Act 10 was designed to provide school district and municipalities with "tools"....tools which could be used to lower property taxes and get a handle on exploding costs.How did it work?
Well...we look at DPT salary and fringe benefit data available from DPI and compared apples to apples. We looked at actual employees in both administration and teaching (support staff salary data is not available). We looked at employees that were on staff both in 2010-11 and this year (2011-12).
We broke teachers down in to 3 classes: the top shelf (most highly paid), those with salaries right in the middle, and those on the bottom rung. Further, we initially obtained data on 32 individuals in each class, to make for a representative statistical sampling.
Weeding the Garden of Outliers
In each case, there were some employees with unusual circumstances that skewed the data, so we removed these statistical outliers. For example, there was an administrator that was promoted last year whose salary was increased by $36,000 (46%). They also increased their fringe benefits by $2800. Clearly things went very well for that individual. And that was not the norm, so we excluded that one. We also had staff that appeared to switch from single plan heal insurance to the family plan (and vice versa). Those individuals were culled from the data as well. Essentially, we were looking to compare this year to last year for staff that did not have any other changes that would skew the data. We hoped to see ONLY the effects of Act 10. Finally, we looked at the median values in each case because the data suggested that the medians were more representative of actual impacts.
Explaining the Data -Administrators
First, let us point out that our group of administrators also includes the Special Ed Program Managers who technically fall under the Administrative Support Classification. Since DPI includes their data, and their salaries are similar to administrators' we included them.
The typical (median) administrator earned an additional $1,762 in 2011-12, a 1.9% increase. In fringe benefits, however, our typical administrator lost $5,188 (-16.5%). Recall that due to Act 10, they were to pay 5.8% (50% of retirement contribution formerly paid entirely by the district) of their salary towards the state retirement system. In addition, all were required to pay at least 9% of their health insurance benefit (up from about 5% last year).
The net effect is only a 1.9% "hit" on total compensation (defined here as salary + fringes). They lost a net $2,300 (less than $200/month) on an average salary with gross monthly pay of $7,720.
Explaining the Data -Top 1/3 Teachers
The typical (median) highest paid teacher/professional educator earned only an additional $300 in 2011-12, a 0.4% increase. The salary for this group ranged from $71,000 to $86,000. In fringe benefits, however, our typical high end teacher lost $3,918 (-12.9%). They lost 5.8% of their salary towards the state retirement system. In addition, all were required to pay at least 9% of their health insurance benefit (up from less than 2% last year). In terms of total compensation, this group fared the worst, losing a net 3.4%. Their total compensation (median) declined to $101,758 from $105,320.
Explaining the Data -Mid 1/3 Teachers
 |
| A look at 25-30 staff members in each group comparing 2010-11 compensation to 2011-12 compensation. |
Explaining the Data -Bottom 1/3 Teachers
The typical (median) "entry level" (1st few years) teacher/professional educator earned an additional $1,621 in 2011-12, a 5.0% increase. The salary for this group ranged from $33,100 to $35,900. In fringe benefits, however, our typical bottom rung teacher lost $1,754 (-13.8%). They, too, lost 5.8% of their salary towards the state retirement system. In addition, all were required to pay at least 9% of their health insurance benefit (up from less than 2% last year). In terms of total compensation, this group fared better than all groups, actually GAINING a meager net 0.2%. Their total compensation (median) increased slightly to $46,309 from $46,212.
We have no data to support this, but due to the significantly lower fringe benefits, our theory is that these teachers typically may be single and thus opt for the less expensive single health plan over the family plan chosen by older teachers. They are also likely affected by a move--one we applaud-- to raise the starting salary for teachers.
Other anomalies
We did note that in several cases for each group, "overload" assignments were added in 2011-12, perhaps to make up for lost take-home pay due to Act 10. In addition, we noticed what appeared to be a switch from family plan to either a single plan--or perhaps no health plan-- in 2011-12. This could increase compensation in 2011-12. Any employee who opts not to take health insurance is eligible for a payment of $3600 ($300/month) in lieu of the health benefit. So if a staff member were to be covered under a spouse/significant other's plan, they could reduce actually increase their net compensation.
Posts
