GREENFIELD — The teachers union has filed an unfair labor practice charge with the state Department of Labor Relations alleging the Greenfield School Department is violating the law, and has filed a grievance with the school district alleging contract violations and that teachers have been bullied and fed misinformation.
The Greenfield Education Association (GEA), which represents teachers throughout the Greenfield School Department, said the contract violations “must cease.” According to a written statement released by union President Ann Valentine, GEA has hired a lawyer to explore its pursuit of additional remedies under the federal Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) and Family Medical Leave Act (FMLA).
The union alleges that The Management Solutions Inc. (TMS), the private company hired by the School Committee to manage the district while it seeks a new superintendent, is attempting to revoke medical accommodations for educators who applied for them in accordance with the provisions of the ADA and FMLA.
The Management Solutions has been providing the Greenfield School Department with its current business manager, TMS President Andrew Paquette. Most recently, the School Committee hired two consultants and the district’s Interim Superintendent Judith Houle, all from The Management Solutions, at a cost of $10,000 per month.
The union alleges that Paquette sought to “coerce” educators into waiving their rights and allowing him to speak directly with their medical care providers.
“The bullying and misinformation must stop,” Valentine said. “These are public schools, not a corporate playground. If the School Committee allows this corporation to come in and create a hostile work environment, break the laws and bully our most vulnerable educators, then that is going to quickly trickle down to the children that we are all here to serve.”
The union sent a letter written by attorney Ryan J. Murphy, who is representing the GEA, to School Committee Chair Amy Proietti and Paquette demanding compliance with anti-discrimination laws.
Proietti said Wednesday morning that she has no comment at this time. Houle said Wednesday afternoon that she cannot talk about issues tied to contract negotiations.
The letter dated March 1 says the union has cause to believe that the Greenfield School Department is blatantly disregarding both the Americans with Disabilities Act and anti-discrimination laws, and is putting its most vulnerable teachers at increased risk of serious illness or death.
The union is calling on the district to engage in a “good faith” process consistent with Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) guidance and with anti-discrimination laws with teachers who are at high risk of the harmful effects of COVID-19.
“The district should begin this process by rescinding the letters that were recently issued to dozens of its teachers by the School Committee’s consultant, Andrew Paquette,” the letter continues.
In Murphy’s letter, he charged that instead of addressing the particulars of individuals’ medical documentation, the School Committee sent the same “form letter” to everyone and did not provide sufficient information to require the district to provide an ADA accommodation of remote work. It says that the district “threatened” that unless it receives appropriate documentation by March 5, teachers will be expected to return for in-person instruction as required by the district’s re-entry plan.
The union said it is not aware of any re-entry plan or requirements related to one. The School Committee discussed pursuing a re-entry plan at its special meeting on March 3, but did not reveal any plans or a specific date of re-entry. Instead, School Committee members said they would discuss the issue more at their regular meeting on March 10.
“The union had worked with the district through December to iron out safety protocols related to the Phase 2 restoration of educational services for special needs students,” Murphy wrote. “Since then, the district has not negotiated with the union about developing a Phase 3 or Phase 4 re-entry plan. If a plan does indeed exist, the district should make it public for the union and the community to evaluate.”
Murphy wrote that the letter sent to teachers failed to explain what was insufficient about the documentation they and their doctors supplied.
“This unnecessary overreach only serves to intimidate members from continuing with their requests for reasonable accommodations,” the letter reads. “The district should actually engage with the particulars of the information already submitted by each member, rather than making the process more difficult and causing members with medical conditions to shy away from it.”
It says the CDC has specifically addressed remote teaching accommodations for at-risk teachers in its recent guidance, which states that employers should offer options for staff at increased risk for severe illness from COVID-19, including telework, virtual teaching opportunities, modified job responsibilities or temporary reassignment to different job responsibilities.
In its grievance to the district, the GEA writes, “the most pernicious and creepy aspect of the demand was the inclusion of a medical waiver to allow Paquette to communicate directly with all of the affected educators’ medical providers without reason or need.”
The GEA says the remedy is for the district to “cease and desist. Revoke the demand. Follow the law. Stop bullying and creating a hostile work environment. Make members whole for any and all harm suffered. Hire a competent HR manager.”
The Greenfield School Committee’s lawyer Russell Dupere and the GEA’s lawyer Jennifer MacDougall at the Massachusetts Education Association did not return phone calls for comment by press time Wednesday.