Thursday, August 26, 2010

The NFT's counter offer; Sweet relief

The School Board posted the following statement on their Negotiation Website . . .

At last night's negotiation session, the NFT delivered a verbal counter offer which included concessions in some areas but not to employee health care contributions. The Board will await the written proposal to review and analyze. Another negotiation session has been scheduled for September 23rd.

I cannot comment on the counter offer until such time it is given to the Board in writing so we can conduct a proper analysis.

Our new Courier Times beat reporter, Christian Menno, attended his first Board meeting on Tuesday, and he wrote this article which appeared in yesterday's newspaper. Nice to have you aboard Christian. Welcome to the freak show :-)

A few words about our labor attorney before I sign off . . . I've received numerous emails and Facebook comments from citizens who feel Charles Sweet is not counseling the Board properly regarding a legal challenge to the NFT's work-to-contract action. While I understand that you may disagree with Mr. Sweet, I don't get why some of you criticize him for his opinion that no judge will grant an injunction against WTC. When you go in for a risky operation, a good surgeon will alert you to the odds of success/failure but they ultimately leave the decision to the patient. It's the same thing in this case. Sweet's opinion is that a legal challenge to WTC will fail, and now it is up to the Board to determine its next course of action.

If you think that we should ask for a court injunction against WTC, then your beef is with the School Board, not the attorney.

I've got to disappear for a few days so I won't be around the Blog or Facebook much. If you submit a comment, please be patient in waiting for it to appear.

No comments: