Debbie Fery 2/13/23 Debbie Fery 2/13/23

What you can do —

Testimony submission is closed now, but you can still write your House rEPRESENTATIVE and YOUR SenatOR. It is very helpful to our cause if many counties are represented on Lobby Day.

WHO IS YOUR SENATOR?

WATCH VIDEO OF SENATE EDUCATION COMMITTTEE HEARING on SB 283

Senator Dembrow’s PRESENTATION SLIDES

Debbie Fery 2/12/23 Debbie Fery 2/12/23

PERS BENEFITS

Background

SB 283 will affect ALL substitutes in that they will have the opportunity to earn PERS benefits regardless of the length of their assignment.
One of the most alarming trends that substitute teachers in Oregon have been experiencing is the loss of their retirement benefits due to the outsourcing to private educational hiring companies. For example, the company will replace the personnel duties of a school district and take over the jobs you used to get from your School or Educational Service District. Then, you receive a letter telling you to reapply for your job, and presto, you have a new employer. You may not realize that you are no longer eligible for the 600-hour PERS accrual benefit.

Why is this a problem? OSTA has been fighting for the right of substitute teachers to be considered employees of the school district. This language is crucial for obtaining the ability to reclaim the right to accrue PERS retirement benefits.

It is an important fact that being able to retire with a pension helps retirees stay out of poverty. The professional substitute teacher is the backbone of the school and deserves to be treated as a member of the educational team. Currently, some substitute teachers earn PERS while others do not. If you live in a district that outsourced to a third-party company, you can no longer get PERS. Many substitute teachers used to take long-term assignments with the understanding that they would meet the 600-hour rule for PERS. With contracting out, that does not matter anymore. OSTA has members who would like to be able to retire with a PERS benefit. They have been substitute teaching for many years and hoped they would be able to receive a PERS pension.

OSTA worked with the Senate Education Committee to create language that would state that substitute teachers are members of the school district. Their bill, SB 283 has language that provides some hope for teachers who want to convert their teaching time into PERS retirement benefits.

Sections 7 & 8 of SB 283: (5) A teacher employed by a school district as a substitute teacher

shall be:

“(a) Considered an employee of the school district, regardless of the

length of the assignment, and shall be under the management of the

school district; and

“(b) Eligible for retirement benefits as an employee in a qualifying

position for purposes of the public employees’ retirement laws and el(5) A teacher employed by a school district as a substitute teacher

shall be:

“(a) Considered an employee of the school district, regardless of the

length of the assignment, and shall be under the management of the

school district; and

“(b) Eligible for retirement benefits as an employee in a qualifying

position for purposes of the public employees’ retirement laws and eligible for health benefit plans as an eligible employee for purposes of ORS 243.105 to 243.285. “[(5)] (6) This section does not apply to substitute teachers represented in a bargaining unit in the school district by which they are employed.

Why is OSTA excited by this? This language would put into statute that substitute teachers are members of the school district. This line in the statute will create a foundation that substitutes can use to argue with PERS that they are eligible for benefits.

OSTA wants to make sure that this bill passes with this language intact. We are concerned that lobbyists do not convince legislators to remove this language. Lobbyists from school administrators' Coalition of Oregon School Administrators (COSA) will try to influence legislators to change the language. OSTA needs to protect our right to fair treatment.

SB 283 Testimony Letters — It is important to know what we are up against, and these letters tell us. Read them carefully to counter, contact GAC to find out more. Additionally, enjoy seeing what OSTA members contributed.

Debbie Fery 2/12/23 Debbie Fery 2/12/23

PAID FOR TRAINING

BACKGROUND about PAID TRAINING:

BOLI has ruled that substitute teachers must be paid for their time when trainings are mandatory in order to be called to work. Individual teachers have brought their cases to BOLI and won. Their district then paid for the training. This is four or seven hours of online training that districts require and is easily documented. But BOLI has not informed all districts that they need to be paying their employees for the mandatory training. In HB 4030, temporary reimbursement was granted to substitute teachers and Instructional Assistants. SB-283-3 makes the training payments permanent for substitute teachers.

Write your Representatives!

SUBSTITUTES ARE ENTITLED TO BE PAID FOR TRAININGS, INCLUDING ANNUAL MANDATORY TRAININGS - SAMPLE LETTER ONLY -

Due to complaints from substitute teachers going to BOLI (Bureau of Labor and Industries) over unpaid training pay, the legislature passed a temporary bill that pays substitute teacher for their mandatory trainings). As you know, substitute teachers are not allowed on Frontline until trainings are complete, and therefore cannot work if they have not been marked as completed Substitutes with BOLI wage claims win their claim because unpaid, required time spent completing the trainings is not voluntary. For more information on this guidance see https://www.oregon.gov/boli/workers/Pages/paid-time.aspx. Your analogy, while might seem to fit under the past practice rules is wage theft and BOLI does not support work conditions that steal wages. Requiring teachers to donate their time for free in order to work fits a classic work theft definition because unpaid training is required for work.

THIS IS A SAMPLE LETTER ONLY — REPEAT DO NOT COPY AND PASTE — THIS IS A SAMPLE LETTER ONLY —REWRITE & MAKE IT YOUR OWN — CONTAINS PERSONAL REFERENCES — DO NOT COPY AND PASTE AS IS — CHECK LINKS BEFORE SENDING — — —

The temporary changes created by the state legislature are covered by HB 4030 and subsequent rule making OAR 581-017-790 (ODE’s Substitute Training Cost Reimbursement Grant Rules). My class time for the mandatory training is covered under these rules. The guidance from the ODE website should help you understand the rules.

OAR 581-017-0790 (“(c) Reimbursement for time taken to attend Required Training. Time will be reimbursed at the Substitute Teacher's or Instructional Assistant's current wage rate.”)

Coos Bay School District applied for and was awarded $87,000 in grant money (https://www.oregon.gov/ode/schools-and-districts/grants/Pages/Substitute-Reimbursement-Grants.aspx), which should cover the costs of these trainings. House Bill 4030, Sections 7;1 and 7;2b explicitly mention licensed personnel in high-need positions, like myself who has retained my Preliminary Teaching License from TSPC, be afforded the opportunity to receive their due payment out of said grant money for the purposes of retainment and recruitment.

These rules will cover the just cause for me to insist that I am eligible for reimbursement for the time I donated to your district for this year. I am not requesting costs for previous years even though last year the district paid for my seat time to complete the trainings in the past 2021-22 school year. Additionally, you state that substitute license fees are not paid for by the District, yet the recent Emergency Substitute Teachers are afforded the opportunity to have their licenses paid for by the district. My desire to work in this district is a bonus for Coos Bay School District because you have an experienced licensed teacher available I could have returned to the Portland Metro Area to substitute during the pandemic, and received substantial bonuses for the same efforts I graciously gave to Coos Bay during those risky and difficult times.