After thinking for a day about the results of the election, here are some scattered thoughts:
The Flaws of the Tenure System. All this discussion about the flaws of the tenure system are conceptually interesting but eradication or modification of the tenure system is not a something that can be solved on the local level, regardless of who is on the Board. I don’t see the opportunity for immediate savings here.
Savings on the Horizon? I’ve been hearing that a spate of retirements are expected in the next few years. This will probably provide some relief to the system over the medium term, also regardless of who is on the Board.
Class Size. While I personally like the fact that classroom sizes rival those of private and charter schools, this is an area where adjustments can produce savings in the short term. I have no idea what the optimum class size is. When I was in school during the baby boom, the average class size was about 30 kids, which, I contend is too high, based on the amount of time I spent doodling on my sneakers without anybody noticing. Someone, who is an expert on matters of educational efficacy, once told me that studies have found that kid is better off in a larger class with a better teacher than a smaller class with a lousy teacher. Unfortunately, tinkering with class size does nothing to solve the problem of lousy teachers. Luckily, in my experience, a vast majority of the teachers are quite good. It would seem to me that the price for increased class sizes would be paid by lost junior level teaching positions and the possibility of the degradation of educational quality for the type of at-risk kids who need a lot of teacher face time.
Too Many Administrators. I’m not in the educational business so it’s hard for me to speak to the question of how many administrators are needed. My sense is that this issue relates directly to the tenure problem and that if you can’t fire people, but they no longer have the stamina for class teaching, you have to do something with them. Perhaps the anticipated retirements will help here.
Sharing of Services. There appears be significant overlap between the youth-oriented services provided by the Board of Education and the Recreation Department. Many of these services are already provided to residents on a fee basis, but I would look here for ways to eliminate duplicative offerings to reduce administrative overhead.
71 comments:
Re: class size, Esther both of my kids have small classes my youngest has 15 in his class and the oldest has about 16 kids in most of his classes but some are as small as 5 kids. Two different private schools to boot.
Sharing of Services. There appears be significant overlap between the youth-oriented services provided by the Board of Education and the Recreation Department. Many of these services are already provided to residents on a fee basis, but I would look here for ways to eliminate duplicative offerings to reduce administrative overhead. Esther what overlap is there between the schools and Rec. dept?
Karin - And the point of your first comment is?
As for your second question: The Recreation Department has the Sunshine Gardens pre-school program, which is duplicative of what is offered by the Board of Ed. In addition, both the Recreation Department and the Teaneck Center for Community Education, have various summer day camp programs, all of which are quite good - The rec summer program at Rodda, Sports and Arts, Camp KoosKoos - I'm sure there are others that I'm not aware of. Finally the Rec Department and the Schools provide various sports and arts-related after school activities for youth. While all of these services are offered on a fee basis, I think savings may be possible through consolidation of administration of these programs.
The teacher's contract used to be on the website and was removed when the website was updated. I contacted both the webmaster and the late superintendent to ask that it be restored, was promised follow up and nothing happened.
I was finally able to track down a copy of the salary scale at the following address:
http://jd2718.wordpress.com/2007/01/10/teacher-pay-scale-teaneck-nj/
I realize now that working from memory, I made a mistake in a earlier posting. To get to the top of the scale, you do not need to have an MA+32 credits, you need to have a doctorate. It is the doctoral award that is subject to Superintendent approval and so no Superintendent approved a gym teacher getting the doctoral salary bump. Sorry for previously posting incorrect information.
However, this schedule also highlights a potential solution. The Superintendent's discretion should be extended to the Masters +32 column. Being in this column represents a roughly 15% pay bump over teachers with Masters degrees. Without getting into the question of whether the base pay of all teachers should be equal, once a teachers is rewarded for a Masters degree do we really need to pay more for additional training for every teacher.
The added pay might make sense for teachers who teach advanced courses and special education teachers with special skill sets, but just doesn't make sense when applied across the entire teacher population
Esther my first comment was in regards to this comment you made.
While I personally like the fact that classroom sizes rival those of private and charter schools,The BOE offers pre-school now? I thought the pre-school offered was just for special ed kids, to give them a bit of a "head start".
Unless the needs-based pre-K program at Bryant has changed an awful lot, it isn't the same as Sunshine Gardens at all. I looked in earnest to find a structured, non-religious place for my child to attend preschool for a year before beginning kindergarten and was hard-pressed to come up with much besides Sunshine Gardens.
That's not to say that there couldn't be some sharing of services, but they really are different.
Please refrain from posting entire articles when links will do (with relevant passages to support your point). It really disrupts the flow of a blog.
A previous commenter posted:
FOR BETTER SCHOOLS, FIX TEACHER PAY By MARCUS WINTERS
New York Post
Okay I'm a new homeowner and new to Teaneck, so this whole school budget business confuses me.
I personally voted for the budget, because education has always been a priority in my family and I want to do whatever I can to support the public school system.
But now that the school budget "failed" I realized I am not sure what the whole budgeting process is. What happens when a school budget fails?
I personally voted for the budget, because education has always been a priority in my family and I want to do whatever I can to support the public school system.
But now that the school budget "failed" I realized I am not sure what the whole budgeting process is. What happens when a school budget fails?Since there were already indicators that the budget was going to fail, a sub-committe of the town council was formed to meet with a sub-committee of the school board to determine what should be done next.
The Council will hold public hearing at which time you (and everyone else) should come and tell them what you think the correct number should be for the Education budget. You can also let them know where you think cuts should be applied (raise class size, cut administration, etc...)
Then a revised budget number will be made by the council (possibly with recommendations as to where the board of ed should apply them) that hopefully reflects the views presented to the council. A new budget will then be sent to Trenton for approval. Trenton may reinstate the items that were cut if they are determined to be vital or they can leave them as is.
It's good that you came out to vote, but remember - you don't have to be against education in order to vote against the budget. You only have to be against spending $78 million.
I believe in the importance of education, come from a long line of teachers and voted no on the budget.
Welcome to town, Stacy! I concur with Swiggle that you don't have to be against public education to vote No on the budget. I have two kids in the public schools and this year voted against the budget for the first time. I just feel that we, the taxpayers, have been put into an untenable position by the school board which seems unwilling to deal with these hard economic times.
Swiggle said "It's good that you came out to vote, but remember - you don't have to be against education in order to vote against the budget. You only have to be against spending $78 million."While $78 million may seem on it's face to be too much money to spend on education, since school systems are not interchangeable and children not widgets that produce specific results based on a specific the level of input, most people in town would be hard pressed to cite what the right number should be. People with kids in the public schools are inclined to be more generous. People with no "skin in the game" are inclined to be less so.
Public School Parent - But as a parent of kids in the schools you might have a different set of priorities for what should be cut than someone with nothing to lose, no?
Why does the school system pay $100,000 plus for a public relations person?
How about $111,000 for a director of information systems?
Public School Parent - For example, how would you feel if the Board decided to reduce costs by cutting out the honors program or eliminating the music and arts programming?
For example, how would you feel if the Board decided to reduce costs by cutting out the honors program or eliminating the music and arts programming?Such dramatics Esther I am surprised you did not throw in the varsity sport(s) program in the mix
Here is a thought Esther, perhaps Teaneck could stop providing busing or transportation reimbursement for private school kids. I know it is not a large amount of $$ but it is a start.
"While $78 million may seem on it's face to be too much money to spend on education, since school systems are not interchangeable and children not widgets that produce specific results based on a specific the level of input, most people in town would be hard pressed to cite what the right number should be.And as hard pressed as that is to figure out, we are still asked to vote.
Don't get me wrong, I don't like the fact that laymen that have no clue get to vote on the budget, I don't think they should get to vote period (until I remember that "Democracy is the worst form of government except for all those other forms that have been tried from time to time.")
But if the argument used against those that voted against the budget is that they have no "skin in the game", then my response is that you haven't explained what their stake is. You haven't done a good enough job teaching them what a good education does, not just to their home values, but to their future.
What about if the BoE just froze salaries for this year? There is no contract in place so there is no obligation to implement an increase. I bet a fair amount of Teaneck residents did not get pay raises this year. The Teaneck fire dept. offered to forgo their increase.
While we may have to get to the point of cutting services, shouldn't our first priority be to manage the cost of the services already being delivered.
78 million dollars is not accurate. The budget is 93 million plus, if the non-tax levy dollars are included.
With 3300 students in the schools, that is a lot of per student expenditure.
What are we paying for that other towns are not???
With per student cost so high ,where are those extra dollars going? can anyone answer
I had a professor that used to say that numbers don't lie, until people start using them.
One thing to keep in mind when looking at the number of students is that while parents tend to take some kids out of the system to send them to private school, they have a tendency to leave special needs children in the public system. There are several reasons, especially because private schools aren't equipped to handle many of them.
Practically speaking, since the special needs children can cost many times the amount of other kids, it skews the per-student spending numbers.
And yet, Teaneck's percentage of students with IEP's is not out of line with many districts. I, too, thought surely we must have a million kids with special needs because our costs were so high, but if that were true, wouldn't they have IEP's and be represented in that total?
From an old post, here are average teacher salaries in our area:
Teaneck: $73,897
Tenafly: $44,528
Closter: $48,809
Demarest: $32,797
Englewood: $43,783
Leonia: $29,320
Fort Lee: $39,548
Pretty big discrepancy, no?
According to state records, we have 39 teachers at Teaneck High School making over $99,000 in salary.
I believe the Teaneck number to be accurate and higher than most other towns, but, the rest of those figures seem implausable.
Average teacher salary in Leonia at $29,000. Are you kidding me???
as per wiki the average teacher salary in leonia is $44720 and that is from the NJDOE 2007 stats
teaneck is $69742
The figures of the Comparitive Spending Guide specifically exclude costs such as busing, the Charter School and Special Ed. Of 105 peer k-12 districts we are, off the top of my head, somewhere between 95th and 98th on overall spending per student and 104th on spending per student on teacher salary and benefits. Anyone see a possible cause and effect behind our high spending level?
People with kids in the public schools are inclined to be more generous. People with no "skin in the game" are inclined to be less so.Or you could say: Those who don't own homes, such as renters & people who live with their parents, don't pay property taxes & therefore have no "skin in the game"
Karin,
I believe it is state law that the township must provide to students who go to private school the same bussing regs as they give to public schools.
So, if Teaneck gives bussing to kids who live 1 mile away from a school, they must give it to the private school kid. I believe there is an outer limit too - so that the private school child must be within XX miles (I believe 20).
Further, I believe that Teaneck is more generous than state law for the public school children with regard to distance from school at which they give bussing. So, they could save money by increasing to state limits. The end result would be to save money, no doubt, but would result in less PUBLIC school children getting bussing and few private school children from being impacted at all.
The irony is that this type of issue is EXACTLY the one that would prove Esther's point. If a change meant reducing private school bussing, you can be the private school crowd will yell. If the same type of change would reduce public school bussing, the private school crowd will be for it.
In other words, I want what I want and I don't give a hoot about you. That's what drives most of Teaneck politics - school and otherwise.
Why would we expect the Director of IT of a school system with more than 3000 kids and who knows how many teachers and administrators to make less than 110K???
That is probably the salary that any Manager of IT would make at a corporation.
Is it any wonder why we are falling so far behind the rest of the world in education? CEOs of failed companies make billions and we refuse to pay good teachers a living wage.
I believe it is state law that the township must provide to students who go to private school the same bussing regs as they give to public schools.Anon,
You are mostly correct. You can think of a donut with the school in the center. In the inner circle, there is no requirement for bussing at all (since they can walk to school). In the actual donut area, if you provide for public, you need to provide for private and outside the donut, you're on your own.
But there's a bigger problem with taking away bussing. There are several parents sending kids to private school that just getting by. Take away the rebate for bussing and they WILL enroll their kids in the schools. Now, I'm not saying that you are going to get thousands of kids if you take away bussing allowances, but there will be a handful that simply can't handle the financial strain.
For each one that enrolls in the public school, you just spent an additional $17k. The amount you save isn't going to be worth what it costs.
There are real ways to cut down waste, but don't start getting rid of essential services to save pennies while throwing dollars down the drain.
CEOs of failed companies make billions and we refuse to pay good teachers a living wage.The notion that teachers don't make a living wage is ridiculous. In fact they make a comfortable wage if you take into account the hours that they work and length of the school year.
I'm all for recognizing the talented teachers and adding incentives to the pay scales to retain them, but the idea that teachers aren't being paid well is simply incorrect.
In addition to a comparable hourly rate, teachers rarely have to work nights, never have to work weekends, get the entire summer off, gets a week off in February, gets a week off in April, gets 10 days off at Christmas, gets 4 days off at Thanksgiving and never has to work a holiday.
Compare that to comparable jobs in the private sector with up to 12 hour days, nights, weekends, working through the summer and 20 vacation days a year.
or maybe they'll just carpool their kids to school. Don't be so extreme.
Oh, and in the case of my father - got a regular paycheck during the summer while teaching summer school for a second paycheck. He then taught home bound kids for a third paycheck and tutored at the local PAL for a fourth - simply because your pension was based on your end pay.
This was in NY, however I wouldn't be surprised if there were similar issues in our district as well.
or maybe they'll just carpool their kids to school. Don't be so extreme.Anon,
I'm not being extreme at all. These are parents that ALREADY carpool their kids to school. They receive a credit for the bussing. Therefore it would be costing them money - not to mention the additional headache for all parents of public school children.
Swiggle,
Your experiences have obviously not been with any GOOD teachers.
My wife was a teacher. She most certainly did NOT work only 'school hours'. Even in early childhood, she had to prepare projects many evenings and weekends. We usually spent 1-2 weeks getting her classroom ready for the coming school year during the summer.
Yes, she was allowed to take a 2nd job during the summer so you can consider the wage to be 5/6 (or so) of an annual wage.
So, the average in Teaneck was 65K or maybe about 80K annualized.
WOW! that's a top salary for Bergen county.
How does your salary compare to that? What do you do that makes you earn more than the people we entrust to teach the next generation!?
And given most secular teachers in Yeshivas make even less than their public school counterparts, is it any wonder why the yeshiva system is a total failure in secular studies?
Good thing Burack wants to use it as his model!
interesting that no one is mentioning the ticking timebomb that is a large number of kids in town who are currently in private schools (primarily yeshivas) are likely to be moving into the public school system because their folks can no longer pay tuition. Can you imagine, we spend more than anyone on schools when half the town don't even attend. What the heck will costs be when they do?!
Sorry, that is not Teaneck's time bomb, that is the Yeshiva time bomb.
1) Most parents will 'find a way' because they don't want their kids in ANY public school system hanging out with 'those' kids.
2) See #1 above and multiply it given the nature of Teaneck public school. They wouldn't want a public school system if it were Ridgewood, they will want it even less given the minority nature and so-so education it provides (at least in their minds)
3) If you were correct, what happens to the Yeshivas when 25-50 kids are removed from each one. Their fixed costs skyrocket and the whole system which is already teetering - explodes completely.
Anonymous said...
Karin,
I believe it is state law that the township must provide to students who go to private school the same bussing regs as they give to public schools.
Yes Anon from the BOE website they do not bus kids to the township schools in 5-12 grades. So why do they pay for the private schools kids in these grades?
So, if Teaneck gives bussing to kids who live 1 mile away from a school, they must give it to the private school kid. I believe there is an outer limit too - so that the private school child must be within XX miles (I believe 20).
Further, I believe that Teaneck is more generous than state law for the public school children with regard to distance from school at which they give bussing. So, they could save money by increasing to state limits.
Yes they are more generous than state mandates.
The end result would be to save money, no doubt, but would result in less PUBLIC school children getting bussing and few private school children from being impacted at all. No I think alot of private school kids would be impacted, but I could be wrong. If Teaneck only buses from K-4 grades then they should only offer bussing for private school kids for those grades, or does it not work that way?
The irony is that this type of issue is EXACTLY the one that would prove Esther's point. If a change meant reducing private school bussing, you can be the private school crowd will yell. If the same type of change would reduce public school bussing, the private school crowd will be for it.
Actually I am a private school parent and I would not complain if I did not get my 4 checks each year reimbursing me for transportation.
And given most secular teachers in Yeshivas make even less than their public school counterparts, is it any wonder why the yeshiva system is a total failure in secular studies?
Do you have any evidence that the yeshiva system fails in secular studies? I haven't seen any studies done but I'm willing to be that yeshiva students on average do considerably better that public school students on standardized tests. (On average Esther - we know your kids are geniuses).
And yeshivas do not, as some suggested, get to handpick the smartest kids to accept. The fact that OOR went to yeshiva is proof enough of that.
If you were correct, what happens to the Yeshivas when 25-50 kids are removed from each one. Their fixed costs skyrocket and the whole system which is already teetering - explodes completely.
They yeshivas will survive the recession the same way the TPS will survive the budget rejection: by making the painful but necessary cuts.
Your experiences have obviously not been with any GOOD teachers.Quite the contrary, I've had great teachers, horrible teachers and ton in between. You miss my point. I'm not saying that teachers don't put in extra time and go above and beyond, I'm saying that on a whole it's not required of them. Those that do should be recognized and rewarded for their efforts.
My wife was a teacher. She most certainly did NOT work only 'school hours'.
Does she think that those that did should be getting the same wage as her? You are supporting my point.
So, the average in Teaneck was 65K or maybe about 80K annualized.
WOW! that's a top salary for Bergen county.On top of the $80k, how much more do you save in benefits? I'm betting that even though your job offers them, you are using hers, right? Is that $80k looking more like $90k or $100k now?
How does your salary compare to that? What do you do that makes you earn more than the people we entrust to teach the next generation!?It's actually less. Perhaps I should have gone into teaching.
And given most secular teachers in Yeshivas make even less than their public school counterparts, is it any wonder why the yeshiva system is a total failure in secular studies?You should stick to the topics you know. I'm a product of both public and private schools and can tell you without a doubt that I received a top rate secular education. I'd put it against yours anyday!
If you want to see what teachers or any other public employee in the state is making go to the Asbury Park Press's website in their "DataUniverse" section:
http://www.app.com/datauniverse
Click on "Public School Teachers", Select Bergen County and then Teaneck and then you can see exactly how many Phys Ed and kindergarten teachers there are in Teaneck who earn $100,000 (and these are 2007 salary figures, so by now they are probably making $104,000).
Yoni,
My proof is my neighborhood. My proof is when I see that Frisch finishes 3rd routinely in Math League behind 2 public schools. On the one hand, you all criticize Teaneck for being so much at the bottom of the scale, yet you don't realize that a significant number of Bergen County public schools are top rate. They are not failing. They get their kids into Ivy Leagues and top private schools.
From the Yeshivas, we'll never really know when 75%+ of the kids go to YU and Stern. Yes, some go to some top schools, but no more so than Ridgewood, Paramus, Fair Lawn and a host of other PUBLIC schools.
We'll see how well the Yeshivas weather the recession and beyond. How does anyone expect the avg family with 4 kids to put out 50K-75K PER YEAR in tuition! and that's assuming at most 1 kid in HS and none in college!
If 50-100 of these kids were to leave to go to public school, the cost would go up even higher as the fixed costs would have to spread even more.
Swiggle,
First, I'm all for doing away with the tenure system. I do believe it is a disaster for U.S. education, but that will not be solved in little old Teaneck.
Teachers are REQUIRED to put in extra time to do their jobs adequately. Those that do not, should be terminated. Your statement was that they are not required to work those hours, which I believe to be incorrect. If you want to take the most incompetent ones that do not work them and then say thus it is not required, I believe you are slanting the discussion greatly.
My wife worked in the Yeshiva system. Her benefits sucked. She paid most of the insurance cost herself and paying for family was absolutely prohibitive. My company allowed me to purchase insurance for a family for 10-20% of the Yeshiva cost. So, the job now looks like about 60K instead of 80K and G-d knows she never made that much in the Yeshiva (or even close).
Your salary is less than the 60-80K? I find that difficult to believe unless your wife is a lawyer or doctor.
As for sticking to topics that I know, maybe you should take your own advice. I am a product of both public and yeshiva as well. My wife is a product of a public school. My son goes to the Yeshivas. I think I've seen plenty. And when you want to take me on in secular subjects, please let me know.
What about if the BoE just froze salaries for this year? There is no contract in place so there is no obligation to implement an increase.
Not true. State law requires the terms of the prior contract be continued until a new contract is negotiated. Even if they could, it would be unsound fiscal policy not to keep the money for the anticipated raises in the budget as they will eventually have to be paid.
Contracts are negotiated between the school board and the unions. State law determines what happens if an impasse is reached and is essentially binding arbitration. The end result is likely to be raises in the neighborhood of 4% a year - perhaps 1/4 to 1/2 a % below the last contract. Despite the ardent wishes of some posters the school board cannot dictate terms.
There is also a reasonable chance that a contract may include provisions to cut health care costs - possibly by requiring contributions toward the premiums.
The article, N.J. teacher contract talks include push for smaller raises, reduced benefits is the primary source for the above predictions.
However, this schedule also highlights a potential solution. The Superintendent's discretion should be extended to the Masters +32 column.
This could be a good idea, but the school board would need to get the union to agree. No doubt they would want something in return.
I've gone through the 2007 numbers. We have 139 teachers/principals/administrators making over $99,000 a year (probably more than $100K now).
This includes 11 gym teachers and a bunch of kindergarten teachers. Ouch!
If I'm understanding what people are suggesting is that adding 100 private school students to the mix would result in $17,000 (or whatever the per pupil cost is) x 100, or $1,700,000 more in costs. I don't think this is accurate as it doesn't account for fixed costs. Someone else who follows this issues can speak more eloquently to this question.
It's also worth noting that kids don't all cost the same to educate. While it's obvious that kids with disabilities and special needs cost more, I would argue that kids who come from home environments that aren't supportive and enriched also cost more, in terms of teacher attention and academic resources. This is one of the reasons that private schools are able to educate kids more cheaply with better results - they are self selected for non-disabled kids who generally come from enriched and supportive environments.
I'm not a teacher but I would bet that it's easier to get better results from a class full of kids whose parents are doctors and lawyers than from a class full of kids whose parents are day laborers and unskilled service workers. This is main case against merit pay for teachers. If we reward teachers based on student performance, the best teachers would all flock to the high income communities and it would become very difficult to attract high quality teachers to low-income communities where the obstacles to student achievement are higher. It would result in a further stratification of society into the haves and the have nots.
As for the people who are fixated on how high teacher salaries are, are you people aware that these salaries that are approximately consistent with the area median income in Bergen County?
What is the relevance of Bergen's median income to this discussion? The only relevant question is whether Teaneck needs to pay these salaries to attract teachers. With median salaries substantially lower in almost all neighboring schools, clearly we do not need to pay Teaneck salaries to compete for talent. In fact, a 10% pay cut would leave us well ahead of most districts - the teachers would not leave, in most cases they could not do nearly as well elsewhere. We can have a debate on whether society adequately compensates teachers, but basically, Teaneck is bidding against itself for talent.
In fact, a 10% pay cut would leave us well ahead of most districts - the teachers would not leave,Once again we enter fantasy land. It's true the teachers would not leave. Why should they? Instead they would refuse and let it go to arbitration where they would get roughly 4% raises.
Tom, the article you referenced focuses on Summit, a pretty wealthy Union County town. Just to keep things in perspective, based on this year's budget (08-09)(which, per usual, Teaneck will overspend) per the Comparative Guide our per student spend is $17,395 (Rank 98), Summit - $13,753 (Rank 70!). Per student spending on teachers' salaries and benefits $9768 (Rank 104! (out of 105)) vs. Summit 8421 (Rank 88) - almost 16% more. If the Union wants to go to binding arbitration and claim that they are underpaid, I'd take the side arguing for a freeze any day.
State law requires the terms of the prior contract be continued until a new contract is negotiated. Even if they could, it would be unsound fiscal policy not to keep the money for the anticipated raises in the budget as they will eventually have to be paid. Let's assume your point on state law is correct, which is not 100% certain to me. As I noted before, the contract is not on the website, but based on my recollection (which as previously indicated is not perfect) it did not contain a COLA - rather it included a schedule that identified salaries in each of the 3 years of the contract. Unless you know of another provision of state law or unless the Board made some promises, as a matter of contract law , if the teachers' showed up for work at the start of year 4 they implicitly agreed to the year 3 schedule, although teachers in Years 1-12 of their tenure probably moved to next tenure level on the pay scale.
Another fantasy is that the addition of 100 students would suddenly increase school spending by something like $1,700,000.
If 100 or even 200 students were to register for the fall session, their would be no increase in the budget and no additional taxes. The public schools would be required to absorb the costs in it's current budget. Class sizes would go up and they might even need to cut staff to accommodate other expenses.
As for the following year, the school board budget would still be subject to the state cap and the whim of the electorate.
The article may have focused on Summit, but it gave statewide statistics. Such as "... average salary increase for teachers for the 2009-10 school year is 4.5 percent statewide, and many of those deals were negotiated a few years ago."
Arbitration tends to not focus on the comparative amounts teachers are making from district to district but rather the percent raises. It may not make sense but it seems to be the way it goes. It also considers conditions at the time the contract was due to start not the current conditions.
If I'm mistaken and the requirement that the terms of the contract be continued between contracts does not cover salary increases, the teacher's probably have not received the raises. Instead they would receive them retroactively after a new contract is signed.
As I've stated each time this subject has come up, it would still be necessary to set aside money for expected retroactive raises in the budget year when they are earned. If the 4% is set aside and indeed the result is that the final contract is the unlikely 0%, the money set aside would not be needed.
To the best of my recollection, in that unusual case, the board would not be allowed to just reallocate it. They would be required to return the money to the taxpayers. It is possible, they would be allowed to reallocate some but it would need to be approved by the commissioner and require a real emergency. Maybe an extra 200 students showing up would count.
Unless Pemperton Twnshp (Rank 105) has gone to arbitration recently, I don't think many districts in our position make it to arbitration. Unless you have specific knowledge of the experience of other districts in the top 5%, I would not extrapolate.
As to the budget, I believe it only includes a line item for total compensation. Keep that line flat in the budget and going to arbitration essentially becomes a situation of the Union arguing for the layoff of more of its members to secure higher salaries for the remaining senior teachers. Although unlike our Firemen, our Teacher's union seems willing to tolerate that trade-off, the layoffs that would be required to cover 4% raises in a budget that was unchanged might even cause political problems for the teacher's union.
Or we continue to live in your fantasyland, where we never challenge the Unions but keep on increasing class size rather than do anything to drop Teaneck from second place in the teacher's compensation race.
It has become increasingly clear to me that the Board of Ed should hold a public meeting about what they can and cannot do about teacher contracts and the entire negotiations process. Now that the election is over, we should have a meeting where we can ask questions and expect genuine, unvarnished answers. Wild conjecture on both sides doesn't seem to be getting us anywhere.
The school board holds public meetings regularly where the public can ask questions or give input.
They also have unofficial meetings where the public is invited to discuss specific issues in more depth. This month they had one for the public to provide input on selecting a new superintendent. There was another in March and one late last year on the progress of ACT. There may have been others.
In addition to the board's public budget meetings, they have had presentations on the budget and the budget process for the public in past years. They may have this year as well.
The board or administration may answer questions about the negotiation process. They may not discuss the actual negotiations which have been going on for well over a year.
They also can't answer for what an arbitrator might do anymore than I can. It is meant as a last desperate step. It was not designed to eliminate good faith negotiations. A major purpose was to avoid teacher's strikes and there have been none since it was passed.
I base my conclusions as to the results of arbitration on the results for other municipal unions that have ended negotiations through arbitration.
Yoni said:
Esther - we know your kids are geniuses. Then I'm doing my job as a Jewish mother..
I am well aware that the Board of Ed holds public meetings -- I am a parent in the public schools and have attended them.
Given the general level of dissatisfaction expressed recently by the majority of the voters, it might be a good idea to hear directly from the Board about what it can and cannot do in its future negotiations. What are our options? To simply hear (I'm paraphrasing here) "the union won't like that" doesn't seem to move us forward.
I believe teacher strikes (and firefighter and police strikes) are illegal, which also helps to prevent them. But, perhaps that's why arbitration plays such an outsized role in negotiations with these unions.
But as a parent of kids in the schools you might have a different set of priorities for what should be cut than someone with nothing to lose, no?Yes. What else is new? Does that mean that no cuts are allowed? That is why I didn't vote for
Burak but did vote against the budget
The cuts should come from non-teaching positions, period.
Since last year's budget was approved, but this year's with its 4% increase was disapproved overwhelmingly, it is obvious that the budget should be cut back the four points--back to last year's amount.
Since last year's budget was approved, but this year's with its 4% increase was disapproved overwhelmingly, it is obvious that the budget should be cut back the four points--back to last year's amount.
Unfortunately last years amount was higher. Taxes are going up because their non-tax income is projected to go down. I don't know what the source of that non-tax income is. Tom, can you help us out with that?
Basically, the tax levy, which is what we voted for on Tuesday, is total spending minus funds from surplus minus grants, aid and other external sources of funds. Whatever can't be collected from outside has to be collected from tazpayers.
This year's total spending is down about half a percent from last year. There were a number of one-time grants and state aid that was received this year, but won't be coming in the 2009-10 school year.
Alan Sohn
Clearly, a huge majority of voters do not want to be the ones absorbing the increase caused by the cuts in outside revenue. The fact remains that the majority wants the tax reduced back by four points. There is no way to avoid that conclusion with a fifteen point defeat for the budget.
Borack got elected by an organized targeted effort.
Just like the one that got Pruit elected as well as the empty seat onthe council MH
The Council needs first of all to examine all the non-teaching jobs. Full time teaching positions ought to be protected. All other jobs need to be justified.
A $100,000 public relations person? Surely that is a joke. Department heads who don't teach at all or teach part time--another joke.
Hopefully, the Board of Ed understands the message of this election and will cooperate with the Council.
Just heard on the grapevine that at least one of the local-area yeshiva day schools has laid off 20+ staff for the fall 2009 school year as they are expecting many more parents to need financial assistance with tuition next year.
Esther:
Teacher salaries are getting out of whack with the rest of the economy. And that's before we discuss benefits.
A P.E. teacher at Bryant (a school with 4-6 year olds) makes $100,000 for 10 months of work. Is this right? Why?
I would like my wife to make $100,000 and work only 10 months a year and not have to travel.
Two of my kids' three teachers at Bryant make also $100K for 10 months of work, while the other teacher makes only $50.
What's the difference between these teachers? As a parent, they were all very good.
Post a Comment