On Friday afternoon (3/11) 6 of 7 school board members were able to meet during a special meeting to discuss extending the contract with the MGEA until June 30, 2012. The meeting was not just to extend the current expiring deal, but rather to agree to changes for the 1 year extension only. Below are the some of the provisions that changed (as copied from Peter's blog, because I am too lazy to retype them):
1) Teachers will contribute 1/2 the WRS pension contributions from their salary. This is the same requirement as the "Budget repair bill".
2) Teachers will pay 12.6% of their health insurance costs. This is the same requirement as the "Budget repair bill".
3) Only teachers currently eligible for retirement within the next 5 years will retain the current retirement benefits. No provisions for retirement benefits for teachers retiring beyond the next 5 years are provided in the contract, these will be up to the board to provide in policy.
4) There will be a 0% increase to the salary schedule, although step and lane increases will occur.
5) The district calendar will be determined by the board and is no longer a subject of bargaining, teacher transfers also become a management prerogative.
The contract was extended on a 5 - 1 vote. I was the lone dissenting vote. The main reason that I voted against the measure was that I felt it was moved on too fast.
From the teacher perspective I am guessing that having the peace of mind on a contract for an additional year was worth the changes to their existing contract. From the district perspective, the gains made in providing relief to the budget are great.
As I stated when we voted on the extension, this is a good deal for the district, but I think it is a deal that we could have given to the MGEA after the budget repair bill becomes law. Is it better to reach a deal together vs. mandating one, which is what we could have done when the law changes? Without question it is!
I don't like making decisions and limiting flexibility for next year when we don't yet know what the rules of the game are. However, for better or worse the regulations as it relates to employee relations for the district will change in the very near future. It is this uncertaintity that gave me pause and concern that we were rushing into a deal.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Hey, is there anybody out there?
ReplyDeleteCutch:
ReplyDeleteAs the board begins to bargain on the next contract (7/12-6/14), please make sure you get more concessions from the teachers and administrators. Bring their benefits in line with the rest of us private sector workers.
Also, please puch to have the district utilize the physical assets they already have. We can't afford any new buildings for several years - schools or admin buildings. If we have to bus some kids - so be it.
You do that, and you've got my vote.
Get their benefits in line with who in the private sector exactly? How many more concessions would you like from the teachers? Maybe we could just have them all work for free?
ReplyDeleteOh boy, he gets your vote.
ReplyDeleteWho is talking about new buildings? Why does that keep coming up? The elementary enrollment in Cottage Grove is NOT growing!
I agree we should keep teacher benefits and wages in line with the private sector which means we'll have to give them a huge raise.
Welcome back to the blogosphere Jason,
ReplyDeleteMany of us in the district feel that it was not the MGSB but the Governor and the Republican members of the Legislature that moved too fast, and more importantly, in a manner far less respectful of the men and women who have dedicated their professional lives to the education of the children in our district.
The Governor planned to have the budget repair bill passed in 6 days and to present his 2011-2013 budget 5 days later. There is no evidence that the Governor and the Republican controlled legislature had any intention of giving the Democratic members or the citizens of Wisconsin time to evaluate whether his approach to budget reduction was appropriate or sound, or to digest the implications of the proposals on the quality of life in our state, and to debate them in public. In retrospect, the Governor's 11 day strategy does not look at all like a sound, fair, measured approach to balancing the budget, but rather a disturbingly aggressive move to expand the power of his office and to advance the extreme right wing ideology of his party.
I applaud the 5 members of the board who recognized the urgency of the situation, and sent a message to teachers that while they could offer nothing better than a 8-9% pay cut for the next year, at least they would know what lay ahead and could plan accordingly. For some that might mean postponing retirement for a year, and for the rest, to either swallow the bitter pill and hope the recalls are successful, or update their resumes and leave the profession.
Your objections to the haste of the agreement sound hollow. What is the down side of this contract for the district, Jason? The Monona Grove teachers just got kicked in the gut. They just had $1,000,000 taken from them by the Governor's "scorched earth" tactics (WSJ's words) and the only consolation you can give is, "I don't like making decisions and limiting flexibility for next year when we don't yet know what the rules of the game are." Quite frankly it sounds as if you are afraid that you will not have all the "tools" the Governor promises to local units of government to whack away at their costs as they attempt to balance their budgets. Our teachers deserve better.
Bill,
ReplyDeleteYour last post got sent to the spam filter. Coincidence???
Actually, I agree that the teachers gave some great concessions in this contract. So did the other employee unions previously.
This board goes thru pain staking measures to gather data/input on issues. Yet we pass a 1 year contract after about 24 hours of negotiations and only 2 hours of discussion at the board level. We could not get an agreement over the past 18 months. I just think that it would have been better to slow down.
I have not heard any board members or members of the administration talk about new buildings. I would not put any credibility into those discussions.
Jason:
ReplyDeleteI agree with you. Keep up the good work.