I reference THIS article.
"Director Cy Douaihy said the one-year contract means the district and union will be back at the bargaining table soon..."
Here is my question: Why is Director Cy Douaihy even allowed to vote on this fact finding report (and soon to be contract)? He has a direct personal financial stake in the agreement because his wife is a member of the bargaining unit. On what planet is THAT NOT considered a conflict of interest?
This doesn't require further commentary or analysis. Any school board director who has immediate family members that would benefit from a labor contract with the district should not be voting on the contract, period. The fact that this exists in the Scranton School District is yet more proof that education comes second to self-interest in the district.
Please, someone try to defend this, as I'd love to hear the argument FOR being allowed to give your family a raise using public money.