Contract negotiations grow tense between Juneau School District and teachers union amid funding uncertainty

A crowd of teachers filled the Thunder Mountain Middle School library earlier this month. 

Dressed in Juneau Education Association t-shirts and vests, they voiced their misgivings to the school board about contract negotiations.

Deborah Rakos has taught at the district for 25 years. She said the district’s proposed pay scale is divisive and favors certain levels of experience.

“I’m looking at bringing home less money next year,” Rakos said. “In the meantime, the cost of living in Juneau continues to rise, and we all need to be able to pay our bills.”

Johnson Youth Center teacher Janette Gagnon said she’s now finding it difficult to recommend prospective teachers work for the district.

“If negotiations continue to drag out this time and again next time my faith in the district is getting shattered,” she said.

Electra Gardinier sat in front of board members with a two-month-old baby on her hip. She and her husband are both teachers raising three children. She said the low pay and high cost of living in Juneau means her husband needs to work a second job to make ends meet.

“Three nights a week, he works 13-hour days so that we can do extravagant things like pay for our health insurance,” she said.

They’re pushing the district for better pay and benefits against a backdrop of uncertain state funding. 

Gov. Mike Dunleavy vetoed a bill that increased the state’s per-student allocation by $1,000, and the Legislature is considering several other school funding bills. 

School funding in Alaska hasn’t gone up significantly since 2017. Because of this and other budget issues, the district consolidated its middle and high schools last year to make up for an almost $10 million deficit. 

The initial proposals from the union and district have some major differences when it comes to salaries and health insurance contributions. The district is budgeted for a 2.5% increase to salaries for the first year of the contract. The proposal also includes a 1.5% increase in the second year. The union is asking for 10% each year.

The district is also flat funding health insurance contributions for the next three years. Meanwhile JEA is asking for the district to cover 85% of annual premiums.

Superintendent Frank Hauser wrote in an email that state funding determines how much the district can offer in salaries and benefits. He said the district estimates JEA’s proposal will cost $30 million over two years versus the district’s $2.2 million proposal.

Hauser declined to discuss the terms of contracts outside of the bargaining process, citing negotiation rules signed by both parties.

Now the negotiations have passed the two month mark. JEA president Chris Heidemann said in an interview with KTOO they haven’t made progress with the district. He said the district refuses to negotiate individual financial elements within the contract proposals.

“We’re ready to bargain,” he said. “They’re just not working with us.”

Heidemann said there’s a lot of distrust between the union and the district because of a drawn out negotiation cycle for the current contract. 

They reached an impasse during the last negotiation cycle that escalated to teachers working only during the hours they were paid for. 

Heidemann said if negotiations don’t progress, he fears teachers may go into the next school year without raises.

“There’s a lot of pessimism about that,” he said. “And I think there’s just a lack of trust between teachers and the district administration right now.”

Heidemann added that a combination of flat funding from the state and poor budget management from the district resulted in a concerning contract proposal.

“They chose to attack our health plan, and if we take $0 in additional health care contributions, that means that everybody who gets insurance through us next year will take home less pay,” Heidemann said.

Contract negotiations depend on how much money the district has. Its budget for next year relies on a $400 increase in per-student funding. But that’s not guaranteed after Dunleavy’s veto.

While there are several bills that would increase district funding, Heidemann is concerned that another year without additional state money could lead to another year of staffing cuts the district can’t handle.

“We’re down to the point now where if we keep having to cut, we’re just not going to be able to keep the building safe,” he said. “We are at the bare minimum personnel to keep kids in the buildings going to school.”

The district is also in negotiations with unions for support staff and administrators.