Normally I do not rant & rave about the nuisances of school politics- and there are many! And I won’t go into a huge amount of detail since I do not want this to be a politically correct/incorrect blog, but a fellow teacher friend in our county shared with me the newest information that our school district is proposing. I personally think it’s absolutely absurd and do not possibly know how they can actually take this proposal to the state court (which they are doing). What do you think? Has your school district every proposed anything like this?
*Teachers received a 1% pay raise last year, nothing for the 2 years before that (this includes steps).
*Our county is one of the lowest paid counties in the state. Our county is also one of the poorest and most illiterate counties in the country per capita.
*The superintendent makes almost 7 times what the average teacher makes, with a raise of $50,000 last time I checked. After 6 years as superintendent he/she will retire with a bigger pension than a 30+ year teacher.
*Our health insurance premiums PLUS max out of pocket expenses for a family (of 4) for 1 year ranges from $11,000-$15,000- that’s PER year!
*The district is proposing below that they have complete control of the finances without the PEA (an organization but NOT a union- we are a “right to work state” so a teacher cannot go on strike or will immediately lose their job….thus we don’t have unions) negotiations or any sort of accountability “in case of an emergency”. This proposal includes all things monetary (budget, salary, etc.)
Here is the proposed changes that have just been published:
The district is proposing:
*Furlough all employees without pay for up to 10 days
*Reduced salaries by up to 7 percent
*Reduce the number of paid work hours on designated nonstudent contact days
*Assign employees such as deans, guidance counselors and media specialists to teach classes for up to half the work day
*Increase the cost for including a spouse on the insurance plan an additional $174.80/month
*Increase the cost of child health coverage to an additional $43.70/month per child
(this would increase the cheapest insurance plan from $11,000 to $14,447 max/year per family of 4)
Does this sound like a bit of a stretch to you? Is this even a feasable concept to hold up in court? If this happens we will have to immediately relocate and cut our losses, but I honestly don’t think this idea can hold any water in the state courts. Any feedback?