Lucia Mar strike likely avoided

April 9, 2015

teacherThe Lucia Mar Unified School District has reached a tentative agreement with its teachers’ union that may settle a heated contract dispute.

District officials and the Lucia Mar Teachers’ Association have clashed for months, and union members voted late last month to endorse a strike. But, the two sides met for several hours on Wednesday and reached a deal that would give teachers a 6 percent increase over two years.

The tentative agreement grants Lucia Mar teachers an immediate 3 percent raise and a second 3 percent raise, effective Jan. 1, 2016. As part of the deal, the teachers may also be allowed to renegotiate salary, benefits and one discretionary item for the 2016-2017 school year.

Members of the teachers’ union must still ratify the agreement. Also, a majority of the Lucia Mar school board must vote in support of the pay increases for them to take effect.

Had the two sides not reached an agreement, a strike was likely to begin on April 16.

On Friday, a mediator released a report compiled by a fact-finding panel. District officials and union representatives then agreed to meet on Wednesday.

Negotiations began around 9 a.m. Wednesday and ended around 5 p.m.

For most of the contract dispute, union negotiators demanded 10 percent raises for the teachers. District administrators initially offered 2 percent pay increases. The district raised its offer late last month to a six percent bump in pay to be implemented over a three-year period.

The average Lucia Mar teacher currently receives a salary of about $61,000 a year. Lucia Mar teachers received a 2 percent raise in 2012-2013 and a 4.3 percent bump in pay in 2013-2014.

The teachers organized several rallies and marches over the past couple months, drawing hundreds of supporters. The teachers’ union also filed an unfair labor practice complaint about the district.

District officials argued that more funds should go to tutors and disadvantaged students, as well as to closing the pension gap and improving school programs and facilities.


The administrators of the government schools are corrupt and incompetent buffoons.

If the administrators of the government schools were not corrupt and not incompetent, they would index the salaries of teachers to the Cost of lLiving Index.

Its time to get the moral-insanity of Organized Crime (i.e., the Teachers Unions) out of the government.

3 putt

Why are you looking at this as having one party or the other “backing down” ? Sometimes negotiations are hammered out and merely reflect a compromise. If you have to pick a winner or loser, I would suggest the kids won.

Ana di Plosis

I agree that avoiding a strike is a win for the students and the community.


And as more and more tax money is syphoned the certain losers are the taxpayers

Ana di Plosis

You do not understand how tax money is disbursed to school districts. The governor/state legislature decides how much money will be allotted for public education each year in its budget. They then disburse that money according to their formula. The supt. and school board then determine who to divide up the funding for that year. In the case of Lucia Mar, a disproportionate % of that money has gone to pet projects and not to teacher compensation. Please get a clear handle on this issue before embarrassing yourself further.


Hey all that matters is that kids can go to school, learn and teachers can focus on the class.

Thank you to all involved for pushing this through with no strike.

Ana di Plosis

suferdude: Well put.


I sure would like to see a copy of that fact finder’s report. What did it say about the district’s financial situation?


Uh dah! The union obviously does not want us to see that report so they were busy as teachers hammerin iout a deal. Thank God! It does not take a rocket scientist to figure out it must not look the way the teachers union hoped it would.

Oh well, time for all to get back to business.


Just think, if you backed out your union dues and handled this on your own you’d be money ahead today!

Another pathetic union backed down with the threat of scabs doing the work indefinately. My heart hurts for my teacher friends.

Ana di Plosis

The “pathetic union backed down”? How do you figure? The district’s previous offer was 6% spread over 3 years; now it’s 6% spread over a year and three months. In other words, Hogeboom backed down. It’s not a great deal, but it’s definitely (note the correct spelling) better than a strike.


I seem to recall the statement “nothing less than 10%” , to me 6% is less than 10%, whom do you say backed down?

Ana di Plosis

10% was the union’s STARTING point back in September, to which the district responded with 2%–their “last, best, and final” offer. In other words, the union NEVER said “Give us 10% or we’ll strike.” They did say “2% is not our fair share and therefore, no acceptable.” The district upped their offer (slightly); ergo, the district backed down.


So the union also knew 10% was not a fair share? So they are no better than the administration.

Ana di Plosis

Only fools would start the negotiations at EXACTLY the amount they’re seeking. Intelligent negotiators ALWAYS start higher so that the negotiations arrive somewhere in the middle. In this case, the midway point between 10% and 2% would have been 6%. That would have been an excellent outcome for the teachers. Even 5% would have exceeded the SLO teachers’ raise of 4%. In reality, what the district offered is not sitting well with Lucia Mar teachers. If their responses on the LMTU Facebook page are an accurate indicator, they will not ratify this tentative agreement.


Definitely definitely definitely some sour grapes flowing here today! You said it correctly (teacher), it’s not a great deal. My point was you would have been much better off without your union who’s taken your money all these years and gained you virtually nothing.

3 putt

My comment above belongs here