|
Getting your Trinity Audio player ready...
|
After a month of teachers pleading with district officials during public meetings, the Association of Pleasanton Teachers might have to wait until 2023-24 to improve the salary and benefit compensation.
The Pleasanton Unified School District negotiating team is not prepared to reopen the 2022-23 contract that the APT ratified last year, but they are eager to return to the table for next year’s negotiation process, according to PUSD director of communications Patrick Gannon.
“We acknowledge the concerns raised by our teachers regarding benefits and cost of living,” Gannon told the Weekly on Tuesday.
“We are ready to return to the negotiating table and are interested in negotiating a pathway to increase existing benefits to employees,” he said. “We are now engaged in negotiations for 2023-2024 where we expect a total compensation increase.
The concerns over compensation were raised in public comment by several APT members during the Feb. 9 school board meeting, where over 300 supporters showed up, and during the Feb. 23 meeting, where dozens also voiced the need for PUSD to invest in their teachers who might be struggling to make ends meet.
“One of the district’s organizational goals is to recruit and retain a highly qualified workforce and goal No. 4 of Pleasanton’s (Human Resource Department’s) divisional goals is to retain 90% of all staff for the 2023-24 school year. Not valuing our educators by not paying them a fair return for their work that they do, doesn’t retain highly qualified teachers in Pleasanton,” said Erin Salcido, a first grade teacher at Alisal Elementary School, during the public speaker portion of the Feb. 23 board meeting.
“Rather, it leads to a mass exodus of teachers leaving the district and a decline in quality programs Pleasanton teachers can offer to their students,” Salcido added.
Last May, both sides approved a new collective bargaining agreement between the district and the teachers association that included a 3.25% salary increase and 2% additional compensation benefits.
In addition to the 3.25% increase to the salary, an additional 0.25% was added to the increase with the approval of a 2022 Public Agency Retirement Services memorandum of understanding for retirement incentive, Gannon said. This brought the total salary increase to 3.5% in the ratified 2022-2023 APT contract.
The contract, which is open for negotiations every three years, covers the next three academic years, with a one-year settlement for the 2022-23 portion of the agreement and health benefits for employees in line with CalPERS health benefits — a maximum of $5,000 including all CalPERS-required contributions.
Teachers union and district representatives negotiate salary, calendar and benefits every year, and each side of the negotiations teams gets the opportunity to open to articles in the contract to renegotiate.
But according to Cheryl Atkins, president of the teachers union, while those benefits that APT had agreed to last year were acceptable, it was still not enough.
“All APT members received 3.25% of a salary increase, all members were offered $5,000 towards medical — which is only taken by about 26% of our members — others received cash in lieu of $1,500, which will increase to $2,000 next year,” Atkins told the Weekly. “While the $5,000 money for benefits was certainly appreciated and needed by our members, medical benefits increased by 11%, so they did not feel an increase in their paychecks.”
She added that the last two years of the negotiation process was “long and contentious”, and when that process ended last November, both the district and the union agreed “to come to the table to bargain for the 2022-23 school year with a focus on getting to an agreement in a timely manner.”
And for the time being, that is what had happened.
Back in December, both parties signed a memorandum of understanding to clarify the language in their contract regarding calculating time off for personal or medical reasons. This was after APT sunshined — which is another way of saying it reopened — the article in the contract regarding class sizes and caseloads for negotiations during the 2023-24 school year.
The Board of Trustees, superintendent, executive cabinet, California School Employees Association and district staff all even underwent interest-based bargaining training that was supposed to help facilitate mutually-beneficial settlements.
But then, according to Atkins and several APT members, when they asked the district management to return to the table after they found out about the surplus funds from the state, district representatives said no.
“In July 2022, districts received the largest adjustment in the history of the (Local Control Funding Formula),” Atkins said, citing the LCFF funding formula, which is the mechanism through which most of the state’s public schools are funded. “The state made an additional investment into LCFF of 6.7% to increase the base allocation. Then an additional 6.56% was added to the new base for COLA. This equals 13.2% of additional on-going money for PUSD.”
Atkins said that because of this surplus of money she was hoping the district would look at the situation as a chance to provide teachers with the medical benefits that they deserve.
“PUSD is a destination district. The district has used this platitude over and over again to justify ignoring valid concerns and for refusing to make any appropriate compromise,” Haley Baldwin, a Amador Valley High School social science teacher, told the Board of Trustees. “I am asking you today to please see past that dilution. PUSD is no longer a destination district. As of this year, PUSD now offers the lowest total compensation package in the Tri-Valley.”
And it isn’t just the teachers that asked for the same request.
“PUSD has lost nurses to neighboring school districts, and also to higher paying jobs in health care. We have lost 50% of the nurses hired since August 2020. I repeat that again, we’ve lost 50% of our nurses since August 2020,” said Susan Han, the lead district nurse, at the Feb. 23 meeting. “You might think that this was due to a nursing shortage, it was not. We lost them because we’re no longer competitive in salary and benefits, especially health insurance.”
But Gannon said that during the 2022-23 negotiations, the district had offered contingency language that would have “improved compensation greater than 5.5% in the event the district received additional dollars from the state, but APT and (California Teachers Association) declined that offer.”
Atkins still said that the union was disappointed that the district management had originally said no to coming back to the table for the 2022-23 contract and that the district didn’t share how they intended to spend that surplus money.
One of the main points that she and most of the teachers made during the Feb. 23 meeting was that the district should reopen the contract for one main reason other than just compensation — they said the district should reopen it because the teachers did the same thing for the district in 2008.
Paul Stewart, a physical education teacher at Hearst Elementary School, reminded everyone at the board meeting that during the Great Recession, the PUSD superintendent at the time, John Casey, had asked the union to help the district find ways to save money.
“What Dr. Casey did not know is that we had already been in discussions on what to do, because we were not about to let important programs and staff be taken away from the students of this district,” Stewart said.
“We wanted to be part of the solution,” Stewart added. “So we opened the contract and offered up eight furlough days over the next 16 months to help cover the needs of the students. Let me repeat, we willingly opened up a closed contract when we had no obligation to do so. We did that for the students and I guarantee we would do it again if needed.”
But Gannon attempted to reassure that the district is still eager to work with the union in the 2023-24 negotiations process.
“The current date offered by APT to negotiate is six weeks from now and we would encourage our APT and CTA partners to come to the table sooner to address these issues for our employees,” Gannon said.
Correction: A previous version of this story incorrectly implied that the 2022-23 negotiations have been reopened. The district is not reopening that contract for the current year. The Pleasanton Weekly regrets the error.
I would love to see district management reopen teacher contract negotiations. It might help the district to retain teachers.
I would also like to see the APT wait until the state has released the COLA numbers for the next school year (23-24) before agreeing to something with the district. Don’t let the district strong arm you into settling on something before you know what the district is getting.
It is too bad the Pleasanton Weekly had to change the title of this article from “PUSD management agrees to reopen teacher contract negotiations for better benefits, cost of living” at 1:05am this morning. I thought the district management had realized the only way to keep teachers from leaving in droves and to ensure PUSD can fill open positions with good teachers was to acknowledge that PUSD teachers are under paid and under appreciated by district management. I guess we PUSD parents just need to get used to the reality of having long term subs (at best or rotating subs) teaching our students in core classes like math and science for the foreseeable future.
We are already dealing with a teacher shortage. Why is the district not doing their best to retain and hire new talent in an already difficult area? It sure looks bad on the district when they give a 3.25% raise to teacher salaries when the district received over 13% from the state for such things as teacher raises. Get ready for things to only get worse.
Just to clarify, the district received 16 MILLION DOLLARS in extra funding intended for students and staff after closing the contract and now they refuse to even discuss the matter with APT. Haglund and his cabinet enjoy full medical coverage for their families. The $5000 they negotiated for teachers doesn’t even cover the cost increase since last year. They consider being at the bottom in total compensation “competitive”. Haglund has negotiated himself raises over $100,000, while current students are being taught by long-term subs that play Khan Academy videos. Don’t fall for Haglund’s nice-guy act – he is gutting PUSD and laughing all the way to the bank.
Why would teachers be in a rush to negotiate for 23-24 before the state budget is settled when this is how it played out last year. I imagine if management offered to reopen 22-23 they would be at the negotiating table tomorrow. The fact APT was willing to reopen in 2008 when the district needed help, but they won’t reciprocate now says everything.
@Truth:
Yup, it says everything. And they hide behind statements like the ones Patrick Gannon gave. Very sad. I am old enough to remember the days when the district and Unions worked together to solve problems. That is no longer the case, for the district, it is clearly their way or the highway.
What it shows is how toxic the current superintendent and his cabinet are. They’re carpetbagging grifters who don’t live in our community, don’t have kids who go to our schools, and are padding their salaries with money intended for our kids. He is one of the highest paid superintendents in the state, and for what? He’s only made our district worse for kids. He and Julio Hernandez have destroyed the morale of our staff who are leaving in record numbers. Our school board has fallen for Haglund’s act and his cabinet’s manipulated financials, and even the new board members don’t seem to be any savvier in how they handle it. Even with Haglund close to retirement, the negative impacts of his policies will reverberate for years and years.
Yet another Weekly story about teacher pay that doesn’t include what the actual pay scale is. This is basic information that should be included in every story about teacher pay. Please report the basic info, Weekly.
P’town, here is a link to certificated salaries: https://resources.finalsite.net/images/v1658393641/pleasantonusdnet/vu0kcreww4bidviax0qw/PUSD-Certificated-Salary-Schedule-2022-23.pdf
For the purposes of understanding everything, a little history. In 1988, APT negotiated $10,000 from benefits be put on the salary schedule and teachers (usually 40%) could then buy benefits if they needed them. (It was a very senior staff trying to maximize their retirement.) Every year raises were given, the value of that $10,000 rose too. Fast forward to today and the cost of benefits have increased and while that has been pretty much keeping pace with the increases, salaries have nose dived in value. Most districts give high salaries and benefits.
As to the superintendent and the majority of his cabinet, Truth is correct about their raises and benefits. And the board is mesmerized by them. The board, almost all, don’t see they are the superintendent’s boss (acting as one entity). And now we are broken into five areas, further breaking down parents’ voices.
And truth is right, the impacts are real; they are impacting our students and teachers, and for years to come. The one answer is parents need to write to the board members at a minimum and show up to meetings to speak about the concerns.
Kathleen is correct, the only way change will happen is if parents start writing to the board members and attending board meetings.
link to meet the board members:
https://www.pleasantonusd.net/departments/board-of-trustees/meet-the-trustees
A link to salaries is helpful but only in context. It would be nice to compare to our neighboring districts. Total compensation is what should be listed, not just salaries. While the history of our district is important to this issue, our world was much different 35 years ago. The fact that our teachers stepped up during the recession to take pay cuts is more relevant. PUSD has taken an oppositional stance in all negotiations over the last 5 or more years. We are losing talent in our teaching corp and increasing staff and compensation to the distinct office and cabinet. The dollars are flowing in the wrong direction.
A total compensation study with comparisons to nearby districts is essential for the public to get at the facts. Have it done for both teachers and District Office and widely publicize it. I personally do not take claims by either the APT, nor the District, at face value and am wary of selective facts tossed around. In my opinion, neither the APT, nor the District, demonstrated leadership and were committed to getting the kids back in school in the Spring of 2021 until the Board demanded a plan to do so. Notwithstanding the APT and the District Office, our community should be extremely thankful to the many, many dedicated teachers we have in the PUSD and should expect them to be compensated fairly.
Dublin USD did a recent total compensation comparison at several different levels of experience (step and column).
https://www.dublin.k12.ca.us/m/pages/index.jsp?uREC_ID=507667&type=d
Also know that the above total compensation survey was likely done before the 6% increase in pay the Livermore school district teachers just received on March 1st, after the Livermore school district reopened salary negotiations with their teachers this school year. Something the Pleasanton school district is unwilling to do for their teachers.
https://www.pleasantonweekly.com/news/2023/03/03/livermore-school-board-approves-teacher-salary-increase
@ 3.5%,
Thank you for the link. Pleasanton looks good for starting teachers, but drops significantly in the middle and late stages of one’s career.
Every time Haglund or another District talking head says something like, “hiring and retaining the best and the brightest”, we now know it’s hogwash. Why would anyone stay here when we are middle of the pack, and the district shows they don’t want to make it better?
When the district presents their comparables to the board they always use straight salary rather than total compensation, because of what Kathleen mentioned. PUSD does have high salaries when compared to other salaries. But no other nearby district gets as little contribution to healthcare as PUSD, so it’s important to look at total compensation. The comparables list posted by “3.5% salary increase” from Dublin USD bears this out.
They will also annually claim they are projected to lose money when it comes time to negotiate, but EVERY year they triumphantly report at the end of the year that they managed a surplus due to their fiscal savvy. The state requires they have a surplus of 3%. Their actual surplus is close to 20%. They always have enough money to give themselves raises and benefits. If you pay attention their hypocrisy is astounding.
Email, email, email School Board members and Haglund, et al. He needs to know that our community sees what he is up to and won’t stand for it any longer. He needs to be held accountable for his dishonest way of doing business.
When people who are obviously associated with APT resort to making pejorative statements about Cabinet members, Board members and substitute teachers it does not lend credence to their argument. I would appreciate a disinterested party (PW?) providing the following information:
– What is the total compensation (salary plus all benefits) of PUSD teachers and how does that compare to similar Districts? Please name the Districts and list the dollar amounts.
– What is the turnover rate for PUSD teachers and how does that compare to similar Districts? Does PUSD conduct exit interviews and is pay cited as a key driver in resignations?
– How do PUSD Cabinet members and Board members benefit by keeping teachers’ compensation as low as possible?
– If PUSD reduced Cabinet members’ compensation by 10%, eliminated the Board member stipend and gave 100% of that savings to teachers how much would that increase every teachers’ annual compensation? Please provide a specific dollar amount.
– If other similar districts are in fact paying their teachers more than PUSD how are they doing that? Please provide specific examples (parcel tax? higher student to teacher ratios? lower admin cost?, lower special ed costs?). What needs to be true from both increased revenue and cost reduction for PUSD to increase our teachers’ compensation?
Thank you to anyone who can provide factual data while avoiding mudslinging. As a society we need to stop the constant “us” versus “them” mentality that special interest groups and individuals use to polarize and divide people on seemingly every issue.
“How do PUSD Cabinet members and Board members benefit by keeping teachers’ compensation as low as possible?”
To answer this question it would be helpful to know how the total compensation of the cabinet has changed over the past few years? How many new positions have been created at the district office? General funds may have been shifting away from the classroom to the district office. If this is the case then the people at the district office are getting paid more and doing less.
Here is a link to cabinet’s contracts: https://www.pleasantonusd.net/departments/superintendents-office/senior-management-contracts. There is a link to prior contracts on this page. It does not, however, include all employees at the DO.
This is a link to one department’s org chart: https://resources.finalsite.net/images/v1677521996/pleasantonusdnet/np7wh9lxocbxggjs9lkl/BusinessServicesOrgChart22-23.pdf
I appreciate that the last 3 posts are respectful but they actually don’t answer any of my questions. I was hoping to get this information from someone.
Thank you.
Sorry BAN, I was responding to Jimmy. You could ask PUSD, assuming anonymity isn’t a concern. If you send your questions as a Public Information Request to Patrick Gannon, they have 10 days to respond, even if it is to say it will take longer. I don’t see your questions needing more than ten days (and that includes weekends).
Maybe instead of bickering over employer-provided healthcare, fight for healthcare for everyone, perhaps with a German model where you can buy extra insurance on top of what is provided to everyone. It’s absurd that one group of people, just because of their employment, can negotiate to get something that no one else (especially when it comes to the public sector) has or negotiate it away like APT’s leaders did so many years ago.
Haglund has received a 39.5% raise on base salary in 5 years. Including 16.6% raise this past August. (Along with some of the assistant supers)
Leadership is doing all it can to get rid of teachers. The incentive last year for the experienced teachers to leave was a definite warning sign. We lost a lot of great, experienced, teachers – many who had no plans of retiring for at least a few years, some that simply got jobs in other places.
here are the priorities of senior leadership
1) Their own compensation
2) their own power
3) Appeasing parents that complain
4) Taking credit for work that the students, parents, and teachers do
…
37) students
…
114) Teachers
115) School facilities
@Kathleen Ruegsegger – I’ve emailed Patick Gannon at least 3 times and have never gotten a reply (last one was over a year ago). I’m not sure what the “10 days” is but it sure doesn’t apply with my questions. And these weren’t even hard questions, just looking for the right contact person for different things.
@longtime – “something that no one else (especially when it comes to the public sector) has”
What do you mean “no one else has”? The biggest argument opponents to public healthcare say is that they are happy with the healthcare they receive from their employer. The BLS says that 74% of private sector americans have access to health care benefits.
Maybe I’m misunderstanding something here…
Karl, put in the email title that it is a Public Information Request, assuming you may not have done that. After that, there are laws covering these requests and you can push back. I haven’t had any problems with Patrick, so I am surprised by your response.