Christian Golis

4/29/2020

Reflection Paper

The Pinecrest negotiation was very quick, in regard to the situation moving so rapidly.

The study was based on categories that have been shown as a concern to educators. A board of

educators known as The Teachers Association hasn’t solved the main issues of staff, benefits,

salaries, and workloads. Reduction of staff involved eliminating some teacher positions, in order

to achieve a certain ratio goal. Benefits are not reduced, and salary schedules will be altered.

With regard to workloads, educators want to extend the school day by a miniscule time period.

The round two implications were different, and resolutions were resolved in result of speaking

out and engaging in fair and concerning negotiation. With the same concerns and issues,

reduction in staff stayed the same; salaries were not the simplest discussions, due to rules and

regulations across The Board of Teachers. With the concerns of the educators wanting more

income, the board is strongest in regard to procedure and policy, which resulted in hault. Health

benefit negotiations were beneficial to teachers, as they wanted to keep their current providers, as

switching to an alternative (HMO) would possibly consolidate their trust in the firm. Workloads

were brought up as an issue; considerably not the biggest concern, but chiming in at official

board meetings is crucial if wanting to get your matters discussed. Unfortunately, the association

won't budge on this certain issue, due to more rules and regulations enforced. The end result of

the negotiation was fair, but more issues and concerns need to be resolved for future school years

and other educating essential needs.

Salaries: Health Benefits: Teacher Evaluations and
Workloads:

OUTCOME: OUTCOME: OUTCOMES:

COULDN’T BUDGE KEEP BENEFITS BASED ON

PERFORMANCE;
COULDN’T BUDGE