The Globe’s Ellen Ishkanian reports that Newton’s school teachers are looking for more than the 2.5 percent cap Mayor Setti Warren set last time for all contract negotiations.
During the last negotiations, according to [Newton Teachers Association president Michael] Zilles, his membership understood the mayor’s position.
“The city was in a pretty bad way, and there was no end in sight,” he said. “We took hits on health insurance and compensation, and we agreed to increase the number of steps so it takes longer to get to a full salary.
“We made some very big sacrifices for the health of the system, now is the time to make some progress,” Zilles said.
The head of the teachers union seems not to understand that the only way that the city can maintain sustainable contracts with all of its unions is to cap total compensation–wages/salary plus benefits–at 2.5% per year without seeking an override. Because health care premiums increase at a faster rate, the only way to achieve that goal is to limit annual increases to less than 2.5% and/or increase premium shares, whether the city opts into the state’s GIC health insurance plan or not. Unfortunately, even that is not enough to address over $600 million in unfunded liabilities for OPEB (e.g., retiree health benefits).
Last year, I answered the teachers’ union questionnaire for candidates honestly and said as much, and was criticized by the head of the teachers’ union for doing so. At the time, friends who teach in Newton told me that the union had assured them this round of collective bargaining would go smoothly. Perhaps the union leaders did not want to face the facts, but even with the recent override, there is a long way to go before the city overcomes the fiscal challenges that lie ahead. In short, while some progress has been made, if the city is to stay the course toward sustainability, mutual sacrifices are still required.
But the city did seek an override and got it. The operational override included lots of things which are non recurring yet that tax layer is both with us forever and itself growing at 2.5% per year. Why hide those funds? If there are inequities in salary because NTA is among the last to get a post recession contract, then we need to correct that. It’s not only fair, it’s important in attracting good people
What are the “lots of things which are non recurring”? If there really are any, there’s still the OPEB liability to fund.
Hi Julia — The operation override was $8.5million. For the sake of example, let’s say all of that was for road upgrades needed because no similar upgrades occurred over the last decade. Once the road are fixed, that sum of one-time cost under good management will then be spread over longer periods, Instead of $8.5 million all at once, we do proper maintence over ten or more years. Now follow that example to every other piece of that override; similar scenarios, mostly.
Julia, respectfully, you are vocal as part of a group that wants to maintain Newton as we are used to it. I hope the idea extends to the quality of teaching otherwise all the other efforts are substantially wasted. It’s game over.
I’m not getting why the public wants to improve the distance between the 1%ers and the rest of us, yet make up silly 2.5% rules that work against that. If Newton wanted to say we cap all costs for heating/AC at 2.5%, we’ll all laugh at the stupidity of that ideal. The laws of economics control fuel costs as it does salaries the 1%er venture capitalist makes/and the salary a first grade teacher makes.
The OPEB is a number that each of the other towns locally and nationally face. That has nothing to do w base compensation.
I don’t think there are too many that read this blog that don’t remember where our 2.5% rule came from. It was the friends of a radio guy named Jerry Williams, a Howie Carr type. So here in 2014 we froze life at 1980.
Hoss, with all due respect, if you want the laws of economics to control the contract situation, let’s disband the teachers’ union and let the free market determine base salaries and in which city / town teachers decide to earn a living.
Patrick – who’s “let’s”?
Jane, let’s ask Hoss since he used the term, “let’s” in his comment to which I was replying. Since Hoss was offering a hypothetical set of comments and questions, I felt I could add my contribution to the discussion without having all the supporting facts at my disposal.
Never having been a member of the NTA union, I do not know who has the authority and/or ability to disband it. Who do you think “let’s” would correctly represent if disbanding was to be considered?
Patrick’s theoretical question was honest. He also asked the same honest question about 40b rules. I didn’t answer because none of those changes are currently a voter question. If I needed to right all rules according to basic economic principles, I’d start with the internal revenue code which at times has made yachts and thoroughbred horses a better economic investment than peach or tomato growing. (The list of regional preferences goes on and on and it continues_) Let’s deal with a contract, not a theoretical
the last “let’s” meant me and the mouse in my pocket. She’s very sensitive
And so are many other unions in the City.
Patrick – I was referring to this: “Let’s disband the teachers’ union”, and doing my usual thing of skimming a thread when I noticed this comment.
The City faces a liability of over $800M in pension and retiree health care costs. Any claim that our difficult financial times are behind us is simply not supported by the facts.
Jane, I do not expect the teachers’ union to be disbanded; the people who could make that happen will not let it happen. My disbanding comment was offered thinking that I was involved in a hypothetical discussion. That said, I still do not like the unhealthy financial situation that has been allowed to evolve by the actions of many of our politicians and union leaders.
I think Newton teachers provide a great and important function for the public; however that does not mean they should receive the highest pay packages in the city. (FWIIW, I think the compensation package for the superintendent is obscene.) Comparing everything to the highest data in a range continues the escalation problem. Newton teachers are paid well relative to the entire workforce when assessing the risk/reward aspect of compensation. Hoss offered a wide range on the spectrum when he identified venture capitalists (I think he meant entrepreneurs) and first grade teachers.
And since Hoss introduced the internal revenue code to this discussion, I do not expect that to be fixed either. The politicians and the lobbyists for lawyers and accountants will not let that happen to any significant degree; too much personal wealth for those groups would be negatively affected.
Has anyone asked Newton Teachers Association President Michael Zilles or the other union bosses about the last day raises in the labor contracts that they received?
On the last day of the last labor contracts, new salary step scales took effect which guaranteed lavish pay raises to the unions (particularly the police & fire unions) from July 1, 2014 (September 1, 2014 for the school contracts) to June 30, 2017 (August 31, 2017 for the school contracts).
http://www.newton.k12.ma.us/domain/56
Long story short, even if no contract is agreed upon between Newton and its unions, the unions still get lavish pay raises for at least three years from the expiration of the last labor contracts.
That link shows step increases of 1.8% for each new year across the board, if I am reading the numbers correctly. Are you coming up with a different number than I am seeing that would support the “lavish” tag?
Doug, Newton teachers who are at step 15 or below move up by a whole step annually, which is a 3.6% raise rather than the 1.8% raise associated with a half-step. Similar adjustments are made with the other bargaining groups based on their step scales.
In addition, health care expense grew at a rate of 5.65% annually since 2004.
Furthermore, Newton now has to start accruing a liability for OPEB thanks to GASB 45 and now has to set aside 3.25% of a new employee’s compensation to begin prefunding it in order to mitigate the liability.
Salaries for Unit C and D members grow at a faster rate than Unit A & B members.
Long story short, Newton will need significant turnover of more senior, highly-compensated employees retiring and being replaced with younger, lower-cost employees in order to try to stay within the 2.5% target rate of growth.