627 replies to this topic

[Orangetj]

I was not trying to imply that my situation is unique in any way--rather, I believe it is quite common for the hundreds of teachers in my district, and the teachers I've met in FCUSD who have worked with my children.

I do think there is a general misconception that teachers only work while kids are at school. Having grown up with two teachers for parents, I can attest that at least from what I saw, this just isn't the case. With the exception of about a month during the summer and about a week at Christmas, my folks worked (and still work) hours very much like those of most working professionals. They typically get to work by 7:00 and head home between 5 and 6:00 in the evening. Several nights a week, they spend a couple of hours at home grading papers, preparing materials, etc.. They usually spend at least 4 or 5 hours each weekend in their classrooms as well. While summer break is technically 8 or 9 weeks in duration, several weeks at either end are spent attending meetings, cleaning out/moving/preparing classrooms, preparing the year's lesson plans, etc..

None of this is to try to garner sympathy for teachers, but rather to help people who may not be exposed to the reality of this profession to understand that there's a lot more to teaching than just being in a classroom during school hours. Ultimately, teaching can provide a nicer work/life balance than many jobs, but it isn't quite the cake walk that some people believe it to be.

Without getting into the debate/argument about whether teachers are paid "enough", I'll say that I have the utmost appreciation for those who put their hearts and lives into this noble profession. I believe teaching is a true calling for those who should really be teaching. For these people, no other profession can provide the fulfillment and sense of purpose that teaching can, despite some of the agonies that come along with the job.

[tessieca]

Key difference is you get paid 75-150k to do those hours, teachers get paid less then half that. I think thats the point they are trying to make.

Here's the current salary without the 5.25% the district has on the table. Teachers Salary Schedule. With implementation the top salary would move up to nearly $78,000.

TM70 is blatantly incorrect that FCUSD salaries are at the bottom in the Sacramento area. If you look at salaries alone, and add the proposed raise, they remain in the top quartile (some levels as high as #2). S/he may be comparing to schedules that already include their contracted increases.

Benefits are another story, as pointed out by the Troiano's. Agreements (yes, nothing unilateral, but agreed to by both sides of the table) have settled for several years on salary schedule enhancements instead of benefits enhancements. So district benefits aren't competitive at the moment. A problem that took several years to create will not be solved in one year. BTW, the private sector won't have much sympathy for this either as they likely face huge cost increases themselves. My family just received notice that with our current deductible we will have to pay $8400 per year for a family of 4. Unfortunately, I am self-employed and can complain to nobody about helping me out. That being said, the district needs to compare school districts to school distriicts and not to the private sector.

To give you an idea of why 8.62% isn't really, and why more than 5.25% would require a sixth and seventh year of district budget cuts, I'm adding another post with the Superintendent's bargaining update.

JMH: I also questioned how a teacher could be making so many posts during school times.

I also find it interesting to hear the kids come home from school and tell me what their teachers said about their contract and salaries. They spend so many teaching years hearing that they must consider and analyze an issue from all sides and yet when it's personal many teachers seem to believe they can feed one side of a situation to children and expect them to buy it hook, line and sinker without any analysis.

[tessieca]

Folsom Cordova Unified School District


2006-07 Bargaining Update
January 2007


To date, the District has not yet reached an agreement with either of its employee associations regarding a compensation improvement for the 2006-07 school year. Some degree of frustration has begun to be exhibited. One way to prevent frustration from escalating to unhealthy levels is to increase the understanding of the issues involved. This document is intended to provide the District’s perspective on the current status of the bargaining process.

The nature of the bargaining process used for schools and other public agencies frequently generates some misunderstandings and emotions before an agreement is reached. A natural tension exists between employee associations that want to do the best they can for their members, and a District’s interest in balancing competing priorities. In addition to assuring that employees receive fair and competitive salaries, the District must also invest in student programs, classroom needs, safety, and caring for its buildings and grounds, as well as anticipating annual cost increases and assuring long-term financial stability.

Following is an update about the current status of the bargaining process, and some information about the funding received by the District and how it has been allocated.

Status of the bargaining process

The association that represents employees who support the instructional programs of the District, the California School Employees Association (CSEA), has filed a declaration of impasse. The District and CSEA will begin to meet with a state-appointed mediator in January to attempt to reach an agreement.

The association that represents teachers and other certificated staff, the Folsom Cordova Education Association (FCEA), and the District continue to meet. Some FCEA members have begun to display signs about the “number of days without a contract,” and approximately 150 FCEA members attended the December 14, 2006, meeting of the Governing Board to communicate FCEA’s dissatisfaction with the District’s current offer.

How much of a funding increase did the District receive from the state?

The way the District receives its funds can cause some misunderstandings about exactly how much the budget increased for the 2006-07 school year. The District’s overall budget increased by 7.1%, even though some parts of the budget received a larger percentage increase. Totaling the varied percent of ongoing increases to all the different portions of the budget determines the actual ongoing increase. We refer to this increase as the “blended” COLA because it is a blend of all the ongoing funds.

This year, the District did receive several ongoing increases. The general fund received the largest, and most widely known, increase. The increase added up to 8.62%, via a combination of 5.92% for a Cost of Living Adjustment (COLA), 1.7% for equalization (to equalize per student funds on a district-to-district basis), and 1.0% to eliminate a previous deficit factor. This is one of the largest funding increases for California schools in recent history, but it only applies to part (about 75%) of the allocations due to the District.

For the remaining 25% of our ongoing revenue, the District did not receive a similar increase. Some funds (such as state special education and transportation) received a smaller percentage increase, and some (such as federal special education and career and technical education) received no increase.

This difference in funding is important to note because employees are paid from all the funds. When a salary or benefit improvement is granted, the improvement affects all employees, even if the source of their program did not receive the same percentage increase, or received no increase.

Again, it is important to note that the overall improvement to the District’s budget was 7.1%, even though we received an 8.62% increase to the general fund, the largest portion of the budget.

Let’s talk actual dollars

Keeping track of multiple percentages can be confusing and misleading. It may be helpful to identify the actual “new,” ongoing dollars the District received for the 2006-07 school year. Taking into account all of the increases to the ongoing funds and enrollment growth, the District is projected to receive $9,250,000 above last year’s funding level.

Note: The District must comply with state-mandated accounting and audit requirements. Additionally, the District’s financial statements are reviewed and verified by an annual independent audit and are also reported to and reviewed by the Sacramento County Office of Education and the California Department of Education.

The figures presented in this document have been adjusted to reflect changes in enrollment as of the First Interim Financial Report that is filed with the Sacramento County Office of Education.

Additionally, the District has committed an additional $2,250,000 for increases this school year. These funds are not ongoing and are derived from funds not expended in 2005-06 and a projection of budgeted but unexpended funds for 2006-07. The District will need to identify future sources in the coming year(s) for any of these dollars that are committed to ongoing expenses.

The $9,250,000 of new funds and the additional $2,250,000 identified by the District yield a total of $11,500,000 for 2006-07.

How can the money be spent?

Even though a portion of the money can be spent at the Board’s discretion, some of the funds must be used for mandatory or unavoidable expenses.

Annual increases and mandatory or unavoidable expenses

The District must fund certain increases over the 2005-06 budget and some other unavoidable costs. Those costs include:

• Automatic annual salary improvements (step and column) $1,400,000
o This total reflects the savings from retirees
• Employee and retiree benefit increases $1,250,000
• Staffing for enrollment growth (12 new teacher positions) $ 650,000
• Other staffing (14.6 teacher positions) $ 705,000
o For student/program needs, contractual class size, etc.
• Operational cost increases (gas, utilities, etc.) $ 800,000
• Preparing to open Vista del Lago $ 200,000
• Initial staffing for Navigator (principal, support staff, etc.) $ 285,000

Total $5,290,000


After accounting for the mandatory or unavoidable costs, the District can allocate any remaining funds to address other priorities such as investing in compensation improvements and programs.

Current commitment to salary and/or benefit improvements

The District has committed the following to compensation improvements (salary and/or benefits) for its employee groups. These amounts reflect a proposed 5.25% increase to employee salaries and/or benefits.

Note: The proposed 5.25% increase equals 74% of the blended COLA of 7.1% cited earlier.

• Certificated (FCEA) $3,440,000
• Classified (CSEA) $1,210,000
• Management $ 450,000

Total $5,100,000

Investments in programs

The District chose to invest in some priorities established for the 2006-07 school year. In particular, the Board made a significant investment in special education programs to bring existing programs into compliance, and also to develop programs that will reduce future costs. This investment will generate both better programs for students and potential savings for the District. The cost for students placed in non-public schools because the District does not have a comparable program averages $30,000 per student. By creating programs to serve more of our special needs students, we can assure quality and reduce or control costs.

Investments in District needs and/or restorations include:

• Special education (13 positions) $ 860,000
o Teachers/certificated, classified, and management
• Maintenance improvements (2 positions) $ 125,000
• Testing and assessment (1 position) $ 50,000
• Health services (1.8 certificated and classified positions) $ 75,000

Total $1,110,000


What it all adds up to

As occurs every year, the Governing Board must balance competing priorities and make choices about how to spend its limited resources. At present the funding has been allocated as follows:

Available funding $11,500,000

Mandatory or unavoidable costs $5,290,000
Proposed salary and/or benefit improvements $5,100,000
Investments in programs and services $1,110,000

Total $11,500,000

For the District to offer more than a 5.25% increase would require budget cuts in other areas.


Where do we go from here?

The District will continue to bargain in good faith with its employee associations. While there can be honest disagreements over the competing priorities, the District has an absolute commitment to the integrity of its budget process. The District has faith in the bargaining process and its employees.

Comparisons with our neighboring districts indicate that the District’s salary schedules are among the best in the area, but our benefit package has fallen behind. The District shares an interest in improving the benefit package for its employees and will work with the associations to explore and consider current year and multiple year commitments to improving the current benefit offerings.

Are teachers working without a contract? Since the FCEA contract expired on June 30, 2006, what happens to the provisions in the contract while we continue to bargain over compensation and benefits?

By law, the collective bargaining agreement (contract) between a school district and its employee associations remains in effect until both sides agree on a successor contract. All of the provisions of the agreement must be honored by the District and its employees.

An historical perspective

For the past several years, the District has had to make budget cuts to instructional programs and services to students. Some of the budget cuts have been restored, but $5,618,300 in cuts to personnel and site budgets have not been restored. The following chart indicates the percentage of the budget and percentage of reductions absorbed by the employee groups and site/department budgets.

% of total budget $ amount cut % of cuts

Non-management certificated staff and services 47.8% $1,325,000 23.5%
Non-management classified staff and services 15.6% $1,589,000 28.2%
Administration and management 5.6% $ 896,300 16.0%
Site and department budgets 4.3% $1,808,000 32.2%


Additional questions

Any questions about the information presented in this communication may be addressed to Superintendent Patrick Godwin or Deputy Superintendent Debbie Bettencourt.

[cw68]

Thanks for the information, Tessica. That's quite a read, but it's good to have some facts in here.

It's a sticky situation. I'm generally pro-teacher, but disliked seeing what I assumed to be a teacher posting on a forum complaining about his pay and lack of respect during school hours.

[Jolene]

Thanks for the information, Tessica. That's quite a read, but it's good to have some facts in here.

It's a sticky situation. I'm generally pro-teacher, but disliked seeing what I assumed to be a teacher posting on a forum complaining about his pay and lack of respect during school hours.

I agree. Also, the general tone of disrespect to parents who were posting here, trying to make their own valid points was very off-putting.

Dittoing the thanks for the great information, Tessieca. Gratzi.

[jmccarthy]

I was wondering if anyone knew if it was true that ...if they don't settle this by June the COLA will not be retroactive?

thanks

[tessieca]

That will probably be one of the issues discussed at the bargaining table. Sometimes, in the past, the settlement was for more money but a later start date, such as January 1 instead of July 1 (a little something for everyone).

According to the chief financial officer, the 5.25% increase for all employees has been budgeted for, so if that is ultimately the settlement the district would presumably have the money to pay back to July 1, 2006.

Just another thing about salary increases that is in that very long update . . . close to 75% of teachers have already received a raise this year due to seat time (being in the job a year longer) and/or obtaining more units and moving across the schedule columns. That means that most are not living on the same salary as last year even before a full agreement is reached.

[CaptainSpaulding71]

my father was a teacher for 30 years. he told me that if i ever became a teacher he'd knock me in the head. he was bitter because:

1) the low pay compared to the amount of crap he had to put up with. When he started teaching in 1968 he earned about $5500. He earned more than that over the summer tending bar! just to make ends meet (even up until the late 80s), he had to take on coaching jobs during the year and work fulltime during the summer as well as moonlighting tending bar. He slept about 4 hours a night for 20 years. This was just so we could make ends meet - not lavish life by any means. no, we are not from CA - this was in PA.

2) administration continually stripping power away from teachers to effectively teach. case in point, student earning a B and complaining that she should be given an A - administrator ordered grade changed when threatened with lawsuit by parent even though clearly student did not fulfill requirements for A that was spelled out in grading policy at beginning of term. administrators are like politicians - want to stay in office.

3) parents not encouraging their students to take school seriously. i blame this on society in general these days. makes me sick. what if your daughter had the cure for cancer in her head but is encouraged to be shopping, clubbing, looking thin, finding a man, etc. grrr! there's more to life than paris hilton! Everyone wants to be a rap star, etc. why not study Computer Science or Chemistry or Physics? We are losing our competetive edge in the sciences. i guess the cure for cancer will be discovered overseas.

4) mainstreaming special needs kids into calculus classes to give them same opportunities as others. obviously spirit is good but implementation screwed many of the other students due to disruptions and meltdowns. Also, teachers are not generally educated themselves on how to deal with these types of individuals.

5) lack of respect from community (maybe some in this board?) and students and media - it's cool to NOT be in school. ask a rapper or movie star. did Britney or Paris or Babs Streisand go on to higher education?

6) threats of lawsuits - parents and students can use blackmail, slander, etc to really screw a teacher over.

7) lack of funds to do real teaching - supplies, computers, books, etc. these sometimes get earmarked for the special programs - at the cost of screwing the majority (thanks).

8) on a personal note, my dad was diabetic and he had foot problems. his classroom was reassigned to special needs kids (only a handful of students when he had class sizes of 50) so he had a roaming room policy. this lead to him getting an infection from a broken foot and the loss of his leg. i guess my point here is to say that instead of looking politically correct, let's think what's really in best interest for students AND staff.


if you one day fall on your knees and get the call to become a teacher, consider corporate training. you still get the opportunity to 'shape minds' and at the same time make very competetive wages and good benefits.

[TM70]

A

[SacKen]

The last company I worked for went belly-up a few years ago. I took a 15% pay cut at my next job compared to what I was making at the dead company. That was immediate. Not spread out over 3-years. Since then, my health care costs have gone up. The average annual salary increase for the office over the past few years has been around 2.5-3% each year.

We would LOVE a COLA increase of 5.25% each year! Is COLA on top of your already "step" increase for years of service? If so, that would bump our annual raises to 8-8.5%. :woohoo: Even if it isn't, we'll take the flat 5.25%, that's still better.

Thankfully, you're not looking for sympathy.

We support teachers. We don't support broad across the board raises for all with no consideration for individual performance. Like I said before, are you a good teacher and want more money? Figure out how to get rid of the union.

[mylo]

The last company I worked for went belly-up a few years ago. I took a 15% pay cut at my next job compared to what I was making at the dead company. That was immediate. Not spread out over 3-years. Since then, my health care costs have gone up. The average annual salary increase for the office over the past few years has been around 2.5-3% each year.

We would LOVE a COLA increase of 5.25% each year! Is COLA on top of your already "step" increase for years of service? If so, that would bump our annual raises to 8-8.5%. :woohoo: Even if it isn't, we'll take the flat 5.25%, that's still better.

Thankfully, you're not looking for sympathy.

We support teachers. We don't support broad across the board raises for all with no consideration for individual performance. Like I said before, are you a good teacher and want more money? Figure out how to get rid of the union.

Around 1999, during the "dot bomb", I had to take a 50% paycut and practically forced relocation. My benefits were cut and for a while I was paying for private medical insurance. We didn't see sallary increases for 3 years after that.

I have no sympathy for people demanding forced increases. Mafia!

[mylo]

Off to cook dinner...

I thought you were having lunch...

[TM70]

B

[sanmateo60]

Here's the current salary without the 5.25% the district has on the table. Teachers Salary Schedule. With implementation the top salary would move up to nearly $78,000.

TM70 is blatantly incorrect that FCUSD salaries are at the bottom in the Sacramento area. If you look at salaries alone, and add the proposed raise, they remain in the top quartile (some levels as high as #2). S/he may be comparing to schedules that already include their contracted increases.

Benefits are another story, as pointed out by the Troiano's. Agreements (yes, nothing unilateral, but agreed to by both sides of the table) have settled for several years on salary schedule enhancements instead of benefits enhancements. So district benefits aren't competitive at the moment. A problem that took several years to create will not be solved in one year. BTW, the private sector won't have much sympathy for this either as they likely face huge cost increases themselves. My family just received notice that with our current deductible we will have to pay $8400 per year for a family of 4. Unfortunately, I am self-employed and can complain to nobody about helping me out. That being said, the district needs to compare school districts to school distriicts and not to the private sector.

To give you an idea of why 8.62% isn't really, and why more than 5.25% would require a sixth and seventh year of district budget cuts, I'm adding another post with the Superintendent's bargaining update.

JMH: I also questioned how a teacher could be making so many posts during school times.

I also find it interesting to hear the kids come home from school and tell me what their teachers said about their contract and salaries. They spend so many teaching years hearing that they must consider and analyze an issue from all sides and yet when it's personal many teachers seem to believe they can feed one side of a situation to children and expect them to buy it hook, line and sinker without any analysis.

Since we want to "analyze an issue from all sides" and not have it become "personal" and "feed one side of a situation" and "expect them to buy it hook line and sinker", I think it's only fair, Tessieca, you are candid about that fact that you are the Folsom-Cordova School Board President.

[sanmateo60]

I thought you were having lunch...

Did you miss the part where she said it's after school?