Diocese and teachers disagree on result of employees' council

The following letter to the editor of the Wilkes-Barre Citizens' Voice appeared December 12, 2009:

Diocese and teachers disagree on result of employees' council

Editor:

In the November edition of the Catholic Light both the administrator of the diocese of Scranton, Monsignor Bambera, and human resources director, James Burke, are quoted about how wonderful the employees' council work is progressing. This is true from the diocese's point of view; not so true from the employees' point of view.

There is no binding contract between the diocese and the employee council. The council can only discuss and make recommendations about wages and working conditions. The diocese is free to accept, reject, or change these recommendations at any time without even consulting the employees. This makes the employee council useless as far as representing the teachers, secretaries and maintenance personal.

In the past two and a half years since Bishop Martino took away the teachers' union rights, the diocese has frozen teachers' pay, forced teachers into contributing $1,500 per year to a health care plan with higher co-pays and higher deductibles than the old plan, took away the dental plan, forced teachers to drop the retirement plan we have been with for years and join the diocese plan, increased the length of the school day, added an extra teaching period, increased class sizes, and required teachers to perform additional duties. This added work for less pay is reported as wonderful progress by Monsignor Bambera and Mr. Burke, but doesn't seem as wonderful to the teachers.

Also since Bishop Martino dissolved the union contracts a number of neutral arbiters have ruled that the diocese owes teachers in several schools money specified in the old contracts. The diocese refuses to pay this money owed for almost two and a half years now. Lawyers for the teachers are presently preparing a suit against the diocese to force payment. If the diocese will not even honor a binding contract and arbiter's rulings what makes teachers on the employee council think the diocese will honor nonbinding conditions suggested by this council?

Each of these changes were made over the years without even talking to the teachers, and the diocese spokespersons were often quoted saying, "This is what the teachers represented by the employee's council wanted." Reread the changes listed above made unilaterally by the diocese and ask yourself, if you were a teacher would you want these things? Would you trust the diocese to treat you fairly in a nonbinding agreement?

Eugene Gowisnok

Teacher in the Scranton Diocese for 33 years
Swoyersville