Town Square

Post a New Topic

Recession Lessons from the Private Sector

Original post made by Stacey, Amberwood/Wood Meadows, on Feb 1, 2010

"Creative recession solutions
These Best Companies aren't sticking to the book when it comes to dealing with an economic downturn."

Web Link

Summary:

- Employee discounts
- Salary cuts vs. job cuts
- Management give-backs
- Employee-driven cost cutting
- Furloughs
- Management salary cuts

Comments (8)

 +   Like this comment
Posted by What is the point?
a resident of Avila
on Feb 1, 2010 at 7:00 pm

I am pretty sure my teacher friends here would gladly take an employee discount, defer accepting their bonuses maybe even take a pay cut. IF they could be guaranteed a share of the profits when the company starts to make one again. What? Wait? Who profits from a great education? WE ALL DO. Especially the people getting it. And guess what? If teachers take a pay cut now they will never see that money again because they have to beg to be paid fairly. I never really understood that until now when I read all the terrible posts on this blog. Teachers do not profit when the economy goes up and they should not be expected to pay for your kids education when the economy goes down.


 +   Like this comment
Posted by Stacey
a resident of Amberwood/Wood Meadows
on Feb 1, 2010 at 8:37 pm

Stacey is a registered user.

"IF they could be guaranteed a share of the profits when the company starts to make one again."

That could be a point of negotiation for any salary cut. For example: "The working document sets a timeline that would compensate teachers for salary rollbacks with 8 percent salary increases each year from 2013 to 2015." Web Link


 +   Like this comment
Posted by Really?
a resident of Another Pleasanton neighborhood
on Feb 1, 2010 at 11:06 pm

That happened in the past- we had a "make up for cuts" for 2 years, and look at what the community says about it now...."unsustainable salary increases took place from 2005-2008" (Even this is not true since in 2007 -2008 the increase was given up in order to fund science specialists)

This "web based data" is now used against the district as "proof" of mismanagement and made to show the teachers in a bad light. When this is attempted to be explained, it falls on deaf ears.


 +   Like this comment
Posted by Stacey
a resident of Amberwood/Wood Meadows
on Feb 1, 2010 at 11:14 pm

Stacey is a registered user.

There was no salary cut in the past (if there was, please post that information). There was only no COLA given by the State during that 2003 downturn. And that's after the strange 9% increase in 2000 or 2001 that the PW didn't explain very well in their report.


 +   Like this comment
Posted by Stacey
a resident of Amberwood/Wood Meadows
on Feb 1, 2010 at 11:16 pm

Stacey is a registered user.

And the give-back to fund science specialists was actually a poor decision I think. That's a one-time source of funding to hire people. Those science specialists are not being funded by continued give-backs by certificated staff. So while it may feel warm and fuzzy that there was a give-back to hire those science specialists, it was a poor decision because people were hired without a sustainable funding source.


 +   Like this comment
Posted by Pleasanton Parent
a resident of Pleasanton Meadows
on Feb 1, 2010 at 11:47 pm

Teachers also get summers off, have a less volitile (overall) environment, tenure, and a more generous retirement package than most in the private sector. Its a trade off, the private sector accepts more risk and compensates accordingly. The public sector has historically, (though I think we've moved away from it) offered median salary positions, job stability, and a better than average retirement package.

I think teachers should be rewarded for their efforts, but compensation should not be equal.


 +   Like this comment
Posted by Really?
a resident of Another Pleasanton neighborhood
on Feb 2, 2010 at 12:16 am

I was referring to the lack of COLA, didnt mean to say cut- sorry, but my point is the same.

I believe the increase in 2000 was in connection to CSR being instituded. There was a big shortage of teachers, in order to attract people to the profession, wages increased. Web Link I'm sure there was more in the news at the time, this is just one study of what occured.

You are asking about the 9% because you want clarity, that is different than many have done when seeing the numbers. It is automatically perceived as mismanagement and a poor decision. What would make that any different in 2013 or any year for that matter? If teachers take a cut now, it will stay that way regardless of the economy- or the community will react as you see happening now- with outrage, false acusations, and demands for greedy teachers to feel the pain.

My point about the give back in 2007 was to state that you cant call it an unsustainable raise for all teachers, because it wasn't. Some continually say it is a raise giving misleading information meant to make the district look bad.

Personally, I think hiring the science specialists (Excellence report) was one of the best decisions for the children of this community as far as program benefits. Talk about bang for your buck- it also has tangible evidence- just look at the rise in science test scores among 5th graders in the district.


 +   Like this comment
Posted by Stacey
a resident of Amberwood/Wood Meadows
on Feb 2, 2010 at 7:43 am

Stacey is a registered user.

A couple things...

I've not seen the 9% discussed here before as evidence of mismanagement (actually it hasn't been discussed at all). That's interesting that it was related to the implementation of CSR. I thought it had something to do with putting benefits on the schedule. The "me too" clauses meant a 9% raise for the other employee units too.

I think it is difficult to say that a cut in salary would stay that way. I think that's a valid concern from an employee standpoint, but not a foregone conclusion. These are items that are negotiable.

The unsustainable raises question... afaik the give-back wasn't included in the "14% over three years" calculation.

I'm not saying that hiring the science specialists wasn't a bang for the buck. I'm sure they do have a positive effect. I'm just saying that they're on the chopping block now because the district didn't plan on having the funds to keep them during a downturn. That's what sustainable funding should be about, no?


Don't miss out on the discussion!
Sign up to be notified of new comments on this topic.

Email:


Post a comment

Posting an item on Town Square is simple and requires no registration. Just complete this form and hit "submit" and your topic will appear online. Please be respectful and truthful in your postings so Town Square will continue to be a thoughtful gathering place for sharing community information and opinion. All postings are subject to our TERMS OF USE, and may be deleted if deemed inappropriate by our staff.

We prefer that you use your real name, but you may use any "member" name you wish.

Name: *

Select your neighborhood or school community: *

Comment: *

Verification code: *
Enter the verification code exactly as shown, using capital and lowercase letters, in the multi-colored box.

*Required Fields

Martin Litton, force of nature. An appreciation.
By Tom Cushing | 2 comments | 1,063 views

What to do with your buckets of water
By Tim Hunt | 3 comments | 799 views

The Golden Days of Television
By Roz Rogoff | 0 comments | 559 views

How Many Colleges Should I Apply To?
By Elizabeth LaScala | 0 comments | 362 views