As discussed earlier, now that the teachers' union has ratified the recently negotiated contract with Unit 4, a little more information is being made available.
Champaign teachers voted Tuesday afternoon to ratify a new three-year contract that includes raises of 4.5 percent per year for each of the next three years for most teachers, and increases beyond that for teachers with more than 21 years of experience.
"I'm happy with what they've put up for us," said Franklin Middle School teacher Cindy Stein. "They've got some good proposals that I think, outside the salary, are nice additions."
Hundreds of Champaign's 700-plus teachers showed up at Centennial High School to vote, and they approved the contract – retroactive to July 1 – by about a three-to-one margin, said Bottenfield Elementary librarian Patricia Plaut.
The Unit 4 Board will vote on this contract later this month.
This contract is a 4.5 % average contract for a large group of salaries. It is not what teachers are getting. The scale with seven grades and 21 senoirty levels get raises as high as 8.6% per year and as low as 2.3% per year. The is no consitiency or reason according to the negotiators. The response was "this is the way it has always been". Folks ,change will be hard for them whatever they do. Stratton, apparently you are not work the extra money paid to the high schools...why...again too comlpilcated and too difficult to change. Good luck, I wonder if someone else is hiring after 20 years.....
That statement is not exactly true. I understood the negotiators to say that the reason for the variations was to smooth the schedule from past inconsistencies going back many contracts. That is not going to be a fix that is not going to be immediate, but will take time. I vaguely remember that from the last contract as well. You can fix it immediately, but you hurt people doing it that way. I don't exactly understand the math, but I do understand and took the time to listen to the explanation.
All Stratton teachers are required to work an extra hour as a response to the consent decree. For this extra hour, they are compensated with a stipend which has remained stationary over the last 6 years--it goes up a few hundred dollars in this contract. For more experienced teachers, this compensation can be as little as 9% of their base pay--and teaching this extra hour is not optional. In contrast, high school teachers are being offered 20% of their base pay if they decide to take on an extra hour of work. Since salaries go up every year with experience, the 20% figure will result in more money, while the "stipend" Stratton teachers are required to take will remain the same.
This contract is a slap in the face to elementary teachers.
"That statement is not exactly true. I understood the negotiators to say that the reason for the variations was to smooth the schedule from past inconsistencies going back many contracts."
Past inconsistencies are not fixed by utilizing current inconsistencies. Those who faired well last contract faired well on this contract and vice versa. For some to get over 19% over three years and some under 7% over the same time period is not what the negotiators were sent to accomplish. The school district proposed how much salary they could afford to pay teachers and that average was 4.5 per year of the total salary of all employees. To allow that percentage to be distributed in a manner that one employee gets 7% and one employee gets 2% and the reported average of the two is 4.5% is simply wrong. It really is not that difficult.
I don't have the proposal handout at home, but I really don't think that your contentions are factual. I thought that I was in one of the lower percentages at around 4%, but I am ok with it because it goes up the following year. Since people's cells change on the salary schedule over the years, your contention is simply not true that people who fared well in the past will continue to do so, and those that haven't are doomed for another three years. People change steps yearly and lanes from time to time as well; therefore, if they are in a lower cell, it shouldn't be for forever.
You realize that if you applied a flat rate of 4.5% to everyone's cell, then some people would get raises of over $3,000 and others would get less than $1500. Does that seem like a more fair system? If you apply the same percentage to every cell, year after year, the gap between the low and high becomes far larger than is fair and equitable.
Well I do have the cells in front of me and I will give you an example. YEAR 1...14 years with BA 2.58%; YEAR 2...15 years with BA 2.71%; YEAR 3...16 Years with BA 2.60%. Total for this teacher over three years is 7.89%. Now look at this cell: YEAR 1...2 years with BA 6.86%; YEAR 2...3 years with BA 4.44%; YEAR 3...4 Years with BA 4.30%. Total for this teacher over three years is 15.6%. Almost twice as much of a pay raise. This inconsistency is found through the contract. Clearly the teacher with 14,15, and 16 years are different for the same degree with someone with clearly less experience. You need to look at the steps and lane with a perspective other than your own. If that doesn't convince you, I'll show you another with lane changes. One teacher, assuming that he/she could go from BA to BA+30 over a the life of this contract with 15 to 17 years in the system. Of course, that would be a lot of course work over three years, but I think it would show that the person was motivated to improve by experience and education. Their pay raise over the life of the contract would be 10.47%. Still clearly under the BA rate for less experience. Looking at a teacher with 2 years experience that has the same educational motive drive but only 4 years experience with receive 15.46% raise over the life of the contract.
The point is this: if your base pay is higher for whatever reason, your share of a pay raise should be the percentage of your base pay. Do you really think Culvers 4.5% raise based on $250000+ is going to be the same as the teacher who spent 15 years in the district? Of course not, but shouldn't that teacher expect the same amount of percentage pay of 4.5% for that year. Check my facts and see if my contentions are factual and show me how YOU read the contract.
"You realize that if you applied a flat rate of 4.5% to everyone's cell, then some people would get raises of over $3,000 and others would get less than $1500. Does that seem like a more fair system?"
Well yes it is a fair system, unless the distribution of money is not fair in the first place. The intent should not be to reduce or widen the gaps unless those gaps require such. If they do, then raise them by a cash amount but leave the percentage the same for everyone. This system is very much outside the norm in contracts. I beleive there were self serving negotiators involved who failed to understand the extend of the problem or simply failed to care based on self serving raises.
I looked at the contract this morning and you are correct, but not entirely understanding the whole story. For the fifteen years (and at least four contracts) that I have been in Unit 4, the BA lane has always topped out with the assumption that hopefully that would encourage you to work toward your Master's Degree. The increases in those cells are based upon simple cost-of living adjustments, not actual raises. If you have been teaching for well over ten years and have made little to no effort to get any kind of further education or advanced degree, I really have a hard time feeling a lot of sympathy. I think that you would find that most district's salary schedules operate on that same premise and it is not at all unique to Unit 4.
As I understood them explain it, Step 5 is when you make your tenure jump, so there has always been a larger bump at that point as a reward of sorts and in an effort to further encourage people to stay (I think that that existed several years ago when tenure was only two years also-at that time Year 3 saw a larger jump). If you think that that is unneccessary or unfair, fine; but, there is an explanation for it-it's not really arbitrary. I think that if you look at more typical scenarios based on experience for your examples, it will be more equitable. I know very few teachers with fourteen years or more experience who have taken the time or initiative to move out of the BA lane.
Contract a slap in the face to elementary teachers??? It looks like on Unit 4's web site that stratton's schedule is 8-330 (7 hours 30 minutes), Centennial High schools schedule is 8:10 - 3:15 (7 hours and 5 minutes) Stratton gets a 5,000 per year stipend for working 25 more minutes that a high school teacher. The 20% as I heard it was for high school teachers who TEMPORARILY took a 6th class.
Get the facts straight!
Anon 11:44,
As a member of the team (and against my better judgement), I felt the need to respond to the "self-serving negotiators" comment. As it happened, I fell into one of the lowest cells in terms of percentage on the entire contract. Since over half the team is already off schedule and get a flat percentage anyway, it must have the other two negotiators that I should be mad at. Or, alternatively, maybe we just trusted the IFT rep who put together the salary schedule to continue to smooth the schedule based on past inconsistencies going back more than a decade.
Since I apparently did such a poor job negotiating for myself and, instead, focused the big picture, perhaps you should step up and give it a shot instead of playing Monday morning quarterback. The hours are a little long and the pay is nothing, but other than that, it's a great gig.
If longevity bumps and degree bonuses were in the previous contract, and your contention is that these are included in the total percentage based on last year's salary, then the district should not indicate that teachers are getting 4.5% pay raises. Unless there was a threat to remove them, and I doubt there was, negotiators would not have to do much to keep a benefit. According to Anon 11:59 these benefits have been around four at least 15 years. That leaves only the COLA and it is clearly not 4.5% Secondly, your contention is also that Unit#4 rewards those who move toward more education then explain the "off schedule" pay raises totalling more that 13%. Are these people in your definition of ("If you have been teaching for well over ten years and have made little to no effort to get any kind of further education or advanced degree, I really have a hard time feeling a lot of sympathy."), their raises are not based on any type of bumps or rewards.
Speaking of getting the facts straight--
For the last 6 years, Stratton teachers have been required to teach 1 hour and 15 minutes longer than any other elementary school in the district. For that 1 hour and 15 minutes, they recieved 5,000, with no cost of living increase. That will now go up to 5,750 after SIX YEARS.
The district has not paid Stratton teachers any money at all for the extra 15 minutes over the course of 6 years. The district now recognizes this and Stratton teachers will be paid retroactively for the 15 minutes from when the last contract expired (July 2008), yet the other portion of the six years will be free service of teaching time to Unit 4.
High school teachers get paid 20% of their base pay for an extra hour (which, by the way, we consider fair--we just believe elementary teachers should be paid the same). Stratton teachers are required to be in the building at 7:30-4:15. Contact time (teaching time) with children is 7:50-3:30.
Good point about the HS teachers temporarily taking on an extra class. At Stratton, the extra hour and 15 minutes has not been optional, rather it has been every day for every teacher for the last 6 years.
Hope that helps straighten out the facts. No one wants to take anything away from high school teachers. We just believe in equal pay for equal work..
Several thoughts to add on this based on 25 years of sitting at the table.
First and foremost - a 4.5% raise - or 5% or 3% or what ever does not mean that all staff members will be getting a raise of that amount. It means that the COST to the district next year is anticipated to be that percentage over this years cost for staff. Some staff will get more than that percent - some staff will get less. More then once my raise was less then that which was announced - and every now and then I got more then the announced raise - but it NEVER means that everyone gets the same percentage of a raise
For example, Unit Four's salary schedule - as do almost all in the area - is designed to push teachers to get additional education. You can get as a staff member free tuition for taking student observers or student teachers - there are also a number of tuition waivers one can apply for - there exist the U of I here in town - and EIU and ISU an hours drive away - so one should not be able to get additional education if they want. Hence raises above certain steps in the BA lane and the BA 15 lane are very limited - its a means of encouraging staff to go back to school. In a similar vein Unit Four is one of the few - if not the only district in this area which has a lane for Phd and Ehd staff - when I last looked two years ago there were eleven teachers in the district with such a degree - in fact a state survey noted that the CU area had some of the best trained staff in the state - and the Unit Four Salary schedule does help push that
This is not to say that all is right with our current schedule - it was built during the 1980's and 1990's to reflect a staff that 70% of the teachers had masters degrees and above - and that 70% of the staff had twenty years of experience or more. These factors doe not exist anymore - I have not seen a scattergram for this year - but would be tempted to state that 60% of the staff has a bachelors degree - and that 60% has less than 20 years experience. The salary schedule most likely needs to be rebuilt to reflect this fact - I know the process started in 2005 but not sure what was done to continue to fix it this year.
On the elementary time versus the high school time - here is the issue - that has been around since the 1970's. A high school teacher day is normally 7 1/2 hours, but he/she teaches five classes of fifty minutes each, has a fifty minute plan period, and has fifty minutes of either supervision or peer coaching - which would indicate a teaching contact time of 250 minutes. In the last few years, the district has had to increasing ask teachers to do a sixth period class in place of their supervision or plan - and has paid those teachers a 20% bump. This practice started out an an emergency solution but has become more common place over time. Last year at Centennial I think we had no less than 11 teachers teaching a sixth class - and i am not sure what the numbers are this year.
A regular elementary teachers day is shorter than a high school teachers day, but he/she spend far more time in front of their students. If memory serves me right - they have a 375 minutes school day - of which they get a 30 minute lunch and a forty minute personal plan period - so they spend well over the 25o minutes that a high school teacher does. So there is a long term imblance on teaching loads that has never been addressed - and then there is the Stratton issue
The issue at Stratton was one of adding an hour on to the school day for a flat $5,000 - which is about 14% of the base salary - while the district plays 20% of actual salary for the high school teacher who takes an additional c;lass - fair - perhaps not but an issue of concern to Stratton teachers. The new contract language addresses some but not all of their concerns.
I have some concerns about this contract. I have been told that the money to pay for it is there - but I dislike running in the red. I would have liked to have seen some issues addressed that were not. I fear its going to be like all contracts - one tales the good with the bad - and hopes that next time things will get better
My .02
Greg Novak