Watertown teachers union, town clash on layoffs

By Laura Paine and Dan Atkinson / Staff Writers

Wicked Local Watertown
Posted Mar 18, 2011 @ 04:54 AM

WATERTOWN — While the teachers union insists layoffs were not mentioned during negotiations
for their new contract, school officials say they were told raises would cause job loss.
And with the school superintendent presenting an even more alarming picture on Monday – including
the possibility of closing an elementary school if the schools don’t see an increase – the stakes in the
showdown over the contract just got higher, reflecting a similar showdown two years ago.
The proposed teachers’ contract would give educators a 4 percent raise over three years, which
School Committee members say could lead to 15 to 35 layoffs throughout the school system. School
Committee Chairman Tony Paolillo said the ramifications of the contract were made clear.
"We told the union any raise we give [them] for 2012 will have an impact on the number of layoffs,”
he told the Watertown TAB. “We want to try to save jobs if we can and we want to do this right. I don’t
want to lose those teachers."
But Watertown Educators Association President Debra King said layoffs were not part of the
discussion during negotiations.
“Never once was a layoff discussed at that negotiating table,” she told the Watertown TAB. “If I
thought for one moment it would hurt the town, we wouldn’t have voted for it.”
Superintendent Ann Koufman-Frederick said that while she would not comment on the ongoing
negotiation, she said that she did hear layoffs discussed during the meetings.
During budget hearings in 2009, the School Committee presented a worst-case scenario of 50 staff
layoffs, including 13 teacher positions. Councilors and Committee members asked the teachers’ union to
forgo a contractually obligated 4.5 percent raise for the following year in order to save money, and the
union refused. Ultimately, the town gave the school department more money that year but 10 positions in
the department, including four teachers, were cut and class sizes increased.
And in 2002, the town gave 75 teachers and administrators written warnings that they might be laid
off due to a $2.6 million deficit in the budget. That year, Town Manager Michael Driscoll moved around
$450,000 in the budget to pay for those positions and no one was laid off.
This year, the WEA and the School Committee reached a tentative agreement on Jan. 25 after
negotiations that had gone on since last August and included three sessions with a mediator. The teachers
ratified the contract on Feb. 4.
Since then, the School Committee has held off on voting while they and the Town Council wait for
more information about the town’s finances. The superintendent recommends her budget in April, but
Town Manager Michael Driscoll prepares the budget for the entire town and presents his
recommendations afterwards. In past years, Driscoll’s budget for the schools has been lower than what
the superintendent has recommended.
The School Committee and the Town Council met in executive session on March 9 to discuss the
contract and collective bargaining strategy. Town Councilor Angie Kounelis said the contract may affect
how Town Manager Michael Driscoll funds other town departments and that he has to present a balanced
budget to the council.
School Committee Vice Chair John Portz had a similar view.
“It’s kind of a broad concern about the overall financial picture and how this is going to work,” Portz
said. “How will we be able to do this as a school district and move forward?”
School Committee member David Leon said that in the interest of reaching an agreement, the
negotiating team opted to support the MOA even though it may not be the best over-all contract.
“We felt that it was the best agreement under the circumstances,” Leon told the Watertown TAB. “I
think we felt it was the best negotiated agreement we could get at time. We understood that it was not
without risks or impact to the budget.”
But King said she had to convince her union to support the agreement. While its figures were not
great for either side, both sides agreed to support it, she said.

1
 “Those numbers were on the table when we negotiated. It was their MOA as much as ours. There was
a lot of movement on their side and our side, the teachers were not ready to jump at this agreement.”
Copyright 2011 Watertown TAB. Some rights reserved