Cloudy / 54° F
Gap remains between teachers, board
Published 11:32am Thursday, April 5, 2012The Fergus Falls School District and the district’s teachers union still have significant differences in their negotiations for a financial package increase as part of the current teacher’s contract settlement, according to school board member Melanie Cole.
Cole provided The Journal with information today that the school district offered a 3.5 percent increase to the financial package at the last mediation session with the union on March 19, while the Fergus Falls Education Association last offered an 8.8 percent increase.
According to district business manager Mark Masten, the district’s offer would increase the school’s current teacher compensation budget (approximately $11 million right now) by $385,000, while the union’s offer would increase the budget by $960,000.
Teachers union co-president Steve Olson could not confirm the percentages without speaking to the lead negotiators for the union; he did note that percentages of package increases can be calculated different ways.
Though much of the negotiation process can legally be made public, the school district had been keeping its dealings under wraps in order to work out the contracts quietly and without controversy, Cole explained.
“Out of deference to the teachers, quite frankly I didn’t want to tell the public immediately what (the teachers union) first came to the table with because it would outrage (residents),” said Cole.
She said the first offer from the union back in September came in at a “conservatively estimated” 18 percent. Masten noted that typical negotiation strategy involves both sides starting with numbers they know they won’t receive.
Cole, who supplied The Journal with the negotiation numbers independently of the school board, changed her mind about the benefits of confidentiality because she decided that the public needed a more thorough picture of what the terms were. She recently received more than 200 form letter-style postcards from area residents (distributed, she said, by the teacher’s union) urging her to find “a fair and equitable settlement” for the teacher’s contract.
Virtually none of those people, she said, are aware of what is happening behind the scenes, and none of them had asked for the district’s side of the story before sending the postcards.
“One of the most difficult things as a board member is to not have people ask me what we’re doing or why we’re doing it,” she said, adding, “I’m disappointed that more people don’t ask questions of me or the other board members.”
Though Olson could not provide exact dollar amounts being negotiated, he explained that the teacher’s union is concerned about the increase of insurance compensation (the district has given only one increase in the last four years, he said), as well as the reinstatement of two salary measurement tools called “steps” and “lanes.”
Steps, explained Olson, are a measure of how long a teacher has worked with a school. Under normal circumstances, he said, a teacher “moves down” one step for every year he or she works at a school, receiving the pay and benefit level accorded to each new step. Each lane, on the other hand, measures 15 graduate credits that a teacher pays for out of pocket. When a teacher earns enough credits, he or she “moves to the right” into the next lane, which also has certain compensation rules.
“The ultimate goal is to get to the bottom right hand quarter of the salary schedule,” said Olson.
An average school salary schedule might contain somewhere around 18 steps and six lanes, he noted.
The problem, Olson said, is that the school district has frozen the teachers’ steps three of the last four years, essentially keeping them in the current compensation tier when they normally would move to the next level. However, that doesn’t necessarily mean that teachers don’t get pay raises, as districts often supply a pay increase to offset the step freezing.
Reinstating steps is one of the union’s primary goals this year, said Olson. When it comes to how much each step will be worth, “the dollar amount is negotiable.”
Cole, however, is less concerned with the specifics of how costs break down and more concerned about the overall cost to the district.
“We haven’t gotten funding from the Legislature to support salary increases for many years,” she said, noting the $50 per student increase approved by the Legislature last year is negligible compared to the amount the Legislature is keeping in delayed payments.
When it comes to calculating increases to the teacher’s contract, she said, everything from wage increases to an extra paid day off to more sick days is considered.
“Everything that has a cost to the district goes into the mix,” she said.
Masten said the average teacher working for the district would receive an $800 salary increase in each of the contract’s two years under the district’s offer, while the union’s offer would give the average teacher a $1,185 increase each year. The district offer does not increase health insurance spending in either year; the union offer increases the average insurance spending by $3,234 per teacher the first year and does not increase the second year.
The first year of the contract would be retroactively compensated, as it started in 2011 and ends in July.
Though she respects Fergus Falls’ teachers, Cole said they should not be exempt from the belt-tightening that has affected every other level of government.
“I’m constantly mystified why this segment of public employees doesn’t get lumped in with the state and the city and county employees who … get their salaries frozen,” she said.
Masten and Olson, however, are hopeful that the district and the union can reach an agreement soon. The next mediation session between the two parties takes place on May 9.
“The (March) mediation session brought some significant progress,” said Masten.
Outraged? That word does not begin to describe how we feel. 18 % increaase? 8.8 % increase? Even the boards offer of 3.5 % increase is beyond excusable. How many taxpayers in the school district have received a total of 3.5 % increase over the past several years put together? Thank you Ms. Cole fo bringing this to our attention. Never aain will I believe a teacher who says it is for the children. Parents will find it harder to give children what they need with increases like the teachers want. Property taxes are way out of control already and this would be over the top. Many taxpayers have not seen a pay increase in several years.
So in other words, because Pam Carlson didn’t get something, no one else should. Talk about class envy.
So, by labeling the criticism of the greed of the teachers’ union, you are accusing the critics of class envy? A dedicated Marxist such as you should know about class envy. But, your class envy is usually directed at people who have more money than others, and labels those more fortunate as evil.
Does it not follow then, that your defense of money grubbing teachers is labeling the teachers as “the evil rich”? And, does it not also label those who have to pay for the excesses of the teacher union as whiny ingrates, peasents who should keep their mouths shut about their “betters”?
But, I have no doubt your Marxist “policy of no policy, and nothing is constant but change” will help you to easily spin on a dime and flay the tax paying taxpayers as the “elite” stomping on oppressed (teacher) workers.
In this economy we have all had to tighten our belts. The school district is going to have to too. They want to keep adding things to the school budget, by raising taxes in the district, and aren’t looking at the people who pay those taxes. If they need funds, I would first suggest that all unnecessary personal be laid off. In reality how many people does it take to administer the district. I know it has been done before, all we need is for them to step up, and come up with a budget that works.
In these economic times, I can’t believe that the teachers union started at 18% and begrudgingly dropped to a mere 8.8% increase. I applaud you Melanie for bringing this travesty to light, many of us haven’t gotten an increase of pay in several years. And when we did it is commonly based on performance not just putting in the time. I think the board’s 3.5% offer is more than generous and the teachers union needs a big reality check. The average teacher salary in Fergus schools is $41,498 (http://www.teachersalaryinfo.com), while the median family income is $36,976 (http://www.city-data.com). Plus they only are under contract for 9 months and many get summer jobs. You can’t tell me that a household with a teacher in it are hurting financially. Way to go Melanie Cole, stick to your guns.
Well, remember the schools might have had more money….but our DFL GOVERNOR VETOED THE IDEA.
Dayton vetoed the payback plan….I guess the DFL thinks you teachers should tighten up your belts too….
18% Raise. Am average of over $7,000 MORE A YEAR, for each teacher? HA Ha Ha. Oh My, what SEIU brain trust thought that up?
I know gas prices and coffee prices are now sky high! But your Union loving President has done nothing to lower the cost of your Union life style. Take it to his door and whine about it to his staff.
Careful, Dave, your ignorance is showing.
I don’t know what your problem is Larry, but I’ll bet it’s hard to pronounce.
Let’s see…a union supposedly asking for an 18% increase, knowing they won’t get it or Humongous Multi-national Oil Companies with profits out the wazoo get billions and billions of taxpayer dollars each and every year.
Guess which one upsets conservative tea baggers?
Speaking of oil companies and cost of gas, interesting stat: Average profit for oil companies per gallon of
gas – 7 cents….Average taxes per gallon of gas – 46 cents. Who is taking more from the motoring public, the oil companies or government?
And, the 7 cents profit for the oil companies is then taxed again. Big government strikes again.
Shouldn’t mix your metaphors or compare apples and oranges or profits and taxes, Richard/acker/munk.
You shouldn’t mislead readers with false information. To say that the oil companies average a profit of seven cents per gallon is laughable. It is also untrue because it omits the profits they make from producing and selling crude oil. (crude oil and finished product are two different things)
But by attempting to turn the conversation to oil company profits you show us that you have no answer to my question, which upsets you more working people asking for a raise or those same working people subsidizing big oil to the tune of millions and millions of dollars per year. Still, it’s not difficult to determine where your sympathies find comfort, Ms. Ryan.
There are lots of bloggers out there. There are lots of people distorting numbers to promote some cause or another. Testifying before Congress, the 5 major oil companies said their profits were 10% per barrel of oil. (I doubt they really know their profits or where they come from.) Anyway, that doesn’t mean they take a 10% cut on a gallon of gasoline. People who would argue exact dollars and cents for to support one position or another are just too simple to understand the nature of a full line producer making multiple products. Anyway, here’s something we can know for ourselves—when the price per barrel of oil goes up oil companies report bigger profits. Interesting suggestion though—we should increase the federal and state budget deficits so oil companies can make even greater profits? As I own a few oil stocks I would profit from that suggestion but my holdings are so small and there are so many of us small stockholders, I doubt the increase in my dividends would be enough money to build/repair my own roads.