No on the Tentative Agreement

***Please forward this widely***

Many issues are important to the members of UESF but we in EDU believe that the issue of layoffs is the main concern of the members of our union. We are therefore urging UESF members to vote NO on the tentative agreement.

UESF members have been angered by SFUSD's hardball negotiating that threatens the livelihoods of our colleagues. Each of us in EDU (Educators for a democratic Union) heard members say they would be willing to make sacrifices to save the jobs of their colleagues.

EDU supported the UESF bargaining team when it made "No Layoffs!" the central component of their organizing campaign (as opposed to the important, but less central issues of 18 non-monetary, contractual items). During this campaign, UESF's leadership demonstrated that the district has the resources to rescind every single layoff. UESF called on the District to cut much deeper into the $52 million in consultant funds. UESF called on SFUSD to use a large portion of the nearly $40 million in reserves to preserve jobs.

The money was there but the political will was not. SFUSD did not take our demands seriously until UESF set a date (May 20th) for a membership meeting to authorize a strike vote. This single act helped communicate what we were willing to do to prevent all the layoffs. This, together with political pressure from families and students, forced the District to dramatically reduce the number of layoffs.

But SFUSD has not gone far enough. They still aim to lay-off up to 250 of our certificated and classified members. This is unacceptable. We in EDU are convinced that the money is there to save the jobs of the 250 brothers and sisters who work in our schools and have proven their dedication to our students and families.

Unfortunately, the UESF leadership pulled the plug on the strike-vote authorization meeting. This was a serious error. Until May 12, the UESF leadership maintained there was enough money to prevent all layoffs. What caused the leadership to back off from this position?

What does it say to our members when we ask all of us to "share" in making sacrifices, but then accept layoffs that would have some sacrifice more: their jobs and dreams of being an educator in SF.

Some will say it is irresponsible to dip into the reserves. The opposite is true: It is irresponsible NOT to use the reserves. A teacher or a para lost is a blow to our classrooms, to our children.

Replenishing the reserves would then be a major task of the union, the Board of Education and of the city and state officials. UESF could spearhead this fight, as it did in the streets of San Francisco on March 4. One of the main demands of that historic day of action, featured on the banner of the rally platform, was Progressive Taxation Now!

Five years ago, our willingness to strike resulted in an 8.5% raise. We were out in the streets with our communities on March 4th. The Oakland Education Association's recent one-day strike forced OUSD back to the bargaining table. Action works!

To that end, EDU will be urging all UESF members to vote "NO" on any tentative agreement that has layoffs in it. We do think it's crucial that every UESF member vote on the tentative agreement, so we will be abstaining when the Assembly votes whether or not to ratify the agreement on May 19. EDU believes that ultimately this decision must be made by the members: vote for the tentative agreement and accept 250 layoffs, or take a stand now to save all our members' jobs –vote no on the tentative agreement, go back to the bargaining table to demand that all layoffs be rescinded and authorize UESF to call for a strike.