| Author |
Message |
    
wharfrat
Citizen
Username: Wharfrat
Post Number: 1631
Registered: 6-2001
| | Posted on Friday, March 11, 2005 - 5:13 pm: | 
|
Tucker -
As discussed in another thread, administrative salaries you are recently complaining about are for this year. They are a done deal. They passed last fall with the votes of your three favored candidates from last year’s election. And I don’t recall you raising much of a peep at the time.
In recap, administrators received the same raise SOMEA received this year, and I don’t hear you griping about SOMEA’s 5.5% increase. For 05/06 and 06/07 school years the ASCA contract calls for salary increases of 2.5%, meaning that for next year their salaries will increase less than the 3.01% cap imposed by S1701. According to board members, the central office staff has also committed to 2.5% raises in each of the next two years.
In addition, as you know, health benefits are now about 11% of the total budget and are increasing by 15% per year. And as part of the contract, ASCA also agreed to a health benefits re-opener in the event the board can obtain some concessions from SOMEA. Finally, the ASCA package is 10% of the district's $60 million expenditure for all salaries and benefits.
Now, as you stated in the editorial component you added to the Strategic Planning: Research Committee Report, the district is preparing for negotiations with SOMEA, and by the beginning of the 05/06 school year total salaries and benefits could possibly exceed the total 3.01% cap increase imposed by S1701.
Based on the above, I have four simple questions for you:
1. Do you think SOMEA should commit to the same 2.5% increase that ASCA and central office have agreed to?
2. If not, as chair of the education CBAC, what wage increase do you think would be financially responsible for the board to agree to?
3. Should SOMEA make concessions on its health benefits package?
4. If not, why not?
Fair warning: Adopting one of your favorite rhetorical devices, I will assume that any failure to answer these questions directly, and forthrightly, will be an admission that you are either held captive by SOMEA leadership, with whom you cavort, cajole and conspire with during board meetings, or in an alliance of convenience, which will dissolve when the district begins contract negotiations with SOMEA. |
fringe
Citizen
Username: Fringe
Post Number: 817
Registered: 5-2001
| | Posted on Saturday, March 12, 2005 - 8:51 am: |
|
I was just getting ready to post this at the other thread, but it fits here.
Over the years, the basic argument for teacher pay increases has centered on the salaries paid in similar districts, other Essex County districts, the state average or whatever comparative index provided the best advantage to those negotiating. Ability to pay and rate of property tax increase have played little, if any, substantive part in the discussion.
The last two district - SOMEA contracts covering 7 years provided average pay increases for staff members in excess of 5% per year. Some got more some got less. Add to this the health benefits that have risen at rates exceeding 10% annually and its not surprising that Staff compensation encompasses over 75% of the budget.
The district's settlements have contributed to the upward spiral in wage agreements, this year exceeding the NJ average increase of 4.6% by half a percent. This should not be surprising as the O'Leary negotiated contract in 1998 provided the largest rate of increase in NJ for contracts signed that year.
The Jasey-Latz negotiations that resulted in the current contract did not put us in the top position for the current cycle, but created much of the bad blood that exists between the district and SOMEA today. For those who recall, Super H claimed that during the negotiations the union was told that the high salary increase would result in a loss of jobs. The union team members denied that the threat was ever made. The fact that another 40+ SOMEA members will be removed from district payrolls next year is a fresh reminder of that still hotly contested statement.
Rubbing salt into this raw wound are the salary increases approved this year for the administration. If memory serves, the ASCA salary increases have never been at the same percentge rate as those for SOMEA as the administrator base is much higher. I suspect that if the district were to offer the same average increase in real dollars that ASCA members will receive under its new contract (>$3,000 per year), SOMEA would jump on the offer.
But the real question is whether it's realistic to believe that given the increases of the last 7 years, that SOMEA will accept a significant decrease. And recall, unlike the administrators, staff spending is not limited by S1701.
What has the BOE or administration done to improve the working environment here to cause the union to lower its sights? Check the administration/staff relations at any of several district schools for a temperature reading.
For those following the budget the question is how much of a raise did the administration build into the 05-06 salary projections, and what happens to that money if no agreement is reached?
Meanwhile the average experience level of the district teaching staff continues to decline, although in the most recent NJ Report Card that statistic has been replaced by the Teacher Turnover - 9.7 % in SOMSD for 2003-04 compared to 7.2 percet statewide. |
wharfrat
Citizen
Username: Wharfrat
Post Number: 1633
Registered: 6-2001
| | Posted on Saturday, March 12, 2005 - 11:01 am: |
|
I have four simple questions for you:
1. Do you think SOMEA should commit to the same 2.5% increase that ASCA and central office have agreed to?
2. If not, as chair of the education CBAC, what wage increase do you think would be financially responsible for the board to agree to?
3. Should SOMEA make concessions on its health benefits package?
4. If not, why not?
Fair warning: Adopting one of your favorite rhetorical devices, I will assume that any failure to answer these questions directly, and forthrightly, will be an admission that you are either held captive by SOMEA leadership, with whom you cavort, cajole and conspire with during board meetings, or in an alliance of convenience, which will dissolve when the district begins contract negotiations with SOMEA. |
harpo
Citizen
Username: Harpo
Post Number: 2015
Registered: 6-2001
| | Posted on Saturday, March 12, 2005 - 11:23 am: |
|
Mr. [wharfrat],
My money would be on "alliance of convenience," but since since Mr. [fringe's] wife is a teacher in this district, maybe it's more complicated than that.
Mr. [fringe],
Do you receive health benefits from the district?
ms. kathleen
|
ffof
Citizen
Username: Ffof
Post Number: 3440
Registered: 5-2001
| | Posted on Saturday, March 12, 2005 - 3:24 pm: |
|
hey harpo- why don't you just change your screen name? |
fringe
Citizen
Username: Fringe
Post Number: 818
Registered: 5-2001
| | Posted on Saturday, March 12, 2005 - 4:00 pm: |
|
Well, I guess two can play at this game - I asked Mr. Arensburg earlier how the Livingston teachers union, of which he is a member, would react to this BOE budget decision process. What programs are being cut there or did the union agree to let the staff and class size bear the brunt of the budget reductions? Now, I don't expect an answer, so I'll get the information and post it myself. But the issue of salary increases and the factors that go into them should be of concern to anyone interested in the SOMSD budget - including the role that this year's administration salary increases will play in the SOMEA negotiations. As Mr. A chose not to bring those salaries forward, let me post them again and suggest that readers calculate the rate of increase for themselves.
Posted on Wednesday, October 20, 2004 - 8:37 am:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
At its 18 October the BOE approved salary increases for central office and ASCA members. The first number is the 03-04 salary followed by the 04-05.
----------------
Gerald Archibald
District Network Manager
$74,880 $80,983
Patricia Barker
Director of Planning &
Assessment
$103,812 $120,000
Manjit Basra
Data Analyst
$84,324 $91,196
Ellen Bass
Legal Counsel
$98,000 $120,000
James Corino
Assistant Superintendent Administration
$125,000 $139,500
Thomas Cunningham Has been cut from the 2005-06 budget
Director of Transportation
& Custodial Services
$69,628 ?
Peter Daquila
Assistant Business Manager
$85,000 $87,550
Marilyn Davenport
Assistant Superintendent
Grades K-8
$135,130 $146,143
Peter Horoschak
Superintendent
$160,264 $185,000
Pat Johnson
Director of Food Services
$65,000 $66,950
Judith Levy
Communications Coordinator
$58,959 $63,764
James Memoli
Assistant Superintendent for
Curriculum & Instruction
$135,940 $149,019
Karla Milanette
School Business Administrator/
Board Secretary
$123,187 $139,500
Diane Pazkkowski
Director of ETTC
$98,549 $101,505
ASCA
Angelica Allen
Marshall Principal
$97,116 $106,827
Kim Beane
K-8 Supervisor – LA
$87,704 $96,579
Candice Beattys
9-12 Supervisor – Math
$107,618 $114,559
Frank Bender
Alternative Program
$86,798
Pat Browne
Tuscan Principal
$118,696 $126,376
Maryrose Caulfield-Sloan
Jefferson Principal
$100,354 $110,273
David Curtin
Athletic Director – CHS
$84,941 $93,768
Angelo DeMattia (retiring December)
District Chair – Math
$109,118 $116,809
Maria Eppolite
Director of Spec. Ed.
$87,704 $101,408
Cindy Esperson
Director of Guidance K-12
$111,155 $118,324
Kris Harrison
MMS Principal
$97,116 $114,858
Michael Healy
Assistant Principal – CHS
$114,438 $121,819
James Jennings
Assistant Principal – SOMS
$81,736 $90,446
Alan Levin
District Chair – Science
$110,618 $117,809
Lovie Lilly
Assistant Principal – CHS
$114,438 $121,819
Janice McGowan
Assistant Principal – CHS
$92,046 $101,527
Marge Mingin
Director IRC/LMS/TV
$114,742 $122,264
Renee Pollack
CHS Principal $131,004 $139,454
Thomas Porto
Director World Languages
$107,618 $114,559
Chris Preston
K-8 Supervisor – Soc. St.
$87,704 $96,579
Bill Rhinehart (retiring December)
Clinton Principal
$115,196 $122,626
Ella Rideau
Assistant Principal – SOMS
$98,752 $108,407
Nick Santoro
Director Fine Arts
$107,618 $114,559
Donna Ship
Principal - South Mountain
$106,827
Kirk Smith
SOMS Principal
$123,858 $131,847
John Veninger
Seth Boyden Principal
$80,236 $93,044
Karla Wiggins
Assistant Principal – MMS
$84,822 $94,232
Dean Witty
Director Phys. Ed/Health
$84,679 $93,361
Robert Young
District Chair/ English
$109,618 $116,809
|
wharfrat
Citizen
Username: Wharfrat
Post Number: 1634
Registered: 6-2001
| | Posted on Saturday, March 12, 2005 - 4:13 pm: |
|
Tucker-
The other day someone from SOMEA leadership called my union prez, to harass me about my activism, on behalf of my school district, in my hometown.
As a result, I'm not going to talk about what is occurring where I work.
If you want to find out, why not get someone from SOMEA leadership to call.
I'm sure you already know how to do this.
--------------------------------------------------
I have four simple questions for you:
1. Do you think SOMEA should commit to the same 2.5% increase that ASCA and central office have agreed to?
2. If not, as chair of the education CBAC, what wage increase do you think would be financially responsible for the board to agree to?
3. Should SOMEA make concessions on its health benefits package?
4. If not, why not?
Fair warning: Adopting one of your favorite rhetorical devices, I will assume that any failure to answer these questions directly, and forthrightly, will be an admission that you are either held captive by SOMEA leadership, with whom you cavort, cajole and conspire with during board meetings, or in an alliance of convenience, which will dissolve when the district begins contract negotiations with SOMEA.
--------------------------------------------------
BTW, I'm sure Harpo still wants to know if you are covered by this school districts health insurance. |
Reflective
Citizen
Username: Reflective
Post Number: 814
Registered: 3-2003
| | Posted on Saturday, March 12, 2005 - 6:59 pm: |
|
wharfrat
pls clarify. reading between the lines above, it seems you are a teacher in livingston? At least you acknowledge membership in that teachers union.
If you are a teacher and if you have tenure which teachers like you (if you are one) always say "we have to have it so we won't be fired, academic freedom" What a bunch of crap!
Well here's my question, why don't you tell your union leadership to stick it, to shove it. to put it where the sun don't shine (under the rug, as it were).
What is your union, the gestapo, the nkv, or castro's secret police? Where is your constitutional freedom of speech? Guess it doesn't exist in teacher's unions.
One more reason for CHARTER SCHOOLS!
wharfrat - as danny boy rather would say: Courage. |
wharfrat
Citizen
Username: Wharfrat
Post Number: 1635
Registered: 6-2001
| | Posted on Saturday, March 12, 2005 - 8:25 pm: |
|
Reflective-
Actually, it's not my union leadership that has a problem. Re-read the posts.
BTW, what do these events say about both the man and the union leadership he cozies up to, that they are willing to engage in these types of behaviors?
|
fringe
Citizen
Username: Fringe
Post Number: 820
Registered: 5-2001
| | Posted on Sunday, March 13, 2005 - 8:50 am: |
|
While I'm honored that my opinion is so tenaciously sought, I'm pretty sure it will have about the same impact as it had on the administration salary negotiations.
My opinion aside, the facts are that another round of 5% average salary increases coupled with the continuation of the S1701 CAP will result in significant diminished program/services for this district.
Cuts in high visibility programs/services were avoided in the 2005-06 budget by maxing elementary class sizes, gambling on elementary specials, and cutting more custodians. Next year there will still be the elementary custodians to sacrifice, but short of raising class sizes, something will have to go. And it will be a lot of somethings if the pay raise comes in at 5%.
Is such a raise for the teachers likely? The history of the last 7 years says this is the number, but as mentioned in other posts, what has the BOE or administration done to create an atmosphere in which a lower figure would/should be given serious consideration?
Is the working environment safer?
Is the decision making more inclusive?
Has the district protected staff jobs?
Are the teachers' opinions respected?
Has SOMEA reconsidered its "no-confidence" resolution on Super H?
Has the Tripod model resulted in better professional development (recall the yoga event)?
Whether one believes Super H or the teachers, the fact is that these negotiations begin in a poisonous environment, and everything signals a very rough road ahead. My opinion, there will not be a contract settlement in 2005-06 and the staff will not get any raises. The question then becomes what happens to the yet-to-be specified money built into the 2005-06 budget for those raises. How much will end up in free balance, and how much will be siphoned off for other items {under this scenario, few cuts were necessary in the 2005-06 budget)? Assuming that the next contract includes retroactive increases for 2005-06 in the 2006-07 budget - how will those be paid? Just an opinion.
|
wharfrat
Citizen
Username: Wharfrat
Post Number: 1638
Registered: 6-2001
| | Posted on Sunday, March 13, 2005 - 9:07 am: |
|
I notice that in your last posts you still haven't answered these questions. I also trust that people who are reading this post have seen the same.
1. Do you think SOMEA should commit to the same 2.5% increase that ASCA and central office have agreed to?
2. If not, as chair of the education CBAC, what wage increase do you think would be financially responsible for the board to agree to?
3. Should SOMEA make concessions on its health benefits package?
4. If not, why not?
Fair warning: Adopting one of your favorite rhetorical devices, I will assume that any failure to answer these questions directly, and forthrightly, will be an admission that you are either held captive by SOMEA leadership, with whom you cavort, cajole and conspire with during board meetings, or in an alliance of convenience, which will dissolve when the district begins contract negotiations with SOMEA. |
fringe
Citizen
Username: Fringe
Post Number: 823
Registered: 5-2001
| | Posted on Monday, March 14, 2005 - 7:05 am: |
|
Shouldn't we be more interested in the responses of the incumbent BOE candidates (Jasey, O"Leary & Miller) who have, at best, sat by and watched the relationship between the administration and SOMEA worsen without saying a thing? |
wharfrat
Citizen
Username: Wharfrat
Post Number: 1640
Registered: 6-2001
| | Posted on Monday, March 14, 2005 - 7:50 am: |
|
You are curiously unwilling to voice your "objective" opinion regarding just where you stand on the issues surrounding something that will have a significant impact on future budgets.
Consequently, I ask you again:
1. Do you think SOMEA should commit to the same 2.5% increase that ASCA and central office have agreed to?
2. If not, as chair of the education CBAC, what wage increase do you think would be financially responsible for the board to agree to?
3. Should SOMEA make concessions on its health benefits package?
4. If not, why not?
Fair warning: Adopting one of your favorite rhetorical devices, I will assume that any failure to answer these questions directly, and forthrightly, will be an admission that you are either held captive by SOMEA leadership, with whom you cavort, cajole and conspire with during board meetings, or in an alliance of convenience, which will dissolve when the district begins contract negotiations with SOMEA.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Once again, it's worth saying to the people who are reading this thread that Mr. Lamkin, to date, has done everything possible to avoid answering these questions.
What is he hiding?
Of what is he afraid? |
Dad23
Citizen
Username: Dad23
Post Number: 70
Registered: 8-2003
| | Posted on Monday, March 14, 2005 - 8:27 am: |
|
wharfrat,
Mr. Lamkin is not a school official. They are the ones who must answer questions. Why does Super H send you to answer for him?
What is he hiding?
What is he afraid of? |
Hoops
Citizen
Username: Hoops
Post Number: 96
Registered: 10-2004
| | Posted on Monday, March 14, 2005 - 10:12 am: |
|
and why is wharfrat defending the administration?
does he have a personal interest in keeping it?
Why is he happy with the failed direction of the schools and the choices that the administration has made?
|
sac
Supporter
Username: Sac
Post Number: 1926
Registered: 5-2001
| | Posted on Monday, March 14, 2005 - 1:10 pm: |
|
I think that fringe and wharfrat and anyone else who states (or implies) that those in office are not doing (or those running for office would not do) "the right thing" ought to be willing to suggest what they think the right thing is. A good way to do this is to answer the question "what would you do if it were up to you?" I don't think it is an unreasonable question at all. I certainly would like to hear the responses from candidates, but I'd also like to hear those sorts of responses from folks who obviously have spent lots of time and energy researching the data and forming (presumably informed) opinions about those issues ... particularly when they are criticizing the actions of others. |
J. Crohn
Supporter
Username: Jcrohn
Post Number: 2099
Registered: 3-2003
| | Posted on Monday, March 14, 2005 - 6:34 pm: |
|
"As discussed in another thread, administrative salaries you are recently complaining about are for this year. They are a done deal. They passed last fall with the votes of your three favored candidates from last year’s election. And I don’t recall you raising much of a peep at the time."
This is about as far as I plan to read in this thread, but it struck me as odd. Re "with the votes of your three favored candidates," who is Mr. Arensburg referring to? Presumably, Bennett, Crawford, and Little.
But I believe Bennett and Crawford abstained from the vote in question.
|
happyman
Citizen
Username: Happyman
Post Number: 263
Registered: 6-2001
| | Posted on Monday, March 14, 2005 - 6:52 pm: |
|
Maybe it is O'Leary, Miller and Jasey??? |
Iwant2 KeepMyJob
Supporter
Username: Fastfusion
Post Number: 32
Registered: 12-2004
| | Posted on Monday, March 14, 2005 - 7:32 pm: |
|
I can't believe the salaries we pay our school administrators! Are the board members insane?
What ever was going through their minds when they approved these new salaries.
They did know the mess we are in with our school budget. So why the HUGE increases in salary?
Now we have to lay off custodians?
I think cuts should be made in the amount of administrators we have. |
Iwant2 KeepMyJob
Supporter
Username: Fastfusion
Post Number: 33
Registered: 12-2004
| | Posted on Monday, March 14, 2005 - 7:39 pm: |
|
Quote:
-------------------------------------------------
Warfrat:
I have four simple questions for you:
1. Do you think SOMEA should commit to the same 2.5% increase that ASCA and central office have agreed to?
2. If not, as chair of the education CBAC, what wage increase do you think would be financially responsible for the board to agree to?
3. Should SOMEA make concessions on its health benefits package?
4. If not, why not?
-------------------------------------------------
Sure! For all of SOMEA's members earning over a 100 thousand. |
|
Closed: New threads not accepted on this page