanting union jobs. But board members expressed confusion, asking several times if it had to do with the fact that the position was grant-funded. Administrators said that didn't matter.

Three board members voted to move the matter to a committee meeting to be discussed ahead of the board's next meeting, which is before the social worker's slated start date. But it failed with a 3-3 vote. Board Vice President Carla Jackson was absent.

Board members Rene Molenaur and Barbara Sykes then expressed frustration that they had to come to a full understanding of the position in question within minutes of having to vote.

"It is very difficult for me to come up with a question because this has all happened right now, because it is not in committee," Molenaur said.

Sykes then reiterated the same points.

"There's been some questions brought up by the union, and I think that you know again, we're all in this together and if there is something, for some reason they feel that this is an issue, this is a problem, it seems like having some more discussion on it to try to clear it up would be a reasonable solution for all parties," Sykes said.

At one point, when there was confusion about whether the funding was the reason the position was non-union, Thompson interjected with an answer about the funding, but then continued to try and speak about the union agreement.

"I don't think the question is, where does the funding source come from," he said. "I don't think that’s the question, the question is, a supplant — is it supplanting. So what you cannot do, is take a union position, something that the union holds — and I'm not saying they do or they don't, I don't know enough..."

Thompson was cut off new board member Rev. Greg Harrison, who raised a point of order questioning whether the discussion had veered off-topic.

Moments later, Adkins issued a public rebuke of Thompson from the podium when called up to answer other questions.

"I guess I will just make a statement, there's some things happening here that are a little out of order," she said. "The treasurer talking about a union matter is completely out of order. I don’t know how that happened. But I'm going to say that we have a process, we have contracts here with this district and we have a process to follow to address grievances... That has been happening, that is happening."

Thompson did not return a request for comment Tuesday.

Shipe said the union had filed a grievance in July after the social worker job was posted. She said the first time the union was made aware that the district planned to hire a social worker when it was on the board's agenda to be approved.

Adkins denied the grievance. At last week's meeting, she said the grievance was unrelated to the issue of the social worker.

"What we are bringing to you is not really related to that grievance issue," she said. "That is a matter that we are working through, that we have provided response to and we have a position on, and that is how we will proceed."

The board voted 4-2 to approve the hiring of the social worker, with Molenaur and Harrison voting against it.

This story has been updated with additional information and a response from Akron Public Schools.

Contact education reporter Jennifer Pignolet at jpignolet@thebeaconjournal.com, at 330-996-3216 or on Twitter @JenPignolet.

This article originally appeared on Akron Beacon Journal: Akron teachers union files fourth unfair labor practice charge in 2024