627 replies to this topic

[Parizienne]

I, as well, do not want a strike. I think it would be a very sad day indeed if it came to that. A strike reflects badly on ALL parties involved due to the lack of professionalism and collegiality that would be at the root of such an event. I came from a district where the administration and the bargaining unit (union) had a very cooperative relationship. We didn't always agree, but we all wanted to strive for a win-win for everyone. There were compromises by both parties. Isn't that what negotiations are supposed to accomplish? I really thought FCUSD had such a relationship with its teachers when I hired on here.

Pari

[39 degrees]

Anyone else going to the 11:30-1:00 protest? I thought I'd go and check it out. I want to support my child's teacher now that they are at impasse. I really do not want them to go on strike.

[old soldier]

strikes are a bad thing for students to see especially young ones. a teacher is a role model but for most people you put a picket sign in their hand and some guy yelling slogans on an old bull horn you might see some non teacher like behavior, maybe even some nose to nose yelling with the cops or folks crossing thier line.

its not good for kids to see this kind of behavior...it would be sort of like your preecher standing out in front of church with a sign demanding a raise.

some provessions like it or not have to behave with dignity and teachers are sure one of them

[Robert Giacometti]

I'm supporting the children, without them we wouldn't need the Board, Superintendent or the teachers.

Since I truly don't understand if indeed if increasing the raise for the teachers will force the District to make cuts to other programs, resulting in hurting our childrens education, or if there is money available to grant this increase, I would be a FOOL to protest something I don't know anything about. (NO ONE HAS OFFERED ANY PROOF FROM EITHER SIDE)

Maybe arbitration is the way to go....have someone who is independent and no emotional or financial interests involved review everything and make a recommendation. If both sides truly feel they are justified then neither side should have an issue letting someone who is independent look this over.

I can't see how this would hurt anyone.

[Orangetj]

$700-$800 a year!!!! You think we would do that for less than a $100 a month!!! Try $3,500 to $5,000 depending on how long you have taught. I DO NOT WANT TO STRIKE. Please get that into your thought processes. Yes, it is bad for the children...please, why do teachers have to take it lying down and why do you question our motives. I have children too! They have to eat and go to college. Just like anyone here. Why is being a teacher a disqualification of being a regular person in this town. If you don't agree and think we are overpaid, then FINE! I'm not talking to you anyway. You are just the ones that rise up and start the bashing anyway. Doesn't anyone here get it! We are last in the area. Not 10th or 6th, but 12th out of 12. LAST! and no I'm not leaving, but I want to be competitive. If your only answer to that is leave and go private sector then fine. That's your opinion and it's all yours to have!

SUPPORT THE TEACHERS! We do not want a strike!

With all due respect, TM70, I think you ought to go back and read some of my posts. I have the utmost regard for the teaching profession, having been raised by parents who are both life-long teachers. My statement about $700 - $800 a year was based on the notion of increasing salary by a percentage point or so. I don't know the actual average salary of teachers in the district, but assuming it is $45K, it would take an increase of 1.75% to increase annual salary by about $800 over the increase that's already being offered. Since the difference between what the district has offered and what is being asked for by the teachers is really just a couple of percent, I'm not seeing where $3,500 - $5,000 a year is coming from. Are you talking about benefit premiums? If so, they'd need to come down hundreds of dollars per month to get to the $4,000 range in combination with a small increase in the raise offered.

I know that many of the posts on this thread have been very aggressive (some of yours included, to be frank), but I don't understand why you are coming out swinging at everybody on this board.

[Dave Burrell]

I know that many of the posts on this thread have been very aggressive (some of yours included, to be frank), but I don't understand why you are coming out swinging at everybody on this board.

I noticed that too... complaining about others being aggressive while at the same time throwing out some serious jabs herself

Gee, I don't feel nearly as high and mighty as you. Yes, there were some random "stinkin'" posts, but most of them game from just 2 or 3 people

Its a sad situation to think that the education of our children is going to be put to the side for concerns over 800 bucks (or around)

[cw68]

I'm supporting the children, without them we wouldn't need the Board, Superintendent or the teachers.

Since I truly don't understand if indeed if increasing the raise for the teachers will force the District to make cuts to other programs, resulting in hurting our childrens education, or if there is money available to grant this increase, I would be a FOOL to protest something I don't know anything about. (NO ONE HAS OFFERED ANY PROOF FROM EITHER SIDE)

Maybe arbitration is the way to go....have someone who is independent and no emotional or financial interests involved review everything and make a recommendation. If both sides truly feel they are justified then neither side should have an issue letting someone who is independent look this over.

I can't see how this would hurt anyone.

Very good post Robert.

[tessieca]

Yes, we are now at impasse...less than 70 days until who knows what.

This 70 days thing is still baffling. Is the union really looking at a strike within a certain timeframe instead of taking a good faith approach and going in to mediation with their perception of the facts?? A neutral look at both sides ought to be the best way to resolve something that thus far has not been resolved amongst the bargaining groups. Plotting a strike at this point is bad faith and not in any child's best interests. It also seems to concede defeat from the start -- maybe you're thinking your position won't hold up in front of neutrals?

Currently FCUSD is 12th out of 12 in top salary

Where is this coming from? If the 5.25% is added to the salary schedule, the district's top rate would be $77,715. That, my friends, puts FCUSD at #3, not #12. Natomas gets the bottom #12 at $67887 after 21 years of service. Elk Grove is at $79,457 (EGUSD hasn't settled, this is based on their current offer).

Be fair! Don't compare FCUSD's last year's salaries to this year's salaries for other districts.

The union has touted Woodland for settling at 8% increase. Well, guess what?? That brings them, with their salaries and benefits to ranks between 10th and 12th! Guess they had some catching up to do that warranted budget cuts.

The district is using facts. The teachers are using emotions to get parents and kids riled up.

I am a parent! 22 years in school and counting . . . I've probably been in the public school system longer than most of the teachers! The district is seeking to do what's best for everyone, not just focusing on one loud group who wants $100 per month extra.

[tessieca]

The school board president wants you to believe they do not have the money to make a better offer, but they are operating with a budget SURPLUS of $7-$11 MILLION dollars. This is 2-3 times MORE than they need by law. The teachers offer would increase the amount by 1.4-1.6 million overall for the 1,000 certificated employees.

Again, with the attempts at riling people. Toss out numbers that sound large to people and simply expect them to believe that is all money sitting there waiting for you!

I cannot and do not expect teachers to know how to read a budget. They are paid for their expertise, which is teaching a certain subject matter (most of which is not budgeting).

General Fund ENDING BALANCE 101 (listen up, TM70, even teachers can learn):

The State’s Standardized Accounting Code Structure (SACS) establishes the components to be considered in determining a District’s General Fund Ending Balance. The SACS requirements were developed over a decade ago to assure that District budgets reported income and expenses in a similar manner. All California school districts are now required to use this format in managing and reporting on their budgets.

Per SACS, the General Fund Ending Balance includes the following components. These components reflect the funds determined to be available as of June 30, the end of the school financial year.

• A three percent reserve
o All CA public school districts are required to maintain a three percent reserve for contingencies. If the reserve is used in a given year, it must be re-established in the next year.
• A revolving cash fund
o The Revolving Cash Fund is used for quick payments to vendors or employees. For example, districts often need quick cash for late timesheets, last minute vendor payments, or emergency supplies. The FCUSD maintains $75,000 in its revolving cash fund.
• Site and department carry-over
o In the FCUSD, schools sites and departments are allowed to carry over some funds from one year to the next. This allows sites and departments to save for large purchases that cannot be made from the annual site or department budget.
• Legally restricted categorical funds
o The District receives some funds that can only be expended for specific categories. If the funds are not spent by the end of the year, they are identified as restricted categorical funds, but SACS requires that they be listed as a part of the Ending Fund Balance.
• Local grants and donations
o Local corporations provide some grants and donations that are not entirely spent during the year. The grants must be spent for the specified purpose, but SACS requires that they be included in the General Fund Ending Balance.
• Undesignated amount
o These are funds that are remaining at the end of the year that can be used at the discretion of the Governing Board. It is important to note that these funds are one-time funds, and are not ongoing. For 2005-06, this portion of the Ending Balance has been designated for employee compensation enhancements.

For the 2005-06 school year, the FCUSD’s General Fund Ending Balance included:

State mandated three percent reserve $4,050,000
Revolving cash fund $ 75,000
Site and department carry over $5,209,318
Legally restricted categorical funds $3,154,266
Local grant and donations $ 555,572
Undesignated $2,269,701

BOTTOM LINE: The board doesn't really have discretion over anything but the undesignated reserves, and that must be for one-time purposes only and not for ongoing salaries.

There is a certain amount that was budgeted for salary increases (BTW, teachers aren't the only ones asking for more than the 5.25%). Using the KISS theory: if we gave the teachers what they were offering, FCUSD would have to make 1.4 million in cuts.

[Orangetj]

Great post, Tessieca. It did seem that 12th out of 12 was thrown out there with no substantiation. Comparing FCUSD's last year salaries with the current salaries of other districts without taking into account the 5.25% increase the union has rejected is ludicrous.

How do things line up for those teachers who are not in the top rank - say entry level and a teacher at 10 years? Would they still fall above the median rates?

[tessieca]

At 3 years and BA+45 units (where majority of new teachers enter the schedule), FCUSD ranks 4 if we add 5.25% to the scale. That's $43,517 per year. If we add in benefits, not so good at that level (#10 of 12). At year 10 with BA+75 units (about mid salary schedule), FCUSD is #3 at $64,748. Adding benefits drops us to just below midpoint at #8.

These numbers consider the 5.25% addition, 9 districts after resolving negotiations, and 2 districts' offers (as EGUSD and Sac City haven't settled yet -- Sac City is offering about 2.75%, or up to 5.25% if benefits are reduced).

[Orangetj]

Great information. Thanks for injecting some demonstrable facts into the emotionally charged discussion.

[tessieca]

The superintendent has just put out a salary comparison schedule. Instead of adding the full 5.25% into salary, he assumes part in salary and part in benefits compensation. That actually puts the district at #4 in salary at 3 years, and #3 at both mid level and top level. It assumes $100 per month is being used for benefits instead of salaries. My numbers above applied the full 5.25% to salary.

If the raise were applied that way, the benefits+salary ranking would be #10, #8, and #6, respectively.

One would assume that's certainly no reason to strike. This district has never been the top salary payor in the area, partly because the district doesn't get as much money per student as many surrounding districts. There are tons of other reasons that people like to work here, and our applications have not slowed.

[TM70]

This 70 days thing is still baffling. Is the union really looking at a strike within a certain timeframe instead of taking a good faith approach and going in to mediation with their perception of the facts?? A neutral look at both sides ought to be the best way to resolve something that thus far has not been resolved amongst the bargaining groups. Plotting a strike at this point is bad faith and not in any child's best interests. It also seems to concede defeat from the start -- maybe you're thinking your position won't hold up in front of neutrals?
Where is this coming from? If the 5.25% is added to the salary schedule, the district's top rate would be $80271. That, my friends, puts FCUSD at #1, not #12. Natomas gets the bottom #12 at $67887 after 21 years of service. Even Elk Grove slips in behind FCUSD at $79,457 (EGUSD hasn't settled, this is based on their current offer).

Be fair! Don't compare FCUSD's last year's salaries to this year's salaries for other districts.

Even adding in benefits, the district's offer would place FCUSD at #2 at the top rank (21 years' service). And, if the union's proposal were accepted, FCUSD would rank . . . still #2!

The union has touted Woodland for settling at 8% increase. Well, guess what?? That brings them, with their salaries and benefits to ranks between 10th and 12th! Guess they had some catching up to do that warranted budget cuts.

The district is using facts. The teachers are using emotions to get parents and kids riled up.

I am a parent! 22 years in school and counting . . . I've probably been in the public school system longer than most of the teachers! The district is seeking to do what's best for everyone, not just focusing on one loud group who wants $100 per month extra.

THE TOP SALARY IN FCUSD ACCORDING TO THIS WEBPAGE IS $73,838. With a 5.25% raise it becomes $77,714.50.

Where are you getting $80,271 Please explain that to me and we can all go home. By my calculations that's a 8.7% raise.

WAIT, THAT'S ALMOST 8.62%

Oh my gosh, YOU ADDED THE FULL COLA TO THE TOP PAY AND ARE TOUTING THAT AS THE NEW TOP PAY. WOW!!! THAT IS A SLAP IN THE FACE.

http://www.fcusd.k12...cert0506sch.pdf

No wonder there is a problem.

This year's salary IS last year's salary. What in the world are you talking about? We are working off of last year's salary schedule. My paycheck is coming from LAST year's salary schedule. What else am I supposed to compare it to? There is only one salary schedule. If there was any other one to compare then I would, but it doesn't exist.

That's it...I have nothing more to say...Robert, you wanted facts there they are. Top salary $73,838 with a 5.25% is $77,714.50. I don't know any other way to say it...

$80K+...???

Also, the 70 days is part of the impasse process. From what I hear this could come to a head in much less time than that. Again, I do not want to strike. No one is planning a strike, but no one knows for sure. You're accusing me of riling people up. Your posts do the same exact thing. They are just as false or true as anything we have. Each side is trying to make their numbers look as good or as bad as they can. Although, after looking at the numbers myself, from the school districts that are available, I'm very sorry to say, they we are near or at the bottom. Anyway you slice it. We are at the bottom.

Oh yeah, thanks for deleting my post. 12th out of 12. Very nice. Free speech is alive and well here.

The district is saying we are at the top in some categories. People, that is patently false.

Just today, the superintendent sent out more disinformation about the contract schedule. It shows FCUSD at the top of the list even though we are 10th, 6th and 6th(their numbers not ours)in comparison to other districts.

AND, it's not about $100 a month. It's about the long term. We were soooo stupid to give the district 1.5% to save their own programs three years ago. That alone cost me upwards of $3,000. They say they have paid it back, but that it a lie. It is false. We received 11% of the 1.5% cut back, not the whole thing. They NEVER promised it, but it is a lie that they gave it all back. No other way to say it.

It's about staying competitive and to saying, "we have plenty of applicants" is a kick in the teeth. Now, I'm staying for sure...no shaking me now. I'm in it for the long haul...

I'm done...


























for now...

[TM70]

I'm supporting the children, without them we wouldn't need the Board, Superintendent or the teachers.

Since I truly don't understand if indeed if increasing the raise for the teachers will force the District to make cuts to other programs, resulting in hurting our childrens education, or if there is money available to grant this increase, I would be a FOOL to protest something I don't know anything about. (NO ONE HAS OFFERED ANY PROOF FROM EITHER SIDE)

Maybe arbitration is the way to go....have someone who is independent and no emotional or financial interests involved review everything and make a recommendation. If both sides truly feel they are justified then neither side should have an issue letting someone who is independent look this over.

I can't see how this would hurt anyone.

Robert, seriously, if you want indisputable facts, then you are NOT going to find them here. It's our interpretation vs. the district's interpretation and if you think the children are suffering, then you and others do not have a clue. The kids don't even know what is going on. We don't talk about negotiations or lack thereof in class or near the kids. If they ask, at this point, I just laugh and move on. It doesn't concern them and if they want to support us...great...all discussions are happening at lunch or before or after contract time. Simple as that, believe it or not I could care less.

Again, I do not want to strike. Coming on here and saying, "Gee, I don't get it, why do they want to strike?" "When they strike, then what will we do?" "I'll be mad as hell at those teachers if they go on strike!"

WE DO NOT WANT TO GO ON STRIKE! We just want to be paid fairly in comparison to surrounding districts. That's it! Not the top, but not the bottom either. I know Folsom has never been at the top. Remember, I work here, my paycheck comes from here.