Education official confirms Elizabeth Forward fact-finding session schedule
A Pennsylvania State Education Association official said a fact-finding hearing is scheduled for Tuesday as the latest step in Elizabeth Forward School District teacher contract talks.
“Yes, the (Elizabeth Forward Education) Association requested fact-finding from the Pennsylvania Labor Relations Board after progress wasn't being reached in negotiations,” PSEA UniServ representative Christine A. Cortazzo said in an email Thursday. She said the hearing is slated at the district offices in Elizabeth Township.
EFEA represents approximately 180 teachers at the district's high school, middle school and four elementary schools.
“We hope the fact-finding process will result in a favorable contract for both the association and district,” Cortazzo said.
After a special Elizabeth Forward school board meeting on Wednesday, district Superintendent Bart Rocco said the district and EFEA have had “eight or nine sessions” since January.
The teachers' previous five-year contract with the district expired on Aug. 31. Classes began for the fall in Elizabeth Forward on Sept. 5.
Elizabeth Forward is one of three area districts where teachers are working under expired contracts. Talks also continue in East Allegheny and Duquesne City school districts.
Patrick Cloonan is a staff writer for Trib Total Media. He can be reached at 412-664-9161, ext. 1967, or firstname.lastname@example.org.
Show commenting policy
TribLive commenting policy
You are solely responsible for your comments and by using TribLive.com you agree to our Terms of Service.
We moderate comments. Our goal is to provide substantive commentary for a general readership. By screening submissions, we provide a space where readers can share intelligent and informed commentary that enhances the quality of our news and information.
While most comments will be posted if they are on-topic and not abusive, moderating decisions are subjective. We will make them as carefully and consistently as we can. Because of the volume of reader comments, we cannot review individual moderation decisions with readers.
We value thoughtful comments representing a range of views that make their point quickly and politely. We make an effort to protect discussions from repeated comments either by the same reader or different readers.
We follow the same standards for taste as the daily newspaper. A few things we won't tolerate: personal attacks, obscenity, vulgarity, profanity (including expletives and letters followed by dashes), commercial promotion, impersonations, incoherence, proselytizing and SHOUTING. Don't include URLs to Web sites.
We do not edit comments. They are either approved or deleted. We reserve the right to edit a comment that is quoted or excerpted in an article. In this case, we may fix spelling and punctuation.
We welcome strong opinions and criticism of our work, but we don't want comments to become bogged down with discussions of our policies and we will moderate accordingly.
We appreciate it when readers and people quoted in articles or blog posts point out errors of fact or emphasis and will investigate all assertions. But these suggestions should be sent via e-mail. To avoid distracting other readers, we won't publish comments that suggest a correction. Instead, corrections will be made in a blog post or in an article.