Did I hear our superintentent say the districts cost per student should go down after the teacher contract runs out next year because they will be able to reduce staffing ie: layoffs off teachers!!!!
Yes, I heard that. I also thought I heard a payroll figure of $1.5 million mentioned. Average teacher salary in MSD is around $70,000, I believe. So that represents about 20 surplus/underutilized teachers? MSD only has about 75-80 teachers, no? 25% of the teachers are surplus/underutilized? The “no furlough” teachers contract provisions were cited again last night. Below are 2 of Peter’s posts from March 10, 2011 on this topic.
"The "no furlough" clause was portrayed by Mr. Ferrara last night as something the prior board offered up on its own, without the union even asking for it. But of course the union gladly accepted it.
Is that how it really went down?"
No. Totally not true. The contract prior to the current one also had a no furlough clause in it and the MEA would not budge on this during the last negotiation.
Here's a link to an email on the topic that I sent to the board in 2008: http://savethemorrisvilleschool.blogspot.com/2008/06/this-is-ridiculous.html Thursday, March 10, 2011
Peter said... Found it! From the "Agreement between Morrisville Board of School Directors and Morrisville Education Association, 2001-2006," Article 55, Reduction in Force:
"The Board agrees from September 1, 2001 through August 30, 2005, there will be no reduction in the number of professional staff members or their hours except through attrition."
So, as you can see, the language in the current contract didn't change much except that we got them to agree to a ratio which set the stage for layoffs if the district size dramatically changed. Not without argument, of course, but it left the door open a crack. Thursday, March 10, 2011
After last night, I'm more confused than ever about the $30,000 doors installed at Grandview. Here's why. Below is an excerpt from a post of mine from 2/24/11. I know it's a tall order, but can somebody set me straight?
Some other stuff from last night's (2/23/11)meeting:
1. Change order for $11,500 approved for 2 sets of doors at Grandview;
2. Not on the agenda, but apparently a different company than in #1 above installed 3 sets of other doors at Grandview to the tune of $30,000 without authorization and without being prevented from doing so. It'll be interesting to see how this mixup works out.
I know that what Peter wrote about the no furlough clause is true. So how can the superintendent and the school board be so sure that the MEA won't budge on this in the upcoming round of contract negotioations. I would like to know what the MEA is planning. Seems to me that they have a lot of leverage. I hope they can use it to prevent a 25% reduction in the teaching staff. Making those kinds of cuts may save moneyt but can't possibly be good for education in the long or short term.
Secondary (6-12) enrollment has dropped a lot over the last several years. For example, it was 476 on 12/12/07. It's now down into the 380's (almost 20% drop).
Elementary enrollment has risen in the same period, but not as much as secondary has dropped (441 on 12//12/07, in the 480's now - about 10% increase).
I'm not sure I have a point, other than I can see the need to shift teachers from secondary to elementary to reflect enrollment shifts, but I'm having trouble fathoming huge teacher reductions.
Mixed signals - teachers are fantastic, working extremely hard, oh, by the way, there has been major surplus and underutilization for many years.
7 comments:
Hooray for the elementary students! What a wonderful art show tonight at Grandview. This town has some seriously talented kids.
I stopped by before the Super. mtg. Very impressive!
Did I hear our superintentent say the districts cost per student should go down after the teacher contract runs out next year because they will be able to reduce staffing ie: layoffs off teachers!!!!
Yes, I heard that. I also thought I heard a payroll figure of $1.5 million mentioned. Average teacher salary in MSD is around $70,000, I believe. So that represents about 20 surplus/underutilized teachers? MSD only has about 75-80 teachers, no? 25% of the teachers are surplus/underutilized? The “no furlough” teachers contract provisions were cited again last night. Below are 2 of Peter’s posts from March 10, 2011 on this topic.
"The "no furlough" clause was portrayed by Mr. Ferrara last night as something the prior board offered up on its own, without the union even asking for it. But of course the union gladly accepted it.
Is that how it really went down?"
No. Totally not true. The contract prior to the current one also had a no furlough clause in it and the MEA would not budge on this during the last negotiation.
Here's a link to an email on the topic that I sent to the board in 2008: http://savethemorrisvilleschool.blogspot.com/2008/06/this-is-ridiculous.html
Thursday, March 10, 2011
Peter said...
Found it! From the "Agreement between Morrisville Board of School Directors and Morrisville Education Association, 2001-2006," Article 55, Reduction in Force:
"The Board agrees from September 1, 2001 through August 30, 2005, there will be no reduction in the number of professional staff members or their hours except through attrition."
So, as you can see, the language in the current contract didn't change much except that we got them to agree to a ratio which set the stage for layoffs if the district size dramatically changed. Not without argument, of course, but it left the door open a crack.
Thursday, March 10, 2011
After last night, I'm more confused than ever about the $30,000 doors installed at Grandview. Here's why. Below is an excerpt from a post of mine from 2/24/11. I know it's a tall order, but can somebody set me straight?
Some other stuff from last night's (2/23/11)meeting:
1. Change order for $11,500 approved for 2 sets of doors at Grandview;
2. Not on the agenda, but apparently a different company than in #1 above installed 3 sets of other doors at Grandview to the tune of $30,000 without authorization and without being prevented from doing so. It'll be interesting to see how this mixup works out.
I know that what Peter wrote about the no furlough clause is true. So how can the superintendent and the school board be so sure that the MEA won't budge on this in the upcoming round of contract negotioations. I would like to know what the MEA is planning. Seems to me that they have a lot of leverage. I hope they can use it to prevent a 25% reduction in the teaching staff. Making those kinds of cuts may save moneyt but can't possibly be good for education in the long or short term.
Secondary (6-12) enrollment has dropped a lot over the last several years. For example, it was 476 on 12/12/07. It's now down into the 380's (almost 20% drop).
Elementary enrollment has risen in the same period, but not as much as secondary has dropped (441 on 12//12/07, in the 480's now - about 10% increase).
I'm not sure I have a point, other than I can see the need to shift teachers from secondary to elementary to reflect enrollment shifts, but I'm having trouble fathoming huge teacher reductions.
Mixed signals - teachers are fantastic, working extremely hard, oh, by the way, there has been major surplus and underutilization for many years.
Post a Comment