Disputes over working conditions -- not raises -- have soured contract negotiations between the Anne Arundel County Board of Education and school employees.
Union leaders say the board wants concessions that would abolish parts of the contract outlining how employees are evaluated, disciplined and transferred.
"They're trying to conquer their employees," said Dee Zepp, president of the 600-worker Secretaries and Assistants Association of Anne Arundel County. "They're stripping away everything that it has taken us since 1974 to get into the contract. It's a power play."
Michael A. Pace, president of the eight-member school board, had a low-key response when asked about the frustrations of union leaders.
"We have a professional negotiator, and we have every reason to believe he, as well as his counterparts across the table, are bargaining in good faith and the process is moving forward," said Mr. Pace. "We have a policy not to comment on labor negotiations."
Charles LoCasio, executive director of the Teachers Association of Anne Arundel County, said, "We've never bargained in the press."
As the union's chief negotiator, he refused to comment further, referring questions to John Kurpjuweit, president of the 4,000-member union.
"Let's just say I'm not smiling over negotiations," Mr. Kurpjuweit said. "I can't see teacher morale improving unless something changes. With everything teachers have had to face in the last year -- the board's reneging on the contract and getting beat on because of the Price scandal -- we were hoping for some show of respect from the Board of Education. I don't see much going on to demonstrate any respect."
Negotiations began in October and, according to the contract, must be wrapped up by Dec. 15, although both sides can agree to extend the deadline. If the negotiations fail, the union or the school board must ask state school Superintendent Nancy S. Grasmick to declare an impasse.
At that point, an arbitrator would be called in to help both sides reach an agreement. The unions and the school board have gone to impasse three times in the last four negotiations.
This year, teachers want a two-year contract, rather than the year-to-year contracts they have had.
Education sources who asked not to be identified confirmed that in the interest of peaceful negotiations, the unions representing principals and teachers did not ask for a raise.
Union leaders representing about 7,400 employees said negotiations with the school board's $175-an-hour lawyer have been anything but peaceful.
School administrators said Edward Gutman of the law firm Blum, Yomkas, Mailman, Gutman and Denick was hired to handle negotiations because Bill Scott, an assistant superintendent and the school board's longtime negotiator, retired last year.
As for the issues raised by the board, "I call them face-slappers," said Richard A. Kovelant, executive director of the 250-member Association of Educational Leaders, which represents principals and administrators.
For example, he said, the school board wants to eliminate a provision in the contract that requires school employees to be represented on various advisory committees.
Mr. Kovelant also criticized the board's request to remove a contract provision that prohibits employees from working more than 37.5 hours in a week.
"If you don't specify the number of hours, that abrogates the right to work to rule," Mr. Kovelant said. "We're frustrated. These negotiations are an amazing thing. The other three unions are slowly approaching impasse, and we're still waltzing around with them. This was a year when everyone wanted peace."
Jim Pickens, president of American Federation of State County and Municipal Employees Local 1693, which represents school cafeteria workers and custodians, could not be reached for comment yesterday.