The Concord School District is arguing to the state’s Public Employee Labor Relations Board that a union’s attempt to get a fired teacher her job back is misguided.
Superintendent Terri Forsten responded to a grievance filed by the Concord Education Association saying it “constituted an unfair labor practice” and asked the labor board to force the union to withdraw it.
The grievance was filed on behalf of Lori Fosdick, a Broken Ground School teacher who was fired in February for her use of restraint against a special needs child.
The union argues Forsten violated the collective bargaining agreement by using disputed evidence in a letter to Fosdick explaining that the superintendent would be recommending the school board terminate Fosdick’s employment. The union, through attorney Jim Allmendinger, said the district didn’t meet the standard for “just cause” to fire Fosdick and asked to get her job back, and for her to “be made whole” for any financial losses.
But Forsten responded by saying that it’s Allmendinger who is violating the collective bargaining agreement.
A grievance is defined as “a claim based upon the interpretation, meaning or application of any of the provisions” of the collective bargaining agreement, Forsten wrote, quoting from the teachers’ contract. In other words, grievances should filed to correct a perceived misapplication of the agreement – but not to challenge the evidence contained within a letter notifying a teacher she would be recommended for termination.
“The relief sought has nothing to do wih the letter but, rather, is an ‘end run’ around the board’s decision and is an effort to seek reinstatement of Ms. Fosdick,” Forsten wrote to the Labor Board on March 22.
Allmendinger declined on Friday to share a copy of the original grievance. He has until next week to respond to the district’s filing.
Fosdick had been teaching in the school district 10 years and earned $82,600 in 2016. She was fired in February because she “failed to conform to District regulations,” according to Forsten’s filing.
Fosdick’s firing stemmed from her use of restraint on two special needs children over the course of two years, parents and teachers said. Yet, the parents of special education children at Broken Ground School are among her most vocal supporters, saying they trusted her to maintain an appropriate balance of restraint and kindness.
The school board met behind closed doors – on Jan. 31 and Feb. 16 – when it considered Fosdick’s case, took testimony and decided that she should be fired.
The school board offered Fosdick to hold the hearing in open session, as required, but Allmendinger declined and the meetings were held in non-public session, both Allmendinger and Forsten confirmed.
At the close of the February meeting, Forsten said, the board gave authority to its chairman to send a letter to Fosdick officially informing her that she would be terminated. That letter was delivered Feb. 23.
The Monitor filed right-to-know requests Thursday with the district seeking to obtain a copy of that letter, as well as the one Forsten sent Dec. 5, informing Fosdick of her recommendation she should be fired.
The newspaper has also sought to review the public portions of the meetings Jan. 31 and Feb. 16, but was told at the district office Thursday that no such minutes are available.
The state’s right-to-know law requires that minutes be available for public inspection five business days after a meeting takes place. Even if the bulk of a meeting is nonpublic, it must begin publicly.
Meeting minutes should detail, at least, the names of the board members present, any other people appearing before the public body, a brief description of any matters discussed in public and any final decisions made, including decisions to meet in a nonpublic session.
While there were no public minutes available for those two meetings, the full school board has approved minutes for meetings before and after. Minutes from the meetings of Jan. 31 and Feb. 16 were not among those brought forward for approval.
“We just didn’t bring that forward. It’s not a secret. There’s no reason for that,” Forsten said in an interview Wednesday, adding that she would check with the district’s attorney about the request to see public portions of those minutes.
She said the personnel hearings – which made up the nonpublic portion of the meetings – are “a pretty different process” from the other meetings for which the board approved minutes.
Asked how the public can follow up on personnel hearings – to see the limited amount of information that is public – if the minutes aren’t made available, Forsten said: “Most of it is nonpublic until the final decision, and then I’m not sure what (the board’s) decision was as far as when to make that public, so I’d have to check.”
The final decision “has a public moment,” she added, “but it’s not necessarily public that moment.”
Fosdick’s attorney has until April 12 to respond to Forsten’s filing with the labor board.
(Nick Reid can be reached at 369-3325, nreid@cmonitor.com or on Twitter at @NickBReid.)