Presentation is loading. Please wait.

Presentation is loading. Please wait.

December 5, 2013 Fact Finder Recommendations. 1.The Boards Negotiation Issues/Concerns - Ed Inghrim 2.Salary/Compensation - Ed Inghrim 3.Healthcare -

Similar presentations


Presentation on theme: "December 5, 2013 Fact Finder Recommendations. 1.The Boards Negotiation Issues/Concerns - Ed Inghrim 2.Salary/Compensation - Ed Inghrim 3.Healthcare -"— Presentation transcript:

1 December 5, 2013 Fact Finder Recommendations

2 1.The Boards Negotiation Issues/Concerns - Ed Inghrim 2.Salary/Compensation - Ed Inghrim 3.Healthcare - Ed Inghrim 4.Graduate Study & Tuition Reimbursement - Ralph Puerta 5.Retirement Incentive - Ralph Puerta Fact Finder Recommendations vs. SVEA Proposal

3 PSEA – 182,000 dues paying members (NEA – 3M members) PA teachers granted Right-to-Strike Schools collect dues for the Union Benefit packages established years ago when teachers were substantially underpaid (e.g., their pensions that were negotiated with Harrisburg) Salary compensation that is based on time in service & education, not merit. Decades of institutionalized negotiation practices 1.Mediation 2.Binding/Non-binding arbitration 3.Fact Finding 4.Strike Negotiation Challenges – School Board

4 Local $32.6M – 81% Federal $0.5M – 1% State $7.2M – 18% Saucon Valley Revenues – 2012/2013 Budget Department of Educations aid formula classifies the District as wealthy so only 18% of our revenues comes from Harrisburg. 92% of PA Public Schools get more aid, as a percentage of their budgets, then the SVSD. 4

5 * Source: US Census Bureau SVSD Demographics Line 1 Line 8 Households% Total Income (Millions) Avg. IncomeHouseholds% Total Income (Millions) Avg. Income < $40K 97139%$23.7$24,3691,73227%$40.7$23,522 $40K - $50K33914%$15.2$44, %$26.4$44,712 $50K - $75K 59824%$41.4$69,1931,37221%$90.4$65,867 $75K - $100K 24110%$21.1$87, %$75.9$87,500 $100K - $150K 24110%$29.7$123,0811,03116%$127.2$123,387 > $150K 1124%$21.7$193, %$180.8$207,073 Total2,502$152.7$61,0226,465100%$541.3$83,734 37%1,047 Households Collecting SS or SSI 1,45442% HellertownLower Saucon Income Range Single Family Home – Total RET HB - $4,200/Yr. = 17% of Line 1 Avg. LS - $6,100/Yr. = 26% of Line 1 Avg.

6 SVSD – Major Concern 1.The Public School Employees' Retirement System (PSERS) is seriously under funded and mandated employer contribution rates increase from 4.78% in 2009/10 to 25.8% in 2015/16, or more than 400%, which could drain much of the our fund balance. 2.Currently the State reimburses schools for ½ of their costs for payroll taxes and retirement contributions. Thus, it is possible that the State might change the reimbursement rate or cut Basic Education funding or do both if the PSERS increases strain their budgets.

7 $1.5B Independent Fiscal Office

8 Typical PA Public School Salary Schedule $44,153-$41,000 = $3,153 or 2.6%/Year Columns Continuing Graduate Level Education RowsRows Years of Service Note: This concept is ubiquitous throughout the US Public Education System StepBB+15MM+15M+30M+45D (Column Salary Increases)(Step Salary Increases)

9 $48,247-$41,000 = $7,427 or 5.9%/Year Columns Continuing Graduate Level Education RowsRows Years of Service StepBB+15MM+15M+30M+45D Note: Traditionally Unions expect the value of each cell to increase year over year with a Cost of Living Adjustment (COLA). This is how employees at the highest step get pay increases. Typical PA Public School Salary Schedule (Step & COLA Salary Increases) $43,286 $41,000 $45,699 $48,247

10 StepBB+15MM+15M+30M+45D $53,484-$41,000 = $12,484 or 10%/Year Typical PA Public School Salary Schedule (Step, Column & COLA Salary Increases) RowsRows Years of Service Columns Continuing Graduate Level Education

11 SVSD Salary Schedule STEPBB+15MM+6M+12M+18M+24M+30M+45M+60 1$44,232$46,560$49,010$50,481$51,995$53,555$55,162$56,816$59,657$62,640 2$45,600$48,000$50,526$52,042$53,603$55,211$56,868$58,574$61,502$64,577 3$47,010$49,484$52,089$53,651$55,261$56,919$58,626$60,385$63,404$66,575 4$48,464$51,015$53,700$55,311$56,970$58,679$60,440$62,253$65,365$68,634 5$49,963$52,593$55,361$57,021$58,732$60,494$62,309$64,178$67,387$70,756 6$51,508$54,219$57,073$58,785$60,549$62,365$64,236$66,163$69,471$72,945 7$53,101$55,896$58,838$60,603$62,421$64,294$66,223$68,209$71,620$75,201 8$54,744$57,625$60,658$62,477$64,352$66,282$68,271$70,319$73,835$77,527 9$56,437$59,407$62,534$64,410$66,342$68,332$70,382$72,494$76,118$79,924 10$58,182$61,244$64,468$66,402$68,394$70,446$72,559$74,736$78,473$82,396 11$59,982$63,138$66,462$68,455$70,509$72,624$74,803$77,047$80,900$84,945 12$61,837$65,091$68,517$70,573$72,690$74,870$77,117$79,430$83,402$87,572 13$63,749$67,104$70,636$72,755$74,938$77,186$79,502$81,887$85,981$90,280 14$65,721$69,180$72,821$75,005$77,256$79,573$81,960$84,419$88,640$93,072 SVEA Schedule 11/12 Salary Schedule Current SVSD salary schedule has 14 steps and 10 columns. Starting salary at step 1 with a Bachelors Degree - $44,232. Maximum salary at step 14 and a Masters or Masters equivalent plus 60 additional graduate level credits - $93, Credit Increments $58,574-$47,949 = $10,625 or 22% in one year $47,949 $58,574

12 2012 – Salary Schedule Frozen at 2011/2012 Values – No COLA Salary freeze Each employee receives a $1,500 non-recurring stipend Maximum one step and one column movement on the schedule. 2.Employees who were at Step 14 in receive a $1,500 stipend 3.Remove Columns B+15, M+6 and M+18 and add column B Maximum one step and one column movement. 2.Add $950 COLA to each cell in salary schedule Similar to Boards except: 1.Flip school years and & $900 COLA in Remove Columns B+15, M+6, M+18, M+30 and M+45 and add column B+24, M+36, and M+48. Board Proposal Association Proposal Note: A stipend does not add to base salary & does not require PSERS contribution.

13 Association – Modified Salary Schedule Note: All Step 1 cell values increased by 2.5% from the 2011/12 schedule. Active columns unshaded; archived columns shaded.

14 Fact Finder – Recommendation (Adopt the Associations Proposal with Modifications) One Step & One Column, on the 14 th payday, and $1,500 stipend for employees on step 14 in $1,500 stipend for all employees One Step & One Column, on the 14 th payday, and add $950 COLA to each cell in the salary schedule. The following analysis Includes:* 1.Direct Salary 2.Stipends 3.PSERS Employer Contribution 4.Payroll Taxes * PSEA/SVEA defined baseline parameters (i.e., the staff in 2011/12)

15 2012/ /142014/152015/16 $13.0M $13.5M $14.0M $14.5M $15.0M $15.5M $16.0M $16.5M $17.0M (1): Savings includes $440K in salary & bonus + $60K in PSERS contributions. * Assumes State reimburses ½ of SS & PSERS costs. FFSVEA FFSVEA FFSVEA FFSVEA Salary SS* PSERS* Association Compensation Offer vs. F.F. Recommendation (1) (Total Spending increases from $4.6M to $5.1M) Stipend 2011/12 Savings

16 SVSD – Other Cost Objects Salary & Benefits 68% 73%

17 On the average the SVSD spends about $12,000 per year for employee Healthcare. The District is self insured and carries catastrophic insurance. Under the current contract the employee contribution is: Healthcare Objectives

18 $0 $200 $400 $600 $800 $1,000 $1,200 Premium RateEmployee Contribution Saucon Valley Kaiser Average $1,108$26526% $1,120$787% Elite Group Consulting, Inc. Healthcare Objectives * * PEPM – Per Employee Per Month

19 Employee should pay about 10% of the plan cost Raise the deductible to close the gap with private industry plans (average national in-network for single coverage is $675, SVSD is $250) Healthcare Objectives Plan YearDeductibleOffice VisitUC/ERRetail RXMail RX Percentage or Dollar Premium Share $250/$500$15$35$5/$15$10/$30$45/$85/$ $500/$1000 $15/$30 $50/$75$10/$25/$50$20/$50/$100$55/$120/$ $500/$1000 $20/$40 $50/$75$10/$25/$50$20/$50/$100$60/$130/$ $500/$1000 $20/$40 $50/$75$10/$25/$50$20/$50/$100$60/$130/$170 Board Proposal Plan YearDeductibleOffice VisitUC/ERRetail RXMail RX Percentage or Dollar Premium Share $250/$500$15$35$5/$15$10/$30$45/$85/$ $275/$550$20 $25/$75$0/$20/$30$20/$50/$100$55/$120/$ $275/$550$20 $30/$100$0/$20/$30$20/$50/$100$60/$125/$ $300/$600$20 $30/$100$0/$25/$35$20/$50/$100$65/$135/$155 Association Proposal

20 Plan YearDeductibleOffice VisitUC/ERRetail RXMail RXDollar Premium Share $250/$500$15$35$5/$15$10/$30$45/$85/$ * $275/$550$15/$30$25/$75$10/$20/$ 40 $20/$40/$ 80 $55/$120/ $ $500/$700$20/$40$50/$75$10/$25/$ 50 $20/$50/$ 100 $60/$130/ $ * $500/$700$20/$40$50/$75$10/$25/$ 50 $20/$50/$ 100 $60/$130/ $170 Fact Finder Recommendation * For school years, and , only, the amounts noted in the columns above are effective on the 14 th pay period of the school year. Approved the Boards Premium share request Approved the Boards deductible for single coverage and slightly increased the Associations proposal for family coverage.

21 Graduate Study Overview Graduate Study Database - Problems Graduate Study Database - Examples The problem is not behind us Board Proposal

22 Graduate Study - Overview We recognize the value of the teaching profession We recognize the importance of professional development over a teachers career We believe the current graduate study system is not meeting school district objectives for cost, quality, and relevance to district objectives

23 Graduate Study – Underlying Conflict The purpose of graduate study is to achieve career professional development in support of the academic objectives of the school district as defined by the Superintendent. Math. Reading. Science. Graduate study is also a major component of teacher salary, accounting for 20% of average teaching staff salary, and as high as 30% for senior teaching staff.

24 Graduate Study - Cost $ 12,500,000 annual district salary cost $ 1,855,200 portion from graduate study $ 65,000 average annual teacher salary $ 12,368 portion from graduate study $ 250,000 annual tuition reimbursement $ 2 million graduate study salary and tuition account for almost 5% of the $40 million total school district annual budget.

25 Graduate Study – Contract negotiation The board is not suggesting to eliminate graduate study in order to save this expense. Changes in the contract did not solve continuing problems undermining the value of our graduate study program. Board proposals in the current contract negotiation would improve the quality and slow the rate of graduate study, but still not prevent the highest salary attainment.

26 Teaching Staff Profile

27 Problems of Cost, Quality, and Relevance Our analysis of this 2,200 course history over ten years reveals the following problems: – The course and program quality is inadequate – Courses and programs lack progression – Graduate classes lack local interaction – Little relationship to district objectives – Little benefit of career professional development

28 Problem Definitions Quality – A level of rigor appropriate for the degree level Progression – A logical connection and building between courses as the degree level increases through three Masters – Instruction. Subject. Professional. Career Professional Development – Leading to subject mastery and impact on our students

29 Example A – Bachelors to Doctorate (2012) Teacher as Inquirer Teacher as Researcher Teacher as Evaluator Research and Professional Development Learning Sciences & Technologies Designing Learning Environments Doctoral Qualifying Research Project Social Basis of Human Behavior Social Cognition

30 Example B – Bachelors to Third Masters (2008) Integrating the Internet Law & Current Issues High Performing Teacher How to Get Parents on Your Side Succeeding with Difficult Students Classroom Management Language Arts Activities Word: The Ultimate Writing Tool Media Literacy in TV Age

31 Example C – Bachelors to Third Masters (2012) Reading, Writing, Language Arts Strategic Reading in Content Area Statistical Methods of Education Computer Graphics for Teachers Reducing Classroom Conflict Intro to Computers Issues, Laws, and Trends in Education Integrating Technology into the Curriculum Meaningful Activities for Interesting Classrooms

32 Example D – Second to Third Masters (2008) Integrating the Internet into Curriculum Making Sense of Money Educational Leadership Issues and Answers Excel - The Ultimate Information Tool Word - The Ultimate Writing Tool Access Computer Graphics Power Point Apple Works 6 Ed Leadership: Trends and Issues

33 Example E – Second to Third Masters (2010) How to Get Parents On Your Side Classroom Diversity Reducing Classroom Conflict It's All About You The High Performing Teacher Assertive Discipline Motivating Todays Learner Differentiated Instruction Behavioral Social and Academic Interventions Reading Across the Curriculum

34 Inadequate course quality history In the contract negotiations we confronted sub-standard course selection at two internet institutions - Fresno and Indiana Wesleyan. Through 2009 our teachers took 380 courses at these institutions, 309 of which were inappropriate. We eliminated both institutions in the contract.

35 Fresno and Indiana Wesleyan 244 courses - 22 at Bachelor level - 88 at 3 rd Masters level

36 SVEA Rebuttals to Board Proposals "An abandonment of the concessions and improvements in the last contract "A radical change for problems that have already been solved – Elimination of Fresno and Indiana Wesleyan – Creation of Graduate Study Committee

37 The problem is not behind us The elimination of Fresno and Indiana Wesleyan was not a teacher concession. This practice was without justification. The problem is by no means behind us. – (a) legacy salary cost – (b) inadequate professional development – (c) continuing practice at other institutions – (d) decline of local interactive classes

38 (a) The legacy cost of the course quality problem Among five institutions, Fresno, Indiana Wesleyan, Gratz, Kutztown, and East Stroudsburg, there are 796 courses that the Board deems of questionable, inadequate, or entirely below graduate level quality. This problem remains in our district cost every year going forward. The Board estimates a current salary burden in excess of $450,000 per year from hundreds of inadequate courses that should never have been taken, regardless of contract rules.

39 (b) Professional development legacy cost Fresno, Indiana Wesleyan, and their like institutions are lost professional development that did not take place. 5 teachers at the M30 level and 14 teachers at the M60 level with four of more Fresno courses. 13 teachers at the M30 level and 5 teachers at the M60 level with four or more Indiana Wesleyan courses.

40 (c) Graduate study courses after Fresno and Indiana Wesleyan

41 Wilkes history 243 of 681 courses (35%) are inappropriate for degree level taken Of the 243 inappropriate courses 215 are taken at two or more degree levels An additional 209 courses are of instructional focus rather than the preferred subject focus Of the 209 courses 189 are taken at multiple degree levels

42 Wilkes - Not Graduate Level

43 East Stroudsburg history 113 of 249 courses (45%) are inappropriate for degree level taken Of the 113 inappropriate courses 111 are taken at two or more degree levels An additional 55 courses are of instructional focus rather than the preferred subject focus Of the 55 courses 499 are taken at multiple degree levels

44 Gratz history 46 of 194 courses (23%) are inappropriate for degree level taken Of the 46 inappropriate courses 38 are taken at two or more degree levels An additional 99 courses are of instructional focus rather than the preferred subject focus Of the 99 courses 89 are taken at multiple degree levels

45 (d) Wilkes and the decline of local graduate classes Wilkes Local

46 The Source of the Problems Graduate institution limitations – Quality – Progression Blanket program course approval Contract language Past Practice

47 Board proposal would change Requirements for course quality and relevance Requirement for logical course progression Redefinition of requirements to move to M45 and M60 columns Control number of courses – 2 per year Control of tuition reimbursement (a funding cap for second and third Masters)

48 Association Rebuttals to Board Proposals No Change The Board did not visit classrooms The courses are required within programs The rate of study is required in programs The option to tailor substance into programs was not explained

49 Fact Finder Recommendation B to M – Tuition reimbursement 100% of East Stroudsburg rate – Twelve credits per year M to M36 and M36 to M60 – Tuition reimbursement capped at $2,000 per year – GSC will review closely all courses and programs to ensure the rigor and professional benefit from each course – Decisions by the GSC are grievable except that there can be no grievance based upon past practice.

50 Retirement Current contract terms Board proposal Association proposal Fact Finder

51 Retirement Incentive Previous Boards negotiated a retirement incentive clause that paid teachers 45% of their salary on retirement, paid out in $10K annual increments. This was not an incentive as it contained no conditions for timing. It was exercised solely at the teachers discretion.

52 Retirement Incentive The Board negotiated a compromise in the last contract whereby employees with 20 or more years of service would continue to receive the 45% payment (32 employees) and employees with less than 20 years of service would receive a fixed amount pro-rated to their years of service (about 150 employees). Although lower in total cost, this new language also was not an incentive.

53 Board proposal for this contract End the retirement payment with the end of the contract.

54 Association Proposal No Change. The Board proposal to eliminate the retirement payment is a breach of contract, as the previous change in the contract was expected to be a separate and irrevocable agreement.

55 Fact Finder Recommendation The Fact Finder recommended a true retirement incentive that would pay $1,750 for every year of service if an employee retired before the expiration of the contract. At the end of the contract the retirement clause will be eliminated.

56 Potential full retirees

57 Potential other retirees The next 30 teachers have years service If they were to retire in 2016: – Fact Finder proposal cost is $1,190,000 now – Board proposal cost is $ now – Association proposal cost is $ anytime


Download ppt "December 5, 2013 Fact Finder Recommendations. 1.The Boards Negotiation Issues/Concerns - Ed Inghrim 2.Salary/Compensation - Ed Inghrim 3.Healthcare -"

Similar presentations


Ads by Google