Santa Barbara Teachers Union Voting This Week on Whether to Authorize Strike 

The Santa Barbara Teachers Association (SBTA) is holding a strike authorization vote this week. 

Talks of a strike have festered throughout contract negotiations with the Santa Barbara Unified School District over the past year. This week’s authorization vote is a preliminary measure, alongside strike fundraisers and the continued presence of frustrated teachers at school board meetings.

Voting began on Friday, May 24, and will conclude this Friday, May 31. All 736 union members will have the opportunity to vote (anonymously). A two-thirds majority would be needed to pass. 

“We want to make sure that everybody has their voice heard on how we should proceed as a union,” said SBTA president Hozby Galindo.

Should the vote pass, the SBTA executive board would gain the power to call a strike and set a strike date. However, a strike cannot legally occur until the union and the district finish the impasse process and SBTA’s current contract agreement expires on June 30. 

“Our intention was never to strike,” Galindo stressed, echoing teachers’ comments at the most recent school board meeting on May 28. “Our goal has always been to try to settle at every step of this process.”

In the fall, the parties went into negotiations declaring good faith. However, negotiations stalled due to their disagreement over wages — SBTA wants 15 percent next year and 8 percent in the following year, while the district has offered 9 percent and 4 percent. 

The parties then declared an impasse in January and entered the state-mandated impasse process, which began with two very long mediation sessions intended to produce a settlement agreement. Neither was fruitful. 

Now, they move on to fact-finding, which is scheduled for June 12 — the earliest the district said they could meet, two months after the parties were certified for fact-finding in April. (The later date has only fueled teachers’ accusations that the district has been “stalling” the process.)

During fact-finding, each party will present to a neutral panelist the facts that support their argument — SBTA, for one, argues that the district can afford their wage proposal — with potential for mediation and a settlement on that day. These meetings can last up to 24 hours.

“If there’s movement and there’s true collaboration and compromise being made, you’ll find both teams there into the late evening hours trying to get a deal,” Galindo said. 

If an agreement cannot be reached, the neutral third party would issue a report within 20 days, and then the district would have 10 days after that to make the report public.

“On June 12, everybody can be a winner — and I’m talking to students, parents, teachers, the district — if everybody comes ready to bargain in good faith,” Galindo added. “I think it can be done. But again, it takes two willing parties.”

In response to a request for comment, district spokesperson Ed Zuchelli assured, “Santa Barbara Unified remains committed to finding a solution to our labor negotiations. We are hopeful that the fact-finding process will help us find a path forward for an agreement.”

During Tuesday’s school board meeting, teachers repeatedly emphasized that they do not want to strike, nor interrupt students’ education in the fall, but feel pushed to prepare.

“To the community,” began SBTA Organizing Co-chair Kate Lambert, “yes, SBTA is now at the stage where we have to seriously consider the ramifications of a strike,” including creating a strike-fund with community donations. Community support for the union has increased in recent months, with barely a street in Santa Barbara missing a sign or poster expressing solidarity with SBTA. 

“This is not to scare anyone; it’s to make sure that we can protect nearly 800 members of our union that are facing a tough choice that will financially impact them,” Lambert added.

Lambert also promised on behalf of SBTA that a strike “won’t be a surprise thing,” while emphasizing that they are “working hard to avoid having a strike.”

Other speakers on Tuesday, such as Washington Elementary teacher Katherine Cantu, accused the district of “over-saving” and underpaying its employees, referring to the district’s revenues and the 10 percent kept in reserves (the state only requires 3 percent). 

Cantu also stressed that any raises should not apply to top admin who make six-figure salaries in quiet offices, only to the staff who deal with the everyday racket of the classroom.

“Anyone making over $250,000 is not worried about the price of bananas increasing. I am,” she said. “Please consider the teacher’s perspective.”

During the meeting, the board also approved the allocation of $9.28 million in grant and state funds for music and the arts across the district — a big move for their Strategic Arts Plan, but just short of restoring a seven-period day for electives —  but the wages conversation spilled over.

Santa Barbara Junior High (SBJH) theater teacher Rich Lashua called on parents to encourage the district to prioritize both the arts and its employees. 

“The people behind me,” Lashua said, referring to the board room full of teachers, “want to know why we can pivot to save music but not everyone else that has been here in tears, anger, and, yes, respectful requests, for the entire school year… We have the money… there is still time to do the right thing.”

In addition, the board approved Steve Venz, the district’s chief operating officer, as the district’s alternate negotiator, as the current negotiator — assistant superintendent of human resources John Becchio — will be on vacation this summer.  

​​“We are all interested in getting to an agreement,” said Superintendent Hilda Maldonado on Tuesday night. “We are very hopeful to get there. But in the case that we don’t get to it right away… Dr. Becchio has some time off planned for himself — well-earned for his vacation time. So we want to make sure we have somebody in place.” 

Becchio will be at the June 12 fact finding session, but Venz will step in should any further negotiation sessions be required while Becchio is off.

“We really have tried so hard to settle, but it takes two teams in order to get that done,” Galindo said. “Our goal was never to go on strike. It’s just a tool that we have at our disposal. And if the district doesn’t do better, if they don’t come to the table ready to actually compromise and negotiate, unfortunately, that’s where we have to go.”

Correction: A former version of this article stated that the district and board released ParentSquare and social media posts criticizing union behavior at board meetings, but that was incorrect. The single post criticized by teachers during the board meeting was from one specific board member. Additionally, the article implied that John Becchio would be on vacation during the June 12 fact finding date; however, Becchio will be participating in fact-finding.