An Educator Responds...

I have often though about sending a response to some of what you post but this is the first time I have actually followed through.  I [have experience teaching in the district and]  at times agree with your take on issues...but this time you seem to be lacking (or at least not fully disclosing) some basic needed information. 

 

I have to believe that you are aware that the majority of teachers pick up credits because it is required by state law!  Please do not blame teachers for saying that they need to spend their summers picking up more credits when, I suspect, your favorite example (the vaunted elementary librarian) probably does not truly believe that she requires a Ph.D. to find news stories for a third grader...but as long as she is being required, by law, by a legislature that apparently does believe that to be the case, she ought to be paid.

Aside from the obvious continuing certification demands now being ascribed to teaching licenses, there is also the issue of culture.  I believe you to be a businessman so you are quite familiar with corporate culture and should be aware that you do not simply change a culture overnight with the a wave of the "wish wand."  It takes, in most businesses, approximately 5-7 years to fully change an established culture.  For decades, teachers have been playing the hand that was dealt them...credits and experience.  For decades, to make more money as a teacher, the "system" in virtually every district was structured the same: get more credits, get more experience, earn more money.  In business, if you want to make more money you move up the ladder.  In education, there is no ladder...unless you want to be an administrator!  By now demanding a change in the structure of the salary schedule you are effectively demanding a change in the culture - in  a very short time!

What you appear to be advocating by compressing the salary schedule, through the elimination of years of experience and credits,  has the potential to create a leapfrog effect.  This is what I believe the teachers union is attempting to avoid.  It would be not unlike a new attorney coming in and making more than a full partner in the firm.  Numerous recent studies have supported the fact that experience does, in fact, make a better teacher.

Perhaps the time has, indeed, come for a change in how a salary schedule is structured (especially in light of the fact that far fewer teachers find it to be a lifetime career anymore!) but it should be done in transition over a period of time.  And this does not address the variances that  will exist if one district - or a few - change and many others do not and a teacher moves between districts.   Also by the way, I believe that a salary schedule is a minimum.  I think the district can pay more.  In fact, at times they will (don't know if Sun Prairie has ever done that!).

If nothing else, you present "food for thought" but you also need to be fair to your readers and explain that teachers are simply doing what current law is requiring of them.

-----------------------------------------------

SP-EYE comments:

First, and foremost, we appreciate someone having the temerity to not only respond, but to provide their name.  We fully applaud that action.  It's so much easier to engage in dialog when someone isn't using a throw-away e-mail address.  This subject requires dialog.  And at least one educator had the guts to do so.

We see a couple of themes here which require our feedback:

1) Was SP-EYE fair regarding teacher certification requirements?

If we came across as disingenuous,we apologize, that was not the intent.  We certainly do understand that--depending on the license they hold---teachers may be required to obtain additional education requirements for license renewal.  But that being said, let's be totally fair and state that those that require credits have a license good for five years and 6 CEUs are required to renew the license.   Over a 30 year teaching career, that's exactly 36 credits.

But remember...teachers also receive a 2% salary increase for every 6 credits they earn.  If they are "off the grid", then if its a course that fits with their role, and they pass it, the district will reimburse them $300 per credit.  So for each of those 6 credits, they would be reimbursed $1800.  One can get credits for $300 if one looks.  And sometims those credits require very little time to earn.

It is of note that those on the upper end of the salary scale, who received their teacher license prior to 1983, received "life" licenses, and they required NO additional credits.  That explains why at least one teacher with over 35 years experience had only a BS degree plus NINE credits.

These days, under PI-34, teachers can opt (in lieu of credits) to develop a PDP or Professional Development program individualized for them  The downside of course is that their is accountability for holding to satisfactorily completing the plan. 

2) You can't change the culture overnight.

Generally speaking, we agree; in normal times, one cannot change the culture overnight.  But these are not what we'd considered normal times.  Act 10 is here and has withstood numerous challenges.  It looks like it's here to stay, so we need to deal with it.   Act 10 served as an instantaneous game changer.

We're also not the Lone Ranger here.  Other school districts have already done this (doing away with the grid).  The change is already happening across the state, and we suspect the nation will be forced to follow.   The teacher grid model is no longer sustainable.

And as for Sun Prairie being "able to pay more"....  sure...we can pay more.  And McDonald's can pay more, and so can Walmart.  ANYONE can pay more.  But it comes at a cost.  For McDonald's and WalMart, they simply would charge consumers (that would be US) a higher price.  For the school district, it means higher property taxes.  And even the teachers DO have to understand that the old revenue limits are still in place, so there is a maximum that we can spend (gee...hope we don't suddenly get a hole in any damn roof!).

The real question is....WHY should we pay more...other than to increase the base for starting teachers?  A large number of teachers make $65,000/year or more in base salary alone....and that's for 9 months.

3) The leapfrog effect.

We think that the analogy of a lawyer coming in and making full partner to start is a little over the top, not to mention unrealistic.  We're talking about compressing the salary scale, not paying everyone the same.  The base wage paid to teachers is ridiculously low.  You know it; SPEA knows it; hell, everybody knows it.  But nobody wants to do anything about it because of the way things have always worked.

The way the rest of the world works, is a world in which there is a salary scale to work with (and often a maximum "hire rate").  I someone with great credentials and abilities comes in, you may throw a few more dollars at them.  Then, annually, if "company" performance allows it, a pool of money is made available for pay increases.  There is no "everyone gets 3%.   Usually managers have authority to determine how they dole out their groups'  share of the pool.  Those that are not performing to standard may NOT get an increase, while others that are rising above may receive more than the average increase.   But there is no automatic increase because you are a year older.  Unions, of course, are less than enamored with this.

Again...our sincere thanks and major kudos to the sole educator who drummed up enough courage to open a dialog.

At the end of the day, do we not teach our children to embrace change and dare to try?  To face life's challenges?  Instead of endless arguing about a contract proposal which is both fair and unlikely to change substantially, why do teachers not accept change and serve as role models?  

Who Are You Bargaining For?

The question of the day is: WHY is the SPEA Negotiating Team dragging out negotiations for 2012-13 (Hello!  We're beyond the midway point!  Time to start working for 2013-14!!!)

The school board offered a very fair package which addresses what SPEA (and WEAC) have declared to be a primary mission: raising the starting wage for teachers.  But that's not good enough.  You see, in order to do that with the pot of money available, a significant portion must be earmarked for those teachers with 1-6 years of experience.  That means that a small amount would be available to more tenured teachers, most in the form of a stipend (as opposed to a base salary builder).

It's called compromise, people!   You are getting to do some serious good for starting teachers.  But you're not willing to accept that because this plan calls for either a small token stipend (or perhaps nothing) for those teachers that already earn like...say...$86,000 in base salary. REALLY?  Is THAT what unions are all about?

Here's a novel idea.
If the union is really... well....unified...
...and union members really feel strongly but raising the base wage...
If they are that unhappy with a stipend amount of $460 each, why don't they all agree to donate those stipends to further increase the base wage?   As it is, the board proposal still means a base wage that is no more than par with the average paid throughout Dane Co. districts.
If even HALF of the stipend amount going to the upper 2/3 was used to further increase the base wage of those on the bottom rung, we could have a very competitive base wage.
What? sacrifice $500 to help your fellow teachers just starting out?  Fat chance!


What does a 2% across the board pay increase look like?
Let's take a look at that 2% increase and how it would play out the way SPEA wants it to.  Now, the best way to do that is to use that great salary matrix(for 2011-12 ending June 2012) put together by the District Office.  Yes...we'll state it up front...some of those upper end teachers (and some throughout the list) have either retired or moved on.  But we need a model to work with and this is what we have.
We also culled the list; we sorted it by base salary and excluded all individuals earning below $32,505, which is the base wage for a starting teacher.

What we are let with was a list of 552 staff members.
The total base salary of these folks was $26,971,406.
Th school board has budgeted for 2% of that amount for wage increases.
2% comes to $539,428.

Now...from the top of that amount, we have to pay those that earned a step or lane change.  The rest would be available for across the board (or whatever) wage increases.  For our purposes here,however, let's just assume there were no lane/step payments.  Let's just spread that $539 K evenly across the board at 2% increase per person.  And let's split the 552 employees into three groups, those earning the top, the bottom, and the mid-range base salaries.

And here's what happens....

Why should the upper 184 teachers glom onto 42.8% of the available wage increase pool?

Is SPEA suggesting that by virtue of tenure, those teachers at the top deserve a larger share of the pool?  Because while a 2% "across the board" wage increase sounds equitable, clearly it is not.

Remember...we only simplified this.  In actuality, after paying for those due an increase for lane or step movement (hopefully for the last time), we can only raise the base wage for teachers with less than 7 years tenure to $35,000.  That will leave approximately $460 for each of the remaining staff members paid as a stipend rather than a basebuilder.

For actual details of the standing school board offer:
http://sp-eye.blogspot.com/2012/11/spasd-offers-contract-proposal-to.html

Could YOUR Household Make it on $112K?

We looked just at those professional educators that are married to another professional educator.
To be more specific, we only looked at those that both work in the Sun Prairie School District AND they share the same last name.  Oh, yeah...not to worry...we verified our data on the linkage.

This of course does NOT include those whose spouse works in another district, those whose spouse is an administrator, or those with different last names, which includes domestic partners.  READ:  there are a lot more than what we found.

We found 11 confirmed pairs.

The average total compensation for the pair was $112,500.
The median total compensation was $113,000.
The average years of teaching was 14.5
The range of total income was $91,150 - $146,505

We hear how terrible it is for teachers...especially those that share a home.
We're going to have to call bullspit on this one.
We're pretty sure MOST household incomes in Sun Prairie are far less than $113,000.
These are, on average, young people doing QUITE well.

Hell...even the lowest total, $91,150 is a very do-able household income.
Wikipedia (yeah...we know...) shows a median income for a household of  $51,345, and the median income for a family is $61,197.  This 2009 data.  Remember...teachers have received increases since then, but not many others.

And they forget that only one of the pair needs to carry the health insurance cost.

A Few More Bites of the Apple

Some more things to ponder, regarding the "Total Compensation" data...

As they say...pictures tell 1,000 words...so we think none are really necessary.

You Can Lead Them To Data...But You Cannot Make Them Mine It

Click to view full-screen

And SP-EYE just happens to be Miner 49-ers when it comes to data!  Warning:  Reality can have a nasty bite to it.

If you were distressed as we were hearing how terrible that teachers...er...professional educators.... have it...how horribly undervalued (READS: underpaid) they are, this one's for you.   And if you were one of those that heard or read their gut-wrenching stories of financial struggles, then this is also for you.

The district office has been working on a document that compiles total compensation--not benefits mind you,  strictly cash-in-your-wallet compensation.  We heard about this at a recent HR Committee meeting (memo to people: you just may want to find time in your busy lives to start coming to some meetings).  We asked about it this week and learned that the compilation is complete and we requested a copy.  This study covers all professional educators and the "cash" compensation earned during the FY2011-12 school year.

We have pulled out several nuggets from the data; there are many more.
We have also taken the liberty of sorting the data by total compensation, showing base salary and "add-ons".  A copy of this is available here:

View the spreadsheet, sorted by total compensation

Warning Unheeded

Click to view full-screen

We have been warned by trusted compadres in the past that one should never poke an individual holding the keys to the newspaper ink, but we're certain that even someone in such a position whose significant other might just appear near the top of these lists will understand that "the truth shall set them free".  This of course includes a certain editor who happens to slant their OpEds so far to the right that Ann Romney is getting jealous.  Yet, when it comes to this school district, Mr. Right Lurching Journalist, tips so far to the left that they SPARCle.  But there's no link there...right?  It's just coincidence...right?  Someone who so strongly supported Gov. Walker and his "teachers are far too well compensated" rhetoric would never lay aside his political philosophies when it comes to a school district which employs his significant other...right?  Guess we'll see.

A word about "Add-Ons"
There are 23 options available to professional educators to enhance their salary...and take-home pay.

In 2011-12, $27.8M was paid out in salaries.  Another $1.8M was paid out as "add-ons".  That represents, overall, a 6.5% bump to salaries!  Are you kidding us!  And these folks are falling just shy of demanding not a 2% increase, but a 3.1% increase?

Click to view full-screen

And can we please keep in mind that Professional Eductaors operator under a 190 day contract.  Most of the rest of the world operates under a 260 day basis (2080 hrs/8 hrs/day).

Stay tuned...there's more to come as we pick through this.   A shout-out to the district office for putting this information together.

Final thoughts...Chrissie Hynde and the Pretenders just shouted out to us.

It is time for you to stop all of your sobbing
yes it's time for you to stop all of your sobbing oh oh oh
there's one thing you gotta do
to make me still want you
gotta stop sobbing now
yeah yeah stop it stop it

---The Pretenders, “Stop Your Sobbing”

Teachers Declare They Deserve a 3.1% Wage Increase

Listen...we value teachers.  Really, we do.
But it borders on unmitigated gall for them to rally at the meeting at which the school board's Finance Committee was slated to approve the district's proposed budget for 2012-13 and forward it to the full board for final approval and adoption.

Where have you been?

Caren Diedrich actually got it right when she chastised the large group of teachers in the audience.   She asked, accusingly, "Where the hell were you 4...5....6 months ago?  We needed to hear from you long before our backs were up against the wall.  You cannot wait till the 11th hour."
Can you blames them for not coming off the lake to attend a public hearing?
Diedrich's point is well taken; where WERE these folks at the public hearings on the budget?  Oh...wait...those were during the summer.  Our bad...teachers are off all summer.

Forgive us if we offend...but frankly the whole attitude on display was offensive.

At best, seniors will likely get a 1.5% increase in Social Security

What make you more deserving than anyone else?
Do any of these teacher have parents living on social security?  We guess not.  Do you care about those folks?  The current projections for a COLA (Cost of living adjustment) for seniors on social security is a whopping 1.5% increase.  And that's on an income of less than $20K.  Gee...your 2% doesn't look so bad now does it?

State employees, who have had NO raises since 2008, will get NO RAISES for 2013.  Or likely in 2014 either.  Municipal employees are finding similar territory.  What about private sector workers who haven't even made up ground lost since 2008?

Again, forgive us, but this sense of entitlement is really getting old.  In our humble opinion, you are actually turning more people off than developing a rally around yourselves.

Can we stop with the sob stories?
"I'm not getting paid what my friends get paid, yet I'm more educated and work more hours..."
"I took a pay cut to come to Sun Prairie and it's taken me 10 years to get back.."
"[A 3.1% raise] would make us feel valued..."
"With a 2% increase and insurance changes I will earn less"
"I can't afford to take too many more hits [on my paycheck] before I need to choose something else"

Even curriculum leadership was tossed under the bus vs. coaching!
"We [coach] 4-5 hours per day for 5-6 days each week for a small stipend.  Not trying to bash the CLC stipends, but they don't put in the time that [coaches] do."

Again....do you people realize that people are losing their homes!  We watched as an in-home daycare provider --who may have cared for some of your kids-- lost their home to foreclosure.
You seem to forget that you pay less for your insurance benefits --and get better benefits--than state workers do.   The E/R co-pay for state workers has long been $75....which is STILL more than you pay with an increase.  Maybe save the E/R for...um...emergencies?  You folks get dental insurance--at very low expense, while most of the rest of us have to pay those costs out of pocket.  Are you even aware--do you even care--that state workers have to pay $600/year to get $500-$1000 worth of dental coverage?

The sob stories aren't working.  Many people that did NOT flood the meeting are worse off than you.  Seriously, there's a part of us that wants to say, "If you're not happy, then you know where the door is and watch that it doesn't smack your backside on the way out."  But we shouldn't say that...so we won't.  Because if you're not happy, you're probably less effective in your job anyway.  And this district is not going to be held hostage to making you happy.

It's not just 3.1% either; raises could be as high as 8.1%!
But they won't tell you that, will they?  This is the classic magician's game.  Focus on the raise and maybe people will forget about "the other stuff" they get.  Most of the public do not know that the current teachers contract calls for an automatic 2% "step increase" each year they teach.  Now, some teachers have taught so long that they "fall off the grid" and are therefore no longer eligible for the 2% increase

Then there are the "lane" increases.  Gain 6 credits (2 college courses) and you get a 3% increase!  So a younger teacher who was here last year, gets a 2% pay bump automatically.  If they've completed 6 credits, they get another 3% bump.  And now...2% MORE isn't good enough?  You could see a 7% increase yet you want to demand 8.1%? It's called reality and you need to come to grips with it.

And then there are a ton of other opportunities for additional "stipends" on top of salaries.  It has been estimated that as much as $1.8M per year is divvied out to staff for these other opportunities.   If one adds up budget lines 105,106,107, and 110 (Extracurricular, Summer school, Leadership Council and "Other" Salaries) the total for 2012-13 is $1.9M.   That would translate to over $3,000 for every single SPEA member.

And you're not earning enough?
As we said...we value what you do, but you try our patience.  For a group that keeps saying that you don't do it for the money, it seems to be all about the benjamins.