LAWMAKERS COMPROMISE WITH EDUCATORS ON FURLOUGHS
A proposal allowing local school boards to furlough educators and school district employees was amended and passed by the Senate shortly before 5 p.m. today after Sen. Larry Martin, the bill’s sponsor, and several other Senators met with The SCEA to discuss a compromise.
Members are now urged to email their House representatives this evening and urge passage of the compromise amendment as drafted by Sen. Linda Short. To contact your representatives, click on this link at The SCEA website: http://capwiz.com/nea/sc/dbq/officials/directory/directory.dbq?command=statedir&state=SC
The furlough proposal was to be passed by the Senate on Tuesday without referral to committee and without input from The SCEA. But Sen. Kay Patterson, a retired educator, objected to the vote, forcing the bill to be re-calendared and giving The SCEA time to notify members and communicate with lawmakers. To clarify the impression that “all the educator groups were on board”, President Jan McCarthy drafted a letter outlining our support for spending flexibility for school boards, and our opposition to furloughs.
This morning, Sen. Martin called a meeting with The SCEA to discuss the association’s objections to the bill, and he noted that The SCEA was “out there all alone, opposing this bill.” He said that other groups representing administrators, school boards and some educators had already expressed support for the proposal.
At mid-afternoon, Martin convened an impromptu meeting with President McCarthy, Executive Director Richard Miller, Sen. Nikki Setzler, Sen. Patterson, Sen. John Land, Sen. Short, Sen. Tommy Moore and Sen. John Courson to discuss a compromise. McCarthy and Miller expressed the association’s commitment to protecting classroom education, which might be undermined by a potential furlough.
After some dialogue, The SCEA agreed to a proposal by Sen. Short to include a caveat in the bill requiring a local school board to furlough district-level administrators for five days before furloughing any school building-level educators or employees. The possibility of a furlough of up to five days for building-level educators and employees remains, but only after district-level administrators have been furloughed all five of the potential five-day period.
The SCEA agreed that the compromise clearly reflects a commitment to keep educators and school employees in the classroom and on the job, while providing an incentive to district administrators to use every opportunity to avoid furloughing school district employees.
Back on the Senate floor, with the association’s objections removed, Sen. Martin moved immediate consideration of the flexibility-furlough bill. Sen. Short’s compromise amendment was adopted unanimously, as was a second amendment clarifying spending flexibility by school boards. The entire bill, as amended, passed with unanimous consent.
The original bill faced more heated debate in the House this morning, as several representatives questioned Rep. Ronny Townsend on the measure. With President McCarthy’s letter of opposition in hand, Rep. Becky Richardson asked whether The SCEA had not been included in the crafting of the proposal from its inception. Townsend admitted pointedly, “I contacted the school boards and I contacted the administrators. But frankly, I did not ask The SCEA what it thought.”
Rep. Mike Anthony, a Union County High School coach and teacher, expressed disappointment that The SCEA was not included in the early discussions, noting that he is a member of the association.
“You keep cutting and keep cutting, requiring more work of these teachers, and one day you’re going to have 43,000 of them sitting on the front steps of this Capitol saying, ‘You teach them’,” Anthony cautioned the House. “You can’t keep taking more and more away from these schools and these teachers.”
Rep. James Smith emphasized that while he believed a furlough of teachers might not adversely affect classroom instruction, “it does take money out of the pockets of teachers,” he said.
Rep. Jackie Hayes sought to delete the section of the bill referring to the option to furlough educators, but Townsend advised that deleting the section would defeat the purpose of the bill.
In the end, the measure remained on the House calendar and will be debated Thursday morning.
President Jan McCarthy urges members to email and thank Sen. Martin, Sen. Setzler, Sen. Patterson, Sen. Short, Sen. Land, Sen. Courson and Sen. Moore for working with The SCEA to reach a difficult compromise solution.
Finally, President McCarthy thanks and commends The SCEA members who flooded Senate offices on Tuesday evening and today with emails voicing our position on educator furloughs. Sen. Martin noted in public discussion on the Senate floor that educators from across South Carolina communicated with his office and other Senators’ offices in great numbers on this bill. Congratulations on helping to bring The SCEA to the table on this issue.
DATELINE FEBRUARY 20, 2003
HOUSE WILL DEBATE FURLOUGH COMPROMISE TUESDAY
Although a bill allowing local school boards the option of furloughing school district employees this year was on the House calendar for consideration, the House adjourned shortly before noon today without taking up the matter.
The House will reconvene on Tuesday at noon, when it is expected that the Senate compromise reached by The SCEA and Senate leaders will come before the chamber for immediate consideration.
Representatives of The SCEA met today with Rep. Ronnie Townsend, sponsor of the original flexibility-furlough bill in the House, to discuss the compromise agreement and to urge his support. Townsend voiced some reservations about the compromise agreement, saying that he does not want to be charged with choosing or preferring to furlough one group of school district employees before another, or more than another.
Townsend told The SCEA, however, that if leaders of the South Carolina Association of School Administrators and the South Carolina School Boards Association communicate their support for the compromise agreement, he would not block passage of the Senate agreement.
In earlier conversations with lobbyists for those associations, The SCEA learned that the groups would likely support the compromise.
President Jan McCarthy urges members to contact their House representatives at home and email their offices this weekend to encourage their support for the compromise agreement on Tuesday. The compromise language as approved by the Senate on Thursday may be read at http://www.scstatehouse.net/sess115_2003-2004/bills/375.htm
MEDIA IDENTIFY THE SCEA AS FURLOUGH BILL’S SOLE OPPONENT
The State newspaper, based in Columbia, published a front-page article on Thursday, “Tenenbaum sounds budget alarm”, in which it took note of The SCEA’s sole opposition to the original flexibility-furlough bill. Reporter Bill Robinson interviewed The SCEA Executive Director Richard Miller on Wednesday, who was quoted in the article.
“The South Carolina Education Association, a teachers’ advocacy group, opposes furloughs,” writes reporter Bill Robinson. “SCEA director Richard Miller said the group hopes to convince lawmakers to modify wording in the resolution that would limit how any furlough plan could be used.”
Robinson noted that the leader of “another teachers’ organization” said that group was “OK” with the proposal.
To read the full article, click http://www.thestate.com/mld/thestate/news/5220621.htm
WAYS & MEANS VOTES TO UNDERFUND EFA FOR NEXT YEAR
The House Ways and Means Committee on Wednesday voted to approve a proviso funding the Education Finance Act in 2003-04 at almost the same level it is funded today, after suffering more than $231 million in various cuts.
Late last year, the Department of Education submitted a budget request to the committee asking that the Education Finance Act (EFA) be funded at $1.29 billion in the 2003-04 fiscal year. But after that request was submitted, the Budget and Control Board met twice (once in December and again in February) and made across-the-board cuts that total more than $164 million in the current fiscal year.
In addition, last fiscal year’s EFA funding included $67 million in one-time, non-recurring funds for various programs. That funding, too, was cut in this fiscal year. The combined effect was a net loss of more than $231 million from the Department of Education.
The committee’s approved proviso includes $963 million in EFA funding for 2003-04, more than $323 million less than the department’s requested $1.29 billion.
SEX EDUCATION FUNDS WILL REQUIRE GOVERNOR’S APPROVAL
Governor Mark Sanford’s approval may be required before any federal funds may be spent, or before grants may be awarded to private contractors, for the purpose of sex education in public schools.
The proviso was drafted by the governor’s office and circulated today. It states, “Any funds received by the state of South Carolina from the federal Centers for Disease Control for sex education may not be spent without the prior approval of the governor’s office.”
It further allows that “No grant for sex education may be awarded to a contractor without the advice and consent of the governor’s office.”
Oversight of such education programs has never before been demanded by the governor’s office.
The issue of sex education funded by state and federal sources last arose about three years ago, when the Department of Education was subjected to a legislative council audit of such programs and grant awards. The audit found no improprieties.
DATELINE FEBRUARY 25, 2003
FURLOUGH COMPROMISE SET FOR WEDNESDAY DEBATE
S375, the compromise agreement reached by The SCEA and Senate leaders last week, has been delivered to the House for consideration but was not taken up today; it is set for debate on Wednesday. The success of the bill, however, is in question, as a number of education organizations are lined up in opposition to the compromise, including the S.C. Association of School Administrators, the S.C. School Boards Association, the Palmetto St. Teachers Association, the S.C. Chamber of Commerce and four regional consortia of school districts.
President Jan McCarthy urges members to contact their local House representatives and ask them to support S375, the Senate compromise agreement on furloughs of educators.
[What’s the difference?
[The original bill gave local school boards maximum spending flexibility to remain solvent through this academic year, then allowed school boards to furlough all district employees – from the superintendent to classified employees at the school building level – up to five days, using in-service days first. Some education groups were involved in the drafting of this language, but The SCEA was not.
[The SCEA worked with Senate leaders to craft a compromise bill, which still allows school boards maximum spending flexibility to remain solvent through this academic year. But in order to preserve classroom education as long as possible AND to protect the lowest-paid school employees – who can least absorb the loss in salary – The SCEA-Senate compromise package requires that district-level administrators and staff be furloughed a full five days BEFORE any school-level educators and employees are furloughed. The compromise amendment was drafted by Sen. Linda Short, endorsed by the bill’s Senate co-sponsors, and adopted unanimously by the Senate.]
Last Thursday, Rep. Ronnie Townsend, the sponsor of the original House version of the bill, told The SCEA that he would support the Senate compromise if representatives of the other education groups communicated their support of the compromise to him. Today, those groups reaffirmed their opposition.
The SCEA appreciates the support of Spartanburg Superintendent Jim Ray, who attended the meeting and affirmed his opposition to furloughing educators.
“I agree with The SCEA’s point that anything we do that doesn’t hold the line on full funding for education lets the legislature off the hook,” Ray said. “The issue before us is to make these people fund the schools.”
Ray added that many school districts were able to absorb recent budget cuts to education only by tapping reserve accounts. “We’ll make it through, but by making it through, you’re severely damaging the budget for next year, by using up our reserves.”
To identify your local House representatives, click on http://capwiz.com/nea/sc/officials/state/?state=SC and enter your ZIP code. Online resources will allow you to email those representatives through the website.
GOVERNOR’S TASK FORCE ADVISES VOUCHERS, MERIT PAY
Governor Mark Sanford’s Education Task Force issued a report this afternoon that echoes Sanford’s campaign proposals for education in South Carolina, including increased investment in charter schools, home schooling and a focus on school choice that includes subsidizing students’ tuition in private and parochial schools through tuition tax credits and “education passports”, a popular euphemism for vouchers.
“We have a governor who is not beholden to the education establishment for the first time,” said Larry Kobrovsky, a member of the task force from Charleston County who praised the report.
As the report was introduced at a press conference, Sanford acknowledged that “Education is clearly this state’s highest priority.”
But the report largely tracked the governor’s positions that undermine traditional public schools. For example, under the umbrella of “expanding school options”, the report recommends the following:
- Establish an “Academic Passport Program for students in failing schools.
- Implement multiple authorizing jurisdictions so that a proposed [charter] school may be chartered in any jurisdiction.
- Allow participation of home-schooled students in extra-curricular activities within the public school of the student’s residence so long as all district and state requirements are met.
- Institute a personal $500 sales tax credit for parents who home-school.
- Institute tax credits for parents who enroll their children in private schools.
- Implement a $2,000 corporate tax credit for a needs-based individual education passport. The credits will flow to corporations AND individuals that contribute to a legislative account designed to fund vouchers.
The report includes a variety of recommendations in topics of early childhood education, higher education and safety and discipline.
The committee’s report makes no reference to the recent Education Week ranking that awarded South Carolina its highest score for teacher quality, but it cited “warnings” from The Alliance of Excellent Education that more attention is needed in this area. The committee’s recommendations include the following:
- Require all K-3 and special education teachers to take a course in explicit and systematic phonics to teach reading, and incorporate phonics into a comprehensive reading program no later than June 30, 2004.
- Fund block grants to reward “meritorious” teaching by expanding the Teacher Advancement Program.
In one bright spot, the report advocates increasing teacher salaries to the national average by the 2008-09 school year. But it also recommends extending the state salary schedule for teachers from 22 steps to 28 steps.
One of Sanford’s personal interests, restructuring state government, surfaced in the report, which recommends making the State Secretary of Education an appointed, rather the elected, office in order to centralize authority over education in the governor’s office and cabinet.
In contrast at the local level, the report recommends making all of the state’s 85 school boards elected rather than appointed, but Governor Sanford said today that he would not support giving fiscal autonomy to any school boards that do not currently have such autonomy.
Several questions from the media concerned the source of funding for many of the report’s recommendations. Sanford gave no indication that he would support raising new revenues for this purpose but said instead that adopting the recommendations would require new prioritization of education spending.
“When you’re a billion dollars in deficit and education is 52 percent of your budget, the most you can hope for is to stay level with equal funding [next year]. It’s going to be very difficult to ensure level funding, much less anything more than that,” he said.
The report is not yet available online.
THE SCEA OPPOSES BILL TO REPEAL TERI PROGRAM
Members and state employees flooded Senate offices over the weekend with calls and emails opposing Sen. Greg Ryberg’s proposal to repeal the Teacher and Employee Retention Incentive (TERI) program. The bill, S382, currently sits in the Senate Finance Committee. The SCEA continues to urge lawmakers, especially members of the Senate Finance Committee, to oppose the repeal of TERI.
Ryberg’s proposal would not affect employees already participating in the TERI program but would prevent any additional employees from initiating participation. Rather than becoming effective on June 30 as many other bills, Ryberg’s repeal would take effect immediately upon the Governor’s signature.
The text of his bill can be found at http://www.scstatehouse.net/sess115_2003-2004/bills/382.htm
TERI was enacted three years ago to encourage teachers and state employees nearing retirement to remain actively employed while receiving retirement benefits. We believe that it has been invaluable in keeping excellent educators involved in the profession by offering them an incentive to defer retirement, and we believe the program will continue to benefit the state’s public schools and other institutions if it is protected.
SCHOOL NURSE BILL FILED
The SCEA and other education groups have drafted a bill to fund the hiring of nurses in every South Carolina elementary school. The bill, S381, is a proactive response to concerns voiced by lawmakers who sought passage of a diabetes-care bill last session.
While the earlier bill would require teachers and other school employees to be responsible for giving injections, testing urine and addressing other medical concerns of diabetic students, S381 would seek to staff elementary schools with school nurses who are already trained to meet those needs. A bonus of this proactive measure is that school nurses would be available to treat students with other medical needs.
President Jan McCarthy encourages members to call and email their legislators in support of S381, which can be found online at http://www.scstatehouse.net/sess115_2003-2004/bills/381.htm
DATELINE FEBRUARY 26, 2003
TOWNSEND MOVES TO STRIKE SENATE COMPROMISE
Rep. Ronnie Townsend, sponsor of the original House proposal to furlough all district employees up to five days this academic year, moved today to strike the Senate compromise agreement from the Senate bill and to replace it with the original House language. The SCEA has communicated its support for the Senate compromise and its opposition to the original House language to Rep. Townsend and several other legislators.
After only a few minutes of debate, Rep. George Bailey invoked a 24-hour delay in debate. The bill and Townsend’s motion was calendared for Thursday.
During debate, Rep. Becky Richardson questioned Townsend on his motion, suggesting, “I’d feel more comfortable excluding teachers from this furlough altogether. They are the most important part of the education process.”
But Townsend countered that it was not the role of the legislature to suggest which employees should be furloughed in any particular order. The original House language would allow furloughs to apply to all district employees.
The SCEA has learned, however, that the original House language has been interpreted to allow a kind of “rolling” furlough, allowing school boards to furlough school-level employees during the academic year, and furloughing district-level employees once the academic year has ended. This was not the legislative intent or understanding of the Senate sponsor, Sen. Larry Martin, who understood that the original bill meant every employee, from the district superintendent to non-certified school employees, would take furloughs on the same dates.
A number of House members have expressed concern that several other education groups, including the S.C. Association of School Administrators, the S.C. School Boards Association and the Palmetto St. Teachers Association, are in support of the original House language. As has been the case since debate began last week, The SCEA is the sole education organization opposed to the original proposal.
President Jan McCarthy urges members to email Rep. Ronnie Townsend and their own members of the House this evening and until 10 a.m. tomorrow, when the House reconvenes, to communicate our opposition to the House version and our support of the Senate compromise agreement.
To identify your local House representatives, click on http://capwiz.com/nea/sc/officials/state/?state=SC and enter your ZIP code. Online resources will allow you to email those representatives through the website.
[What’s the difference in the bills?
[The original bill gave local school boards maximum spending flexibility to remain solvent through this academic year, then allowed school boards to furlough all district employees – from the superintendent to classified employees at the school building level – up to five days, using in-service days first. Some education groups were involved in the drafting of this language, but The SCEA was not.
[The SCEA worked with Senate leaders to craft a compromise bill, which still allows school boards maximum spending flexibility to remain solvent through this academic year. But in order to preserve classroom education as long as possible AND to protect the lowest-paid school employees – who can least absorb the loss in salary – The SCEA-Senate compromise package requires that district-level administrators and staff be furloughed a full five days BEFORE any school-level educators and employees are furloughed. The compromise amendment was drafted by Sen. Linda Short, endorsed by the bill’s Senate co-sponsors, and adopted unanimously by the Senate.]
AT-WILL EMPLOYMENT BILL AFFECTS NON-CERTIFIEDS
A bill now under debate in the Senate clarifies the at-will nature of public and private employment in South Carolina by stating that employer handbooks may not be characterized as a contractual agreement. While legislative staff assured The SCEA two weeks ago that the bill would affect city and county municipal workers, staff advised The SCEA yesterday that, as presently interpreted, the bill does include non-certified employees of school districts.
Certified school district employees – which include most employees from the superintendent to classroom instructors – are covered by separate statutes that guarantee certain employment rights, such as a grievance procedure. But non-certified employees have never been covered by these statutes, and have relied on school district policies, as stated in district employee handbooks, to provide certain local rights.
But H3448 (http://www.scstatehouse.net/sess115_2003-2004/bills/3448.htm) states that, “No handbook, policy, procedure, or other document issued by an employer or its agent may form an express or implied contract of employment,” except under certain circumstances. In this case, non-certified school district employees – including building maintenance and custodial workers, food service and clerical workers, and bus drivers – would have absolutely no employment rights or protections, even if the district employee handbook gives them rights or protections.
The SCEA has communicated today with several Senators and asked that non-certified school district employees be exempted from H3448. While extensive debate was held on the bill this afternoon, it was the opinion of most Senators that no vote would be held on the final bill and that debate would continue tomorrow.
President Jan McCarthy advises members to contact their Senators on behalf of non-certified school district employees and urge that those employees be exempted from H3448 by amendment.
H3448 originated in the House and has already been approved by that body. Our opportunity to amend the bill rests with the Senate, which could then return the amended bill to the House for concurrence.
DATELINE FEBRUARY 27, 2003
FURLOUGH DEBATE CONTINUES TUESDAY: CALL LAWMAKERS NOW
On Wednesday, Rep. Ronnie Townsend’s motion to strike the text of S375 and replace it with original House language from H3628 was interrupted and debate was postponed until today. In today’s session, Townsend withdrew his motion to allow Rep. Bill Cotty to offer a similar amendment.
Cotty’s amendment stuck to original House language with one exception: it guarantees that no more than two instructional days may be sacrificed to a furlough. While we appreciated Cotty’s intent to preserve instructional days, The SCEA shared its position in support of the Senate compromise agreement with the representative yesterday, and urged him to avoid restoring House language to the bill.
Rep. Bessie Moody-Lawrence moved to table Cotty’s amendment, but her motion was defeated (25-83) and Cotty’s amendment was adopted (85-21). To identify those members who voted for the amendment (against The SCEA-Senate compromise agreement), see the end of today’s legislative summary.
Rep. Harry Ott rose to say that he planned to offer additional amendments, but that passage of Cotty’s amendment rendered his amendment drafts inapplicable. He moved to postpone debate on the bill again until Tuesday. Townsend moved to table the postponement motion, but Townsend’s motion failed (21-77) and Ott’s motion was adopted (64-42)
As The SCEA opposed the Cotty amendment, it supported Ott’s postponement motion in order to give members in local associations time to contact their legislators at home during the weekend. President Jan McCarthy encourages members to call their House members and urge passage of amendments that enhance or protect the Senate compromise agreement, and to urge their opposition to amendments that restore original House language on furloughs of educators.
McCARTHY COMMUNICATES STANCE IN LETTER TO LEGISLATORS
This afternoon, President Jan McCarthy communicated the association’s position on S375/H3628 to House members by email. The letter, comprehensive in describing The SCEA’s rationale for supporting the Senate compromise agreement, is reprinted below. McCarthy urges members to email their lawmakers with similar sentiments before the House reconvenes on Tuesday.
February 27, 2003
Honorable Members of the House,
S375, a bill allowing spending flexibility by local school boards and allowing local school boards to furlough school district employees, is presently under debate in the House. Some debate has already been conducted, and we appreciate the remarks of those members who have made clear their desire to postpone furloughs of school-level educators and employees in order to keep teachers and students in the classroom as long as possible. In our view, keeping these educators and students in the classroom promotes the very conditions under which the opportunity for education is available.
We acknowledge that groups representing other parts of the education community share a different perspective, and we respect their rights to hold those perspectives. That we are in disagreement on this issue should not be construed to mean that the education community is divided on the importance of maintaining a high level of education quality in the state.
While The SCEA would prefer that no school-level educators and employees be furloughed, we understand that circumstances of funding availability leave some districts with little alternative. But the legislature certainly has the authority, as well as an obligation, to hold classroom education as harmless as possible. Any allowance to furlough school-level educators and employees during instructional days is a clear retreat from the state’s commitment to public education. This retreat strikes especially hard when no furlough proposals have included any abatement of state standards and accountability, or any exemption from state testing requirements. At present, these proposals merely take income from educators’ and employees’ pockets, while demanding the same quality of performance and result, and supplying less instructional time to accomplish our common goals.
It is our view that S375, as adopted by the Senate, comes as close as possible to balancing the terrific need for maximum spending flexibility at the local board level with the essential need to preserve instructional time. While The SCEA was not a party to the drafting of original furlough language in either chamber, The SCEA did participate in the discussion to adopt the Senate compromise. We agreed to that compromise for a few reasons:-The Senate compromise would protect classroom instruction for as long as possible, under present circumstances, by furloughing district-level administrators and employees first, and for a full five days, before any school-level employees would be furloughed. In some districts, this saved cost may be sufficient to keep the district solvent through the end of the year.
-The Senate compromise gives budget decision-makers at the district level an incentive to use their maximum spending flexibility before recommending an employee furlough to the local school board. It is only practical to suggest that administrators who recognize that they would be the first to be furloughed might invest more effort in ensuring that all potential fund sources have been tapped sufficiently.
-The Senate compromise acknowledges that a furlough affects different classes of educators and employees differently. Non-classified employees – wage-earners that include maintenance, transportation and custodial staff, food service and clerical staff, and bus drivers – suffer more with the loss of a day’s wages than higher-paid or salaried employees, who also enjoy greater employment benefits.
-Finally, the order of furloughing – first district-level administrators, then school-level educators and employees – guarantees that a “rolling” furlough is not implemented. Debate in the House has borne out our suspicion that the original language could be used by district decision-makers to furlough school-level educators and employees during the school year, including instructional days, while the furloughs of district-level administrators and staff could be postponed until after the academic year’s end. In such a case, both instructional time and educators’ incomes will have been sacrificed without having impact on district-level operation, which certainly defines inequitable treatment.
While the terms of the original bill were characterized to mean that every district employee, from the superintendent to every non-classified employee in the district, would be furloughed on the same date(s), House debate has also revealed this to be a false characterization of the language. Under H3628, it is unlikely that a furlough would actually mean that all district-level and school-level locations would “turn off the lights and lock the doors” on the same date(s), which might offer the greatest equity in an already deeply inequitable bill. In our view, this “rolling” furlough adds insult to injury, and undermines the intent of the original bill: to communicate a need for shared sacrifice across the school district, and to implement furloughs as a last resort and at the same time for all employees.
In short, The SCEA’s reservations about H3628 and its effects on public education in poorer districts have been shown to have merit, and that S375 was clearer, more measured and more prudent means of promoting maximum spending flexibility while protecting classroom instruction for as long as possible.S375 is scheduled for continued debate on Tuesday, March 4. The SCEA urges you to vote for further amendments that essentially protect or enhance the Senate compromise agreement, and to vote against further amendments that sacrifice classroom instructional time unnecessarily.
Please be reminded that the decisions you make on these bills both set a precedent for future deliberations on these topics, and that grave decisions are temporary and do address the larger problem of education funding. We encourage you to take actions that raise revenues immediately and for long-term investment in education. The SCEA stands ready to communicate your support to a statewide network of public school educators and employees, and to aid you in your efforts, when you are ready to take those steps.
Sincerely,
Jan McCarthy
President, The SCEA
AT-WILL EMPLOYMENT DEBATE CONTINUES TUESDAY
Impassioned debate continued today on H3448, a bill strengthening statutes regarding the at-will nature of employment in South Carolina, with Sen. Kay Patterson and Sen. Jake Knotts, among others, rising to oppose the present text and to offer amendments. Speaking from the Senate well today, Patterson told Senators, “American citizens have rights, I don’t care how far they are down on the totem pole. I told you yesterday who this ‘at-will’ bill was going to cover: the peasants and the sharecroppers. Who’s going to stand up and look out for the rights of our American citizens?”
Patterson is working with The SCEA to draft an amendment that will offer some protection to non-classified employees in public schools by ensuring that employment status and rights published in district employment handbooks will be preserved. As written, H3448 would establish that policies published in employment handbooks would have no meaning under law, and they could not be used to defend an employee from frivolous, arbitrary and capricious job actions taken against them.
That amendment, and debate on the bill, is scheduled next Tuesday when the Senate reconvenes.
SCHEDULE TIME WITH GOVERNOR SANFORD
Beginning last month, Governor Mark Sanford is making good on his promise to be available to South Carolina residents who want his attention. Sanford’s office has begun scheduling brief visits during his “Open Door at Four” program on Wednesdays. Although the visits are not individually long – reports of five- to ten-minute chats have been heard so far – they offer new access to regular South Carolinians.
Because education is the state’s largest budget expense and the concerns of educators and public schools are often a priority on the minds of voters, President Jan McCarthy urges The SCEA members to contact the Governor’s Office at (803) 734-2100 to schedule time to discuss these matters with the chief executive.
