Thought for today

The only people who claim that money is not important are people who have enough money so that they are relieved of the ugly burden of thinking about it.

Joyce Carol Oates (b. 1938)

I’m back…..and talking about contracts

Not that I have any allusions about anyone missing my blog during my absence, but I will explain  that I have stayed away from this blog topic until the municipal primaries were completed for this cycle.  I didn’t want to find myself in the position of endorsing or denouncing anyone who has the energy and willingness to serve in a public position.  Now — do I support term limits?  — that’s another question and one I don’t have an answer for.  School boards are not well served by extensive participation by the same voices — especially when the incumbents believe they should stay on the board to “protect the seat” from the unqualified who dare to run against them.  On the other hand, the PSEA has been around for a long time, and will continue to formulate a state-wide (and nationwide to some extent) strategy every year.  It may take a few terms before a board member can really understand the role of negotiation in managing your own district.  So a mix is good — depending on the components in the mix.  With senior board members including new members, we are well served.  When they are an exclusive club, who have little regard for new ideas, not so well.

As I stayed out of the election fray, I found myself cringing at periodic statements by candidates about what they could do for this community.  While my thoughts and comments are in response to local candidates, my concerns are most certainly relevant to anyone running for or voting for a school board position.  “Fiscal responsibililty” – giving our children the best” – “keeping taxes low” …..and all those platitudes that we all like to hear.  One local candidate surely cringed after knocking on my door — not knowing what would face him on the other side.  I asked about his goals and what he felt he could bring to the table, but then I went off on how simplistic it is to have goals and how difficult it is to accomplish them.  This candidate felt that his demographic (elementary age children) was especially lacking on the current board.  I, of course, reminded him that everyone who has a child in the district was at some point an elementary parent first.  My first year on the board my youngest child was 5.  I knew then and I know even better now that elementary parents have very little perspective on the process of educating children.  Each level has its own talking points — and each level is obviously naive about what the next level has to offer.  The continuum is the base of knowledge. 

Am I saying that an elementary parent is unqualified?  Nope.  I just know that what you want to accomplish when your children are first getting on a bus to school is very different than what you can afford to attempt when your last child is graduated from the system.   Having your children in a classroom for a large part of the day is a very vulnerable position if you are at all in an adversary role with that classroom teacher.  Parents have their needs — and teachers have their rights, and kids just have to be there.  It’s an interesting and complex mix.

As a new elementary parent, your precious child leaves a preschool where you know the teacher well and he/she knows you by first name.  You have dropped them off (maybe even at the classroom door) and picked them up with a personal hand-off.   When it’s time to start kindergarten, you actually walk them to a BUS STOP where they get on a bus without seat belts, and they attend a building without air conditioning, and they go in the morning or afternoon (without you choosing), and the bus only goes one direction….and unless you have a lot of time to volunteer in the classroom, the teacher may not even recognize you at ACME unless you remind her/him who you are.   And if you are a full-time working parent, you may never have occasion except for curriculum night and the scheduled 20 minute conference to actually see the teacher.  And that preschool class that had maybe 12-15 kids in it — seems intimate if you are on the wrong side of a class size policy….(which always seems wrong if your child is in it).

So what does this have to do with contracts?  Here’s my focus for the next few entries.  I did several contracts during my time on the T-E board.  I felt the process was civil and went well.  There were occasional attempts to influence me through my children (“ask your mother what the Go for the contract button means”) and one threatened unfair labor complaint because I had “intimidated” an un-named teacher that taught my child.  (quickly recanted when my lawyer suggested I get the details or we would consider defamation charges).  The negotiations were about terms of work (7 hours and 35 minutes is our contract day — longest in Chester County – not negotiable!!!) and wages/benefits. 

 But here’s the deal I understand now, away from the table, that I didn’t even consider then:  we didn’t negotiate wages or benefits.  We negotiated raises and increases in benefit costs — and how we would account for them.  And folks, that’s the problem.

Teachers deserve to be well paid, but in this economy, it’s hard to define what that means.  College graduates are looking desperately for jobs.  Salaries reflect the numbers of applicants chasing few jobs.  The notion of an underpaid teacher is becoming  outdated — especially when contrasted with unemployed workers.  Teachers do not make hundreds of thousands of dollars, but they do make a very decent salary that is based on 180+ days of 7 hours and 35 minutes of work (that’s the contracted part).   They are paid by a taxing authority, so there is little fear of a pay check not clearing the bank.  Pink slips are virtually non-existent.  There is no mandatory retirement age enforced, and quality is what the individual teacher chooses to deliver.  TE is one of 6 districts in PA that has met the PSEA goal of a $50K starting salary. This starting salary  goes up every single year — and the salary for each teacher goes up every single year (and each salary step seems to increase with every single contract).  Districts (taxpayers)  pay for graduate education that triggers another form of raise for negotiated levels of achievement.  Teachers have a benefit plan that doesn’t resemble anything in the private sector in that the employer (again: taxpayer) pays virtually (and in some cases 100%) all of it.  And no matter what year it is, or how long the contract is, the above comments stay true.  The end of one contract simply  means you start talking about the new raises, and the new, higher starting salaries, and the new “top step” money….but rarely do you add any obligation to the process of teaching.  Sometimes they will add a non-teaching day (or even a teaching day) but that increases the salary and obfuscates the actual raise percentages.   Oh yes — you are tenured after 3 years…so performance isn’t a factor in your salary either.  After their annual union meetings in Hershey setting state-wide strategies, one district negotiation focuses on  improving education benefits, another improves health care benefits at retirement, and another might put lots more money on the “steps” of the salary schedule.  The next contract, your teachers are coming at you with whatever the other district improved (regardless of where you have already added costs).  This isn’t done to attract teachers (though it does influence individual decisions, there are many, many applicants for each position).   This isn’t even done to retain teachers (or there would be a state contract).  This is done because every district wants to claim to be the best, and teachers have a right to strike. No one on a board or in a district ever wants that to happen — including the teachers.  So it stays amicable and pleasant and you reach an agreement where the district only spends “some” extra money…and every teacher who was already going to get a raise now gets a bigger one than in the previous contract for their level and education.  And papers never talk about taxes — they talk about tax increases.  Keep those increases low…. The idea of freezing wages  or keeping staff on the same “step” for more than a year is simply not on the table.

The other piece — our state allows you to accrue the right to a pension at the rate of 2.5% per year worked, on your final 3 year average salary.  So, start at 22 years old — at $50,000.  Work 185 days or so and have as the baseline that you do not get rated “unacceptable” (which doesn’t influence your pay, just puts you into a professional improvement program).  Once hired, you get a guaranteed raise every single year you teach (tenured at 25 — so your job is yours) — and retire at 62 with a pension equal to 100% of your salary that is untaxed in Pennsylvania.   (And if you still want to work, you can come back in another capacity — often in New Jersey — and start at a high level making a full salary and still getting your PA pension).  Let’s pretend that those raises were only 2%…(which they NEVER are) and you are making over $100K in 40 years….so that will be your pension annually.   How much does someone in the private sector need to save to generate $100K a year untaxed by the state?  And how much does each district have to contribute to the state each year to fund that retirement obligation?   So — teachers aren’t rich.  But outside of the wall street crowd, do you know anyone who is?  Had a double digit raise not based on performance any time in your recent memory?   And how many would give up raises for tenure/free benefits/lifetime pension? 

So friends. This is my topic.  I look forward to comments and questions.  I’m going to give you some examples and some thoughts to ponder.  I respect teachers, but I’ve lost respect for the contract process.  I’m going to tell you why incumbents may understand the game better than new people, but also why incumbents have in many cases been behind a major effort to hide information from the public “who don’t understand.”    I’m going to try to encourage you to look hard at the folks who have taxing authority and  control the purse  strings in your community — and what is behind their interest in serving.   We can talk about the benefits of incumbency, and the perils of naivete — and vice versa.  These people negotiate salaries and then raise your taxes based on the costs of personnel.  It’s a lot of power in a local board. 

Oh — one more thing:   I will try to explain salary schedules and contracts and benefit obligations, and how the law doesn’t penalize teachers who strike (no loss of income). That’s really an interesting twist.  (Check out the Stop Teachers Strikes website referenced in the blog roll)

I’m back….hope you are listening.

Check out this week’s Main Line SUBURBAN Life

I can scarcely begin today’s post because I don’t know which item to tackle first.  For those who don’ t have the paper or haven’t seen it yet — here are my choices:

1. Documents in Right-to-Know case released  – page 1
2. Tredyffrin Republicans will have a new look – page 1
3. Editorial: “We Need to do things a little different around here”  page 2
4. Chester County employees put on notice that pay raises may be eliminated - page 23

 I think what I would like to tackle today (in light of the fact that tonight is TE’s Finance Committee meeting) is the 4th one — which is sort of back there in the paper and might not get noticed.  It’s online from the Feb 15th Daily Local.    http://www.dailylocal.com/articles/2009/02/15/news/srv0000004699694.txt

The purpose of the article is to outline budget planning for 2010 — “Chester County finance officials have told department heads and elected officials they should plan to reduce their operating budgets 2 to 4 percent for next year.”  (Note:  The Chester County Finance Director is Denny Bolton, who was a long-time business manager for Owen J Roberts School District — so he knows the ins and outs of school spending as well as government spending).   It is unlikely that any school district would plan for a spending decrease (which is where the editorial about doing things different (sic) comes in),

Key comments from article:  

…the department heads and elected officials were urged to prepare two sets of preliminary budgets. One option should be for a 2 percent reduction, another for a 4 percent reduction …”This may be accomplished by eliminating nonmandated programs that do not align with the strategic goals or identifying operational savings…In either case, (2 or 4% decrease)  officials may need to eliminate any annual salary increase for employees in 2010.

As the article continues, some speculate that they do this worrying often and don’t believe anything will come of  it.  There are some sounds of indignation that county employees would not get the 3.75% raises that (apparently) some feel they are entitled to.  But there is also the comment by County Controller DiGiorgio 

“The vast majority of the over 2,500 county employees who work for our government do a great job,” DiGiorgio said at that meeting. “They deserve to be treated with respect. However, we need to consider whether it is prudent to provide them with a raise of 3.75 percent while recession-hit Chester County taxpayers will be seeing very little in the way of salary increases in 2009 and, in some cases, may lose their jobs in these hard economic times.”

 

Citizens of our community need to engage in the budget process.  T-E (and many districts across the state) see the state-mandated “cap” as the floor to their tax plans — not the ceiling.  A 4.1% increase does not have to be voted on by the public (beyond that increase, there are only specific reasons to increase taxes without triggering a referendum–so the “secret” is to stay at or below the cap line).  So instead of worrying about what to spend, boards are more concerned with how much they can increase without scrutiny.  How about a rebate?

Many school districts (and TE is certainly a leader in this) have significant “fund balances” — reserve money that has accumulated in the good times of real estate transfer tax growth and investment interest.  T-E’s fund balance exceeds $50 million.  So with a budget of $100+ million, and no plans to reduce spending, they are planning a 4.1% tax increase AND to use approximately $4 M from the fund balance to offset spending increases.

Taxes are a funny thing — people don’t talk about the tax bill — only the increase.  Hey — you pay the whole thing.  Has anyone thought about using fund balance to pay half the taxes?  Give today’s residents our own school tax holiday?  Sure that means next year (or maybe not until the year after) taxes would “double”, but it’s our money they are sitting on and not spending on these increases or costs. Future residents are not stuck with our debt — they are spending our savings.  

There are lots of reasons this would be complicated — and would require some serious  ”out of the box” thinking. ( I live by the notion that if I have an idea — it can happen.  It just takes effort.)  But as our teachers sit in negotiations and see our reserves piling up, why would they ever step up and participate in the real economy — the one that doesn’t have annual raises OR tenure OR lucrative employee benefit plans OR pensions OR collective bargaining with the right to strike and shut down a community education program?  (That sounds like a knock at OUR teachers, but as I have stated previously, and will talk about again — our local organization (TEEA) is strongly encouraged [read: pressured] by the state organization PSEA….you know — the one whose goal is a starting salary statewide for BRAND NEW TEACHERS right out of college, no experience — of $50,000 — accumulating 2.5% a year toward a pension with 10 years to the top salary).  

More later.  Tonight (Thursday) is the TE Finance Meeting.  Maybe some of us should plan to be there?  Check out the TESD.net website for time and place.   In the meantime, please share your thoughts about these topics and any you want to talk about.

Public Information (and a new blog address)

This is a modified version of the post I left on my previous blog site –

After several suggestions from folks around the state, I am relocating my commentary and efforts to this site  from  http://TESD2009.wordpress.com  Asking Questions of School Boards (TESD). 
WHY? Because an address of TESD2009 is too local a name for the broad issue of school spending. While I live here, and was a member of the TESD board for 3 terms, this blog is not meant to be narrowly focused on TE.

TE does a great job. Don’t get my scrutiny confused with criticism. Having said that, however, I was somewhat appalled (confused, really) at a Public Information meeting this past week when the Board’s president Betsy Fadem said that TE wants to be first in education, but not transparency. Board member Debbie Bookstaber, along with Karen Cruikshank and Pat Wood did not seem to agree with this assessment. Caution in what to disclose is prudent, but openly suggesting that we aren’t about disclosure is something else.  I pointed out the denials I had received in my request for open records — and the charge I was asked to pay for a copy of the TE Teacher’s Contract ($9 for 36 pages scanned — in random order — which apparently means that our Administration does not have an electronic word copy of our major negotiation document).

Consistent with that hesitation about transparency however, the Board’s president had summoned a presentation (a paid presentation) by the District’s solicitor at this same meeting, attended by all of 3 members of the public.  Not that I don’t enjoy hearing a legal presentation on Open Records, but there was no decision to be made at this meeting, and paying several hundred dollars for his appearance  just in case a question came up seems a bit wasteful. Mr. Roos had prepared a memorandum on the topic and distributed it to the audience. That seemed to have been sufficient for the process, and his presence may have been a bit unnecessary as billable time. (Note that the District’s Open Records Officer and the Superintendent were not present at the meeting — perfectly customary in this case as the administration was well represented by other staff, but if the Board felt that the Solicitor needed to be present, perhaps they might have ensured additional administrative support).

So — welcome to my new site.  I have stopped posting on TESD2009 (for now anyway) and will try to follow the request of some of my followers — to advise readers about school spending and what kinds of questions you might ask of your own board (while examining my own local board’s budget and process.)

 

$uper Bowl $unday

I started with an Eagles Loss.  Today is about the winners that went on.  I haven’t been doing a blog for public consumption for very long, but long enough to be told by several folks that I needed to have a blog address that had universal appeal — so this is the continuation of what I started over on tesd2009.  It’s not just about TESD, which (for those hitting this by searching other topics) stands for Tredyffrin Easttown School District.  I’ve moved all the posts from the other site, but the comments didn’t come with us….so please feel free to post your comments again — or add a new one!

Today’s title is Super Bowl Sunday, relying on the dollar sign for the S because like School Spending…(which also uses dollars rather liberally), the Super Bowl is a big dollar event.  It’s not for fans — it’s for corporate spenders.  I’m sure there are a whole bunch of die-hard Steelers fans in bars all over Tampa — who didn’t have quite the cash to pony up for a ticket (and not many places they could buy one if they wanted).  I’m guessing since the Cardinals did not sell out their early play-off games that not a bunch of Arizona fans made the trip to (not quite as sunny) Florida.   Here’s the point — things we want seem to be getting more out of reach — because other people set the price.  A good public education starts to be out of reach, because the costs of living in a good district become less affordable.  “Excellence” in education does not come cheap.

So what does that have to do with the purpose of this blog?   Values, I guess.  School Spending is important — and it’s put into the hands of school board members who are elected to do a pretty thank-less volunteer job of attending meetings and in our local district’s case, to decide how to tax for and spend $100,000,000+  a year……….yikes.  No wonder they claim that tax increases will only cost the average household $178 a year — because when you look at the big number, $178 isn’t really that much (except that’s the NEW amount …. not the whole tax!!)

So — for those migrating here from my previous site, I have some work to do just to get the information in place to start analyzing.  I’m not going to just talk about TESD, though they are the reason I have developed the interest in the process.  I was on that school board for 3 terms — 1991-2002.  That means I left 6 years ago — and the tax rate was 12.03 .  This year, it will be somewhere around 17.66 (that would be the cap max — which they have said will be what they do) — or 47% increase.  That’s pretty hefty for a period of time that has virtually no significant inflation.  Of course, there are lots of reasons — enrollment increases, collective bargaining increases,  “time in the job” increases, infrastructure maintenance and upgrades….the same thing that affects us all.

So — I will move on from here.  I’m going to assume (and you know the danger in that word) that we all share some common values — that we want the best for our children, but that we don’t think that the “best” is always a result of more. 

I love using quotes (rely on them really) because they remind us that our observations are not all that innovative or remarkable — we’ve been there before:

If liberty and equality, as is thought by some, are chiefly to be found in democracy, they will be best attained when all persons alike share in the government to the utmost. Aristotle

Notice to the TE School Board — Times are changing

I recently sent this message to our Board of School Directors (excerpts only)

     “From Today’s NYT – worth reading as you ponder real estate taxing plans, merit increases and other compensation issues. The good news for your employees is that they all have a pension guaranteed by the state, so “saving for the future” is not a critical issue and you don’t need to look for creative ways to help them do it. …..{someone on the board may be able to } help predict the impact of Wyeth on this area – the article suggests ~20,000 people will lose jobs as a result of the acquisition/merger [with Pfizer].

 

     When GE and GE/ Space did a major layoff in the 60s, even local country clubs lost upwards of 30% of their membership – so it wasn’t just the “vulnerable” that were affected.

 

     In the new teacher’s contract, people who DID NOT WORK FOR TE when you negotiated it (i.e.they started on Step 1 this year) will get these raises over the term of the contract if they do not change educational levels.

 

 

Bachelors 17.7%

Masters 18.0%

M+15 25.4%

M+30 29.5%

M+45 30.0%

M+60 34.0%

PhD 36.8%

 

 

…… Do you know ANYONE in industry that will get that kind of raise over 4 years? It’s not always JUST the big picture. These are the details that concern me. The cost of health care is not under anyone’s control …{and that fact} exposes local taxpayers to inordinate risks. Market driven issues cannot continue to be so important in compensation – as the market is likely to LURE people into education that would not really want to be there…. pre-tenure hires can be a waste of staff development resources….

 

      Here is the link to today’s NYT article:

              BUSINESS / ECONOMY | January 27, 2009
              Layoffs Spread to More Sectors of the Economy

By CATHERINE RAMPELL
Companies across the board are resorting to mass job cuts, suggesting that employers expect a long downturn.

 

 

 END OF EMAIL

 

 

I encourage readers to click on the link and read the article — though similar information was trumpeted on the front page of USA Today and I’m sure countless other media outlets.

 

Chicken Little Just Checking

 

The sky may or may not be falling — but taxing authorities will never run out of money (and we just might). The Federal government is considering spending trillions to stimulate the economy — a fairly loud signal that the economy is weak. Locally, we need to be sure we don’t budget for what we WANT, but for what we truly NEED. I believe our Board understands that — but we need to remind them when pressures from other factions influence their decision making.

How state pensions affect us locally

Here’s the commentary on this topic as it applies locally– as Mr. Nunn has clearly articulated the problem at the state level.

TESD has nothing to do with setting pension rates. The Pennsylvania State Employees Retirement System (PSERS) is a bit like a state-sponsored social security for designated groups of state workers (who also are eligible for and pay social security). The Board of School Directors only negotiates terms of employment — not retirement eligibility. PSERS requires a percentage of compensation to be paid by the employee and the employer — exactly like FICA, but without an annual cap. So each raise for any employee requires additional contributions for FICA, Medicare and PSERS. (the state – yes, your other tax pocket [YOTP], refunds a portion of the contribution for FICA/Medicare).

Here’s the taxpayer’s problem: TE may well have enough “stashed” in fund balance to avoid any staggering tax increase to pay for the increased costs of the state retirement plan Mr. Nunn warns of, but the state doesn’t — so schools are not the only source of this shortfall. YOTP again. What generosity local boards offer to their employees becomes an obligation to the state forever.

Recently, TESD approved an across-the-board compensation increase of 4% for all administrators. Given the teacher’s contract, this was not an extraordinary salary increase. My concern, however, is that it was voted on and approved by the School Board through a consent agenda item in October. October 2008– to go into effect July 2009. (The vote took place several months before the Administration started to warn about the need for cuts due to revenue shortfalls). There has been no mention of merit increases, but the Administrative Compensation plan references them, so they may be yet to come. There are moves being made by administrators — retirements and new job descriptions. I ask that the Board of School Directors deal with these changes in a public motion, and not bury it in consent where we cannot be party to the deliberations. The burden of having your compensation voted on in public is certainly mitigated by tenure and pensions. Transparency should not be something the board fears.

 

Cut PA Pension Fund Increase Jan 23 2009

I received this in today’s email from a local taxpayer — thought it was worth sharing. All the emphasis (colors) are my own.

Wallace Nunn is a former chairman of the Delaware County Council

A good return was seen in ‘01 for worker benefits — now a tax increase is needed

Former State Sen. Vincent J. Fumo will soon start getting a six-figure annual pension, according to a recent report. If this sounds like a bit much, that’s because it is. But it’s only a small part of the problem.

In 2001, the leadership of the General Assembly, with the encouragement of public-employee unions, approached the governor with a plan to increase pensions for teachers, state workers and legislators. It seemed, said those advocating the increase, that the state pension funds had enjoyed excellent returns for several years. Therefore, the state could increase the pension benefits of its workers and teachers from 2 percent of their salary per year of service to 2.5 percent – a 25 percent increase.

With this level of benefits, an employee who put in 30 years could get a pension equal to 75 percent of the average of their highest three years’ salary, instead of 60 percent. Most taxpayers would consider 60 percent more than fair, since most taxpayers receive nothing close to that.

Coming up short

Of course, the argument went that this would cost the taxpayers nothing, as the state would always earn 10 percent or better returns on its pension funds. There was little discussion of the possibility that returns could come up short and taxpayers would have to make up for it.

Well, a funny thing happened. It turns out the pension funds not only did not continue to gain at very high rates, but have in fact lost billions of dollars.

This is not to say that the pension fund managers have done a bad job; they are subject to the ups and downs of the economy much as we all are. But here’s the rub: We taxpayers have now guaranteed high pension benefits.

The promised returns were an illusion, but the taxes won’t be. Over the next few years, you will likely see massive increases in taxes, especially property taxes for local school districts. Estimates of the revenue needed are in the billions, and they will no doubt grow.

Day after day, we see articles about cuts in services and possible tax hikes because Pennsylvania is, like the rest of the country, suffering a huge drop in revenue. Our leaders are wringing their collective hands, trying to figure out the least painful way to surmount the financial problems they face.

Go back to 2 pct.

Let me offer a partial solution: Go back to the 2 percent pension formula. The state’s original assumption – that the pension funds would earn enough to pay for a substantial increase in benefits – was wrong. Given that, Gov. Rendell and the legislature should rescind the increase.

This would reduce our pension liabilities by billions of dollars and shrink future budgets. And if the funds are ever in surplus territory again, let’s consider giving the break to the taxpayers. After all, they put up the money in the first place.

The leadership in Harrisburg today is not the leadership that enacted this shortsighted scheme. That should make it easier for them to stand up and say it must be changed. With 2 percent of the courage shown by our troops in Afghanistan and Iraq, our state officials could show some support for the people.

---

E-mail Wallace Nunn at wnunn@aol.com.

 

Teacher Strikes in PA Jan 22, 2009

I recently shared this in an email with neighbors.

From a recent Chester County Action Alert:

Pennsylvania remains the “Teacher Strike Capitol” of the U.S. In the past 7 years, PA has had 82 teacher strikes, more than all other states combined, including two strikes here in Chester County.

 

Pennsylvania is one of 13 states that still permit teachers’ strikes. We are fortunate in TESD that we have not had to experience this, but as pressures on the economy increase, our starting salary for a teacher right out of college (which is now at $45.1K for a bachelor’s degree with no experience) may well reach a level where “just say no” to the negotiators results in a strike threat. Our current teachers work hard for their money – but 16 years of teaching puts you at our maximum salary – so a 38 year old reaches our “top step” and will still get raises every year from then on. And they get tenure after 3 years in public education. The old claim that teachers are underpaid is no longer relevant in our region. Teachers in TESD work a 7:35 day by contract for 190 days, and they all are eligible for a pension system that results in a pension of 2.5% of their final average salary for each year they teach . In other words: Start teaching at 22 years old and teach for 40 years — retire at 62 after a tenured career at 100% of the average salary of your final 3 years. (free of PA income tax). This year,TE’s most senior teachers earn in from $86.5 to $100K in this contract year– pay based solely on seniority and education. (difference between low and high is due to educational attainment). No one minds paying for great teaching. Negotiations, however, are not just about good teachers and experienced ones. At the end of this four year contract, our most senior teachers will earn salaries ranging from $90K to $110.9 depending on educational level, and newly hired teachers directly out of college will get a starting salary of $52.2 . Market presures and inflation are how Unions demand and boards grant annual increases in starting salaries. The market comes from neighboring districts who offer more salary to new recruits — so in effect boards bid each other up. The teachers across the state meet together every summer to set goals for negotiations and salary/benefit demands. Boards from varying districts do not typically share strategies.

The difficulty of strikes is that it costs your family and your children important educational time – but it does not cost a teacher in Pennsylvania a dime. Work missed is either made up by cancelled vacation time (winter/spring), adding days to the end of the school year (but still ending before June 30) or not made up – but teachers still receive their full salary. They are not docked for any time missed. Teachers are paid for a full school year at their full salary, whether or not the full year takes place. SO _- the decision to strike has no true economic cost to the striking employee. Likewise Pennsylvania requires all teachers to pay “fair share” Union dues whether or not they choose to join the teacher’s union. This bill advocating a “no strike provision” does not alter a union’s ability to collectively bargain – only to keep them from holding families hostage to wage demands by threatening the quality of a classroom education.

 

That sounds dramatic –but it should not. The PSEA (the PA teacher’s organization) is the largest lobbying organization in the state. These issues do not necessarily affect people who can afford their homes — but in this difficult economy, will that be true always? In this economy it may not be true now. Contracts are done years in advance.

Click on my CALL TO ACTION page to read a request for action from Stop Teachers Strikes.org. It is an opportunity to try to help Pennsylvania join the other 37 states in this country that recognize that wage and benefit bargaining should not affect time in the classroom.

 

I was on our local school board for 3 terms and negotiated with our unions multiple times. TE is fair – but the state organization PSEA does try to call the shots way too often. Right now, the ability to strike is NOT a local issue. (but the reality that the union can strike certainly influences the bargaining strategy of the Board of School Directors.) This is about the children in our state. Please take a moment and read about this bill – and if you agree, please write a letter and pass this link on.

Do you have any questions you want me to research?

Name (required)

Email (required)

Website

Text only. No markup allowed.

I hope my expertise streamlines the process for those of you wanting answers. Feel free to use this contact form to ask me any questions or to guide me to research on which you have questions. I’ll respond in a post so that we can all learn together.