Whereas if it was majority vote or two-thirds vote, um there probably wouldn't be nearly as much pressure because someone could vote no and have their own reasons for voting no and express that without actually derailing the whole process. Yeah. And if I remember correctly, I think that was your suggestion at the very beginning um is to do a percentage. So, and this is why we couldn't come to any agreement at the um the first meeting and I wanted to bring it up to address again. Um it's your team and it's a decision you make. Um so again do we have any ideas? I mean would you like to continue the way it has been? I mean or next meeting the first meeting you spend again how many a long time discussing this? I think it would be great if we could come to an agreement today so we can when you start next year we'll know what consensus means.
James. Um so I I can see both sides. Um uh but just one thing to add to the conversation. Uh just like um Mr. Lopez has mentioned about how one person can hold things up. Um uh years ago uh we had a uh a meet and convert issue. Um it was during what is lovingly called the Westad years. uh where uh an issue came to meet and confer in which um they were trying to uh move to extend the school day. Um I I don't remember what it was at the time, but they extended the school day and you know arguments were done. the whole process was at the end and then there was one person uh that held it up and um so I I guess uh for me um what I worry about is um I just worry uh because uh sometimes thing you we get that group think and sometimes a dissenting view is um is is an important thing.
Does it slow down the process? Does it make does it mean that fewer things go through? Um yeah, it certainly does. Uh but sometimes um that's not a bad thing. So that's my opinion. Uh I would strongly support not as just a majority but a twothirds um vote so that it wasn't I agree with you. I think everybody needs to be heard and that that I like the idea of if there was somebody who could not get to thumb at least sideways that their objection or whatever is like duly noted and expressed and doesn't hold up the entire um process. I I just think twothirds is is a more reasonable expectation for consensus. Um, so I've just kind of listened to the conversation about what everyone is having right now and I agree with you when I heard you say five out of how many items?
I didn't 13 13. Um, I was like, "Wow, that's that's not very much." And so then I started really looking through it through it even closer and then I re came to realize that well some of it's because we fiscally can't afford to do a lot of those things. we can either do this or we can do this but we can't do both or we can do this this and this but then we can't do this. Um so I do think that is is a a component of it. Um I don't know if I necessarily agree with the idea. I really of a twothirds or you know if two people disagree or if one person disagrees I really do think we need to come to a consensus as a team because there are many perspectives whether you are classified whether you are certified whether you're a teacher you're an administrator your district and really I think we can come to the best solutions when we really work together and there were several times today and and multiple different um options that came forward that may not have got a thumb up or may have gotten a thumb down Um, but had a word change happened like it it would have made some people feel more comfortable and it could have gotten a thumb up.
So when I think about it that way like if we can have a little bit more flexibility or let's make if we can make some of these shifts and if it's like no we can't then we have to also live with like no I don't agree with that. So um and I think that happened several times today and in multiple different um areas not in just one or the other. And I really think that we have very smart people in this room and we're represent many different aspects of the Kraton community and so when we can work together is when we can come up with the best solutions. So I really personally feel like we need to have that consensus that that thumb up. No, go ahead. Go ahead. Well, I I had a direct response. I actually really like that suggestion um because I do think there were several times where if we had been able to talk about how could we change that to um you know if somebody was close to going you know at least them sideways what could we do to alter this or change it to get there we that was shut down immediately and I know that's part of our process so maybe that's the part of the process that we need to think about changing that there is room to navigate or negotiate some of the wording in order to get to consensus rather than this.
It's this or nothing kind of thing. Cuz that's I think what leaves, you know, a bad taste in in, you know, the majority's mouths or feelings if one person's thumbming it down because we couldn't talk about different ways to word it or different ways to even adjust it to make it palatable by everybody. Yeah, I think that makes sense. the meaning of getting but the thing is when we're getting to the meeting we don't know yet how people are going to feel about it. So I think that's fair not to say nope at this this date and time no options can be changed that feels harsh and feels like it's against the idea of collaboration and negotiation in a process like this. So I I actually really appreciate that recommendation. Yeah, I was going to Oh, I was just going to say that the value of interest based negotiation over positions based negotiations is that it allows for creative thinking.
It allows for the input of a lot of ideas from people that might not otherwise be involved in in a positionsbased negotiations process or bargaining process. But looking at our recommendations, I mean, we have benefits, which we always talk about every year. No creativity really involved there. Um, we have three from just the compensation committee that we didn't adjust or really we just approved, right? Um, and one of those we didn't approve and that's part of the process, too. Um, which leaves us with six recommendations. One of which is just a pay increase. And of those six, like there's one that's like it's already a thing that exists at the school site that we're just putting on paper. Another one is again just a pay increase. Move the market demand to the base salary. There's nothing creative in here. There's nothing stellar. There's nothing. It actually seems that we killed all of those things.
All of the really interesting creative. Like I think of the 4 day school week thing, right? Um that was killed because we were afraid of scaring off the board. I think kind of is like the the rationale really is like, you know, being strategic. And it seems like we really uh threw the baby out with the bathwater here and got rid of all of the things that are beneficials about interest based negotiations because when I look at this list of recommendations, I don't see anything that couldn't have been created just by, you know, the union exact team sitting down with the district exact team and them going, "Okay, our compensation committee came up with these recommendations and or what does the union want to see this year? Oh, here's some things you want to see. Okay, let's go back to our budget person." 30 minutes later, okay, here's the budget for next year.
What can can the committee figure the numbers out? two meetings later, we could have gotten an agreement with these types of recommendations. Um, which I think is fine if that's what we want to do, but I just don't see why we had to waste like 30, 40 hours developing like why are we going to develop seven or eight framing statements that we don't address? Why are we going to tell stories endlessly about these different topics and then sacrifice a variety of like that workload topic that was something that we spent hours talking about and we don't have a single option to address workload, not even one. Um, so if all we're going to do is thumb a pay raise every year, that's fine. But that give I'll do we do that in two hours, you know, and I just I don't see why we did all this work.
Yeah. Just the context of that, that's the other um way that districts negotiate, which is called traditional negotiation. And each side just kind of brings their items to the table and there's not a lot of discussion. It's just like back and forth of each each side deciding on what we ultimately come up with. And I agree, it kind of seems like that's where we landed at the end of this. No, this is really our first year of addressing student outcomes focused governance. It's a learning process, I believe. Um, and hopefully we can get some more input from the board to further guide us. Um, I think it's important that your views are expressed um on how you felt throughout this process. Um, and hopefully we can get some feedback as to how to move forward with this. But we didn't we didn't spend as we had the speaker this year and yeah, this is really our first year of really delving into it.
And every first year, you know how it is. It's Yeah, it's a little messy. And Go ahead, Avon. I just want to go back to the consensus twoirds of the consensus. I know that at the beginning of the year and I couldn't find it. You explained the difference between agreements and consensus but I couldn't I couldn't find it. So I'm not I'm not going to use that analogy and I will say I rather do the consensus because the the consensus it uh applies to the commitment that we all have as a group. If this uh twothirds for the majority then that's where the narrative and the message can divide this team. Somebody can say, "Well, I didn't vote for that or I wasn't." And so, if it's all of us together, all of us supportive. If it's not twothirds, that's when we can lose the division over there.
I know at the beginning of this year, we re I think it was the first session or the second session, we address somebody from this team said no, no, no, no, twothirds of majority. It was the consensus. And so today was my my my uh place and I know I was the person who said no into one of the other ones and I have my my reasons and I explain those reasons but I just I just want to make sure that if it's the not Ivonne not so and so but if the meet and confer group that's what we all leave that door and we all commit to the same messaging. Yeah. Yeah, it makes it difficult too. You know, I think the conversations that we have moved some people, but when you have as many um options that we always end up having, it seems, it really does limit our conversations and our our abilities to really delve into it.
I'd like you to think about that next year. And I'm not just saying we don't want a lot of options, but I think we really maybe need to to be maybe a little bit, bless you, a little bit more selective with our options so we can devote the time that's necessary to hear the back and forths and with the open minds um that's necessary. So again, it doesn't seem like we have agreement on consensus. It seems like half the room is like three4s no consensus on consensus, but we will further that discussion. Um, another thing I want to achieve, Kelly worked really hard at the very beginning of the year getting input from the staff. I did not do that by myself. The way I am Kelly and and the CA leadership team. Thank you. And the CA leadership team worked hard to put together the survey and distribute it for IBN.
And remember, she brought those um issues forward. And then once we had those issues, we went around the room and added. So next year actually it'll be the IBN survey and then we'll have all those tabled items too that we have to address. But Kelly, um could you tell the staff a little bit um how how was it developed? And I think we talked a little bit about this before, but it might have been last year. Um how are the questions um developed? How is it distributed? How is it collected? Yeah. So, we really lifted it from other associations around the state that have successfully implemented these surveys, and that's kind of like where we got the idea. There's a staff member from Aea that's assigned to our local that helps us to organize our negotiations process. And so, he suggested that we start doing these um tours of various departments within the district to be able to capture more voices.
And so, um, Ann really put it all together and Daniel kind of like organized the processing of it. We talked about doing a digital survey, but we felt like paper copies were just easier to be able to take with us as we went to various departments. And then we just kind of divided and conquered. And we had a lot of ideas at first with things that were lifted from other uh associations, but we ended up with four main categories that we felt like were consistent issues that fell um within the the problems or scope that just came up year after year. Um, and that came from I've been on the main confer for many years. Dorothy served for many years and then takes her step down and comes back through. Um, so we wanted to keep it brief enough where folks had a chance to prioritize their items.
So that's the way that we organize. I think I showed this in the first meeting, but we have a one through five scale and we have the various categories and then each issue that falls within the categories and anybody can note their one through five. And then there's a spot for more um additional comments if anyone wants to write those. And then we just collect some demographic data on how many years people have been in the district etc. They are um benefits facilities site district support systems. And this one doesn't have a name but I think it is oh JK working conditions. Yeah, I think benefits falls within um compensation because it has inequitable pay. Yes. Under there. So this one the title is just on the wrong side. So working conditions, benefits, facilities, site district support, and then systems. Um um so uh when you were doing the tours, did you hit all employee groups?
We did not. That's just shortfall of the way scheduling worked out. We try to hit most of them and then we try to use our site steward system which is our representatives that are on each of the campuses. Unfortunately, we have a few campuses that don't have a site steward at the moment. So, we tried our best to fill in like Anns a site that doesn't have one. So, she was able to step in over there. Um I think and the same with like even on the sites, cafeteria workers are sometimes trickier. Maintenance staff are tricky to nail down because they aren't always there when staff are there when teachers are there at least. Um I have a little more flexibility in my new position, but I'm also new. So I'm learning every day all the things. So that made it difficult to Right. So, um I mean my my suggestion slashrecommendation is when we did we did something like this years ago.
Um we had a digital version that went out to every employee in the district so everybody had access to it no matter who they were or where they were. And then at the time we had asked principles to have allocate time in their staff meeting like 10 minutes where they can go over and have that in-person thing. And the same thing would be with department heads. And if I remember correctly, uh the HR director at the time and uh someone on the leadership team of CA would hit some of these auxiliary places like transportation, do North things like that to to uh to get those people that are not techsavvy and prefer the paper just so you can get cast a wide net and get as much uh input as you possibly can. Yeah, those are great suggestions. I did attend like an officer manager meeting.
Um I know Ann presented to the special education department. It I came over to um I think we missed transportation this year. Yeah, last year we did at them. Yeah. Uh oh, okay. Thanks, James. We'll get you on our list. Sorry, James. Our side. I went around to our members and gave them the survey. But it should be You're absolutely right. It should be included members on members as wide as we can. Um no, there's not. And there could be that's another Yeah, that's another avenue. I'll go to suggestions. That's where you could link that be the very first message of the year and then a link to the input survey. Yes. Yeah. I'm I'm glad that James uh brought it forward because I was going to say in the spirit of collaboration uh and to ensure equity of voices so every position everybody in the district has access to provide with that guidance of um topics or or challenges or information.
I think it it should be a collaboration with the meeting confer uh rather than just CA um because we're all going to use the the data. We should all have access but everybody will have the opportunity to uh res respond and and tell us what is it that they're concerning because otherwise if it's just uh a small number of people participating and their story is two people then we stretch that story into across the district. And so the more the more um participation that we have, the more that we know like that's a story that we need to address and follow. Well, and to be fair in response to that, so for example, when an came to the special education department, she obviously did not talk just to the CA members in the special ed department, she talked to both non-members and members of the special ed department.