BY MIKE CETERA
There's a great deal we don't know about what happened last month at an East Aurora teachers union meeting. But I think it's fair to ask why School Board member Rayanne Carlson was there in the first place.
The union, according to a story by staff writer Heather Gillers, has filed a complaint with the Illinois Educational Labor Relations Board. Because no one is talking, the details are a bit sketchy. Still, Gillers learned the union wants the state board to take action to prevent Carlson from "busting into our meetings, encouraging our members to engage in unlawful activities and suggesting that union members assist (board members) in their personal agendas."
State law is sufficiently vague on what school district officials -- including board members -- can or can't do when it comes to teachers unions.
From Section 14 of the Illinois Educational Labor Relations Act:
Educational employers, their agents or representatives are prohibited from:(1) Interfering, restraining or coercing employees in the exercise of the rights guaranteed under this Act.
(2) Dominating or interfering with the formation, existence or administration of any employee organization.
According to the Beacon story, the state board will investigate the charge and decide whether to hold a hearing. If that happens, here's the procedure:
Q: What happens after a charge is filed with the IELRB?A: The charge is assigned to a Board Agent for investigation. The Board Agents speaks with the parties involved and reviews any written documentation provided. When necessary, the Board Agent may ask for additional documentation or witness statements. If the investigation reveals an issue of law or fact, the Executive Director will issue a Complaint and Notice of Hearing, setting the matter for hearing before an administrative law judge of the Agency. If the investigation reveals no issues of law or fact sufficient to warrant a hearing, the Executive Director will dismiss the unfair labor practice charge.
Q: If my charge is dismissed, can I appeal that decision?
A: Yes, Executive Director’s dismissals may be appealed to the Board. Please refer to the IELRB’s rules for information and instructions on filing an appeal.
Q: What happens during the hearing process?
A: Within 15 days of the issuance of a Complaint, the respondent is required to file a written answer to the Complaint. A staff member will also contact the parties to discuss the possibility of reaching a settlement. One week before the date of the hearing, the parties will file a prehearing memorandum setting forth the uncontested material facts, a list of exhibits to be introduced and a list of witnesses who will be called. During the hearing, each party will have the opportunity to present relevant evidence, question witnesses and file written post-hearing briefs. After reviewing the record and legal precedent, the administrative law judge then issues a written decision to the parties, which may be appealed to the Board. Please refer to the Agency’s rules for further information and instruction.
Q: What happens during the appeals process?
A: When a case is appealed to the Board, it is assigned to one of the Board’s staff attorneys. The staff attorney reviews the record, including the written exceptions to the administrative law judge’s decision and any responses. The staff attorney makes an oral presentation to the Board members during their meeting, including a recommendation of the disposition. Subsequently, the Board members review and vote upon a written Opinion and Order, which is issued to the parties. Appeals of decisions of the IELRB are taken directly to the Appellate Court in either Springfield or Chicago under Rule 335 of the Illinois Supreme Court rules.
Q:What remedies are available when it has been determined that an unfair labor practice occurred?
A: To remedy unfair labor practices, the administrative law judge or the IELRB attempts to restore the status quo ante; that is, to return the parties to the point they were at before the unfair labor practice occurred. Depending on the nature of the violation, some remedies could require the employer to post a notice containing an acknowledgement of the violation and a pledge to refrain from similar action in the future; rescind certain work rules or policies; reinstate employees who were wrongfully discharged, with or without backpay; and engage in good faith bargaining.
Carlson and others in the district have declined comment. On a district-focused blog she is involved with, Carlson acknowledged the allegation against her, but said she couldn't comment.
Please keep me and all those involved in your prayers.
Commenters, however, have posted their opinions, which range from calls for her resignation to pleas to wait for the case to be resolved before making a judgment.
So is it true that Clayton Muhammad is resigning from district 131 and taking a position with the Illinois Tollway Authority? Why hasn't the Beacon done a story on that?
I do not know what happened and as far as no comment statement that is common in any suit. I have know Rayanne for awhile and this seems out of the norm for her so lets wait and see what comes out of this. I also saw in the paper that the union president could not be reached? What I find odd is that the beacon knew about this and a reporter was at the service center but nothing was posted on the website about this special meeting as it should of been. Since I hadn't been at the service center I don't know if it was posted there. To me it's seems like sort of a witch hunt. I know Rayanne is in a union and I think she would think twice before busting into a union meeting and if she did why didn't they stop her it's there right. I'm in a union and believe me if a manger from where I worked came busting in they would call the police.
UNION Are what is wrong with America! I respect Rayanne but if she is in a UNION like you say, I will have to watch her more closely.
This is all much a do about nothing. If you ask me it looks like some sort of set up.
My name is Diane Carlson, younger sister to Rayanne Carlson. I was disturbed about the way the article was written about Rayanne in Friday's paper.2/ 08/2008.
First and foremost, my sister is the most honest person I know and she would not deliberately say or do anything to break any rules or regulations.
Secondly, I have continually asked her why she wanted to be on the school board since her kids are grown and by the way, all 3 graduated with honors fron EA High, and she has a full time factory job for 27 years and now she can have her free time to enjoy life. Her reply was she wants the Aurora schools to have the best for the kids of today and its her community so she is trying to do her part.
I am a retired police afficer, so I am well aware of how things are done in and around Aurora including misinterpreted Beacon News articles. I served the community of Aurora and was paid for doing my job. My sister on the other hand is giving her time just for her own peace of mind, which from readin the article it sounds like someone is not happy about her speaking her mind. I no longer live in the area and don't know exactly what is going on with Rayanne do to the fact she has been given a gag order. I do know there are enough friends, family and co-workers out there that will be able to read between the lines of your school board article. Respectfully, Diane Carlson
Here is a posting from the district focuesd blog that tells some of the story. I think some people are stepping out on a ledge starting to post about it but here is some of the story.
Some facts on the board member "busting in" on the union meeting.
-The union was consulted prior to the board member visiting.
-The union indicated that the board member can not be in the same room as the meeting.
-The board member visited and was not in the same room as the meeting. She was on the other side of the school.
-The teachers were happy to see the board member there.
-The board member did not give any instructions or recommendation to the teachers that CHOOSE to go to the room where she was.
-The board member sat passivly and listened to what the teachers had to say.
Someone lied to the reporter. The person who lied to the reporter does not want the board to know what the teachers think about what is going on in their school/district.
This investigation and issue will go nowhere because nothing was done wrong.
Maybe to person who contacted your paper is the one that is lying and fueling this fire.
Found this on another blog:
Anonymous said...
Some facts on the board member "busting in" on the union meeting.
-The union was consulted prior to the board member visiting.
-The union indicated that the board member can not be in the same room as the meeting.
-The board member visited and was not in the same room as the meeting. She was on the other side of the school.
-The teachers were happy to see the board member there.
-The board member did not give any instructions or recommendation to the teachers that CHOOSE to go to the room where she was.
-The board member sat passivly and listened to what the teachers had to say.
Someone lied to the reporter. The person who lied to the reporter does not want the board to know what the teachers think about what is going on in their school/district.
This investigation and issue will go nowhere because nothing was done wrong.
February 16, 2008 11:03 AM