I want to start by saying that I am not taking a position on this issue, as I am not involved in the process, but I think it might be helpful to provide a perspective that is prompted by a recent email from a friend.
This friend, business savvy and experienced, sent me a copy of a flyer recently distributed to parents by teachers at his kid’s school. His question to me was, in essence, “What’s the big deal about giving a 3% cost-of-living adjustment rather than a 2% increase. Neither number is very large.”
His question prompted me to look at the current contract because–given my experience in the public sector–I had trouble imagining that each teacher would only be getting an annual increase of 2% or 3%. I was then able to provide him with a more thorough explanation.
The teachers’ contract, like many in the public sector, provides for an annual step increase each year a teacher stays in his or her job. As I read the salary schedule effective March 1, 2018 (since modified by a one-year extension), those step increases were in the range of 3.6% to 3.8%. While some percentage of teachers top out of the 15-year salary schedule and don’t get step increases, there is also a longevity payment that is awarded annually: $750 after 13 years of service; $1000 after 19 years of service; $1500 after 24 years of service; and $3000 after 27 years of service. So the first year’s annual increase for a typical teacher who hasn’t topped out could be, say, 5.7% under the city’s offer and 6.7% under the union’s request.
I think the handout has one inaccuracy when it suggest that the union’s requested 3% annual increase amounts to 12% over four years. Because of compounding, I believe that would be 12.55%. Likewise, the city’s offer of 2% per year does not amount to 6% over three years, but rather 6.1%.
So what’s the right answer, 2% or 3% or something in between? There are lots of moving parts in a negotiation like this. Just looking at the salary component, there are the number and size of the steps, the extent to which the entire step schedule is adjusted up each year, the longevity payments, and so on. There’s also the desired term of the contract, three years or four years. For how long a period do you want to lock in the agreed upon wage increases? More broadly, the contract covers issues like medical coverage, release time for professional advancement, preparation time, and the like.
I think we all join with our teachers in the hope the contract can be resolved reasonably quickly, but we also join with the School Committee (including the Mayor) in their desire to offer a competitive package balanced against a need to ensure that there a reasonable financial result over the term of the contract.
This is a bit of a side step but if the high schools were to shift to a later start time (I know I’m dreaming a bit here) is there anything that needs to be changed in the typical teachers’ contract to make that happen? Or is the contract more focused on overall hours worked where the shift would be possible with no further negotiation ? The term of the contract made me wonder about this other issue.
Careful with you use of the word “we” Paul. There are many in Newton that believe our teachers should be at the top of the pay scale, not merely “competitive.”
“Competitive” means different things to different people. Some think it means top of the range. Some think it should be less than that. So no need to describe it as “merely.”
Paul, you didn’t mean it as “too of range” did you? It was your statement.
I meant it the way I wrote it. Sometimes constructive ambiguity is the most inclusive way to write something!
The percent increase has to have inflation subtracted from it before compounding.
Paul,
Thanks for bringing up this issue in this forum, as it is very important and effects those of us who have kids in NPS in a very personal way. I will leave the teachers on this site to address your numbers, but here is what I know and see:
1. Our teachers are underpaid compared to surrounding towns as far as salaries are concerned. We are starting to lose teachers to other districts, and we have trouble hiring new ones. Our teachers’ salaries used to be 9th in the state, and now they are 85th or lower. If I worked for a company and knew that I could get a nice raise by going to a competitor – I would jump ship, that’s how market forces work. We can’t expect to retain experienced teachers with such salaries. So all this talk of what *you* might consider “competitive” is a moot point if our teachers don’t think they are being paid competitive wages (and they are not).
2. What you did not mention from the flyer is the fact that the biggest point of contention is the fact that special ed aides and behavioral therapists (who work with higher-need sped children) are getting very low salaries and are paid only for their direct work with students – not for collaboration with classroom teachers and parents. One of my children has an aide, and I know first hand how critical it is to have experienced, dedicated aides who will collaborate with parents and teachers – you just can’t successfully educate kids without it. It blows my mind to even think that an aide will not be paid for the time spent collaborating. How is it even OK??? Aide salaries have been an issue at NPS for a while, but now it is starting to hit the proverbial fan. Last year my son had 3(!) different aides working with him because of turnover, and it has severely limited his progress. So yes, I am absolutely furious about this! Not only is the city wasting money hiring new aides all the time (and not doing it effectively, as 19 aide positions were unfilled as of the beginning of this school year), but NPS is failing our children! I am sure that it also puts the city under legal liability of possibly having violated IEPs. Our children don’t deserve this and our teachers and aides don’t deserve this either! The only right answer here is that city does everything they have to do to maintain NPS’s reputation and DO THE RIGHT THING for our kids by bringing teacher salaries to a competitive level.
Thanks especially for bringing up that second point, Irene.
Great point Irene. They are trying to cap one SpEd teacher salary with 15 years experience at 50K, which is $35K after taxes. Is that “competitive” or fair?
A teacher last week told me she runs out of tape after a month at Newton South High School. We all know teachers pay for any extra or special supplies but also things like colored whiteboard markers, etc.
Meanwhile, the Mayor is going to spend zillions on legal fees for Webster Woods. But we have at least 6 unions that I know of with NO contract, all expired. Any CEO I know would always pay their people first before committing huge expenditures on new projects such as the Mayor is doing. I would say that’s an ethical point as well. Having demoralized teachers and police officers who can’t get a contract signed in five years is a huge labor issue that needs to be taken care of properly.
I don’t think you should ONLY look at your calculator when making pronouncements about what is best for our city’s children and schools. However, real estate values are most definitely tied to excellent schools, so you can have your “reasonable financial result” that way.
The reasonable financial result is that we have some of the best schools in the nation. Let’s not muck it up.
PS, who is “we”?
PPS That’s my flyer and if you’d like one to hand out (the rest of it is important too) and keep current on what is going on with teachers & schools, join us on Newton Civic Action Forum.
I think it’s hard to make these kinds of calculations without context.
For example, that doesn’t include cost of living, housing costs, average drive time, etc. that are both real monetary and emotional costs compared to peer cities.
Bryan, it’s not hard to make the calculations once you look at how these contracts work. That’s arithmetic. My point in writing was that even well informed people, like my friend, often don’t understand the mechanics of the situation.
It is hard, though, to make the choices–and maybe that’s your real point. I don’t know, for example, what each point in increase means to the city budget each year. I’d guess it is somewhere between $1 and $2 million, compounded. Likewise, if the steps themselves are modified in an upward direction, there is an additional compounding impact on the city budget. Those impacts are not presented in Kim’s flyer.
How much is it worth to achieve parity with other cities and towns, or as some suggest here, to be at the top of the range? What do we gain by doing so? Kim and others have offered some thoughtful arguments. What do we lose? I bet we might hear from others who would feel differently, who might argue that such money comes from stressed taxpayers, or would be taken from other services.
Kim, “we” in the last paragraph of my post is not the royal we. I think it is a general statement of what people I have talked to would hope for and is not terribly controversial. Please let me know if you feel differently. Here is it again: “I think we all join with our teachers in the hope the contract can be resolved reasonably quickly, but we also join with the School Committee (including the Mayor) in their desire to offer a competitive package balanced against a need to ensure that there a reasonable financial result over the term of the contract.”
Newton promotes Newton with great schools. Great schools need great teachers and aides. Teachers need to be paid fairly as do aides. We need to do better for our schools. We have three great new buildings, but meanwhile every year teachers plead their case to parents to supply Kleenex, Purrell, pencils, dry eraser markers, etc. Every year.
Every year as parents we are solicited to purchase items for the classroom, support PTO, pay $350 for the bus, etc. It is in Newton’s best interest to have kids take the bus and reduce the number of cars on the road. We pay for sports, for drama, for music, for text books (Romeo and Juliet). Parents pay and pay and pay and the citizens of Newton are told the budget for education is our biggest expense.
If we keep reducing the amount of money we spend on the schools and salaries for teachers, we will lose our edge as a great education community. We need great, effective teachers. And, many teachers do leave for other communities where they will get paid more yearly. Because at the end of the day, our mayor, our teachers, our police officers all want to retire with money in the bank. It isn’t fair to make Newton City Employees work without a contract and be paid less than our competitors. We need to be competitive. Housing prices will not continue to rise if we do not continue to be a safe community with great schools.
My CEO of the private company I work for has never asked me to bring in my own laptop to work, nor has he asked me to ask clients for kleenex for my office. My CEO pays a competitive wage, because he knows his employees have a choice of where to work, and turnover will cost the company money. Turnover in Newton costs us money.
Paul, with all due respect it is really not that hard to make these choices. You have to treat your employees well and do right by the children of Newton. My family and most of the other families that I know moved to Newton for schools, and I expect my city’s leadership to put schools as a top priority, and treat our kids as a priority as well. The way the teachers in Newton have been treated is unconscionable.
Paul – Your reading of the contract was incomplete and it probably would have been in your best interest to check with someone who understands how teacher compensation works and how an educator’s salary schedule is set up.
You see that there are 15 steps to the salary scale. Assume that most teachers begin teaching at around the age of 24/25 after completing a two year Master’s degree that leaves them with about $60,000 in debt if they go to a quality program (BC, Teachers College at Columbia for example). My son went to Teachers College and left with $80,000 because he also had to pay rent and eat while completing the full time program. He then got a teaching job that paid $56,000, from which he had to pay $700 a month in loan repayment. This is a very common story for young teachers in this day and age and a significant difference from when I entered the profession.
Let’s get back to the salary scale steps. Once you complete 15 years of teaching, the annual step increases end – period – I can’t emphasize this enough -they end. Your explanation seems to imply that they’re part of compensation package forever. They are not. If you begin teaching at around 24/25, you stop receiving step increases in your late 30’s, maybe 40. After that, the negotiated salary increase is the only significant increase for the next 25 years of your career. I have to ask you: do you really think the difference between 6% and 6.1% over 3 years is significant? That boggles my mind.
I taught on the salary schedule for 42 years and didn’t receive a step increase for 30 of those years (there were 12 steps in Brookine salary schedule). That means I received a step increase during 1/3 of the years I was dependent on the negotiated raise for 2/3 of my career.
Now let’s return to the salary scale again. Once your step increases end, if you’re younger teacher, you still have significant student loans to pay off for many years (unless of course you come from a wealthy family who can fund your graduate education). And just maybe you’re thinking of buying a home/condo and/or having kids. But with all this debt, a minimal salary increase for the last 8 years, and 11% deducted from each paycheck to fund your pension, you can’t afford to live anywhere near Newton. So you buy a house/condo 30 – 45 minutes from Newton – Hopkinton, Stoughton, Quincy, Somerville, Marborough.
Then at some point, you realize you can do the exact same job 10 minutes from your home and avoid what has become a murderous commute (Yes, teachers have to deal with traffic too) at either the same salary or a higher one.
The myth that Newton is amongst the highest paying districts continues, despite the facts to the contrary. In part, that’s because we were in the recent past. In 2005, we were ranked 9th in the state but since them, we’ve fallen steadily from that point. Newton’s reality is this and a it’s stark one: drive 15 minutes in any direction and you can find a community that pays better. Being “competitive” means getting Newton back to being in the pack with comparable communities. That’s where we need to be in order to retain teachers that NPS has put significant time and resources into developing as professionals.
You’re also playing a bit loose with the facts about professional development. It’s not “release” time. Newton PD happens on the job when teachers and educators can collaborate with their colleagues on best curriculum and instruction practices – one of the major assets of NPS. Other courses are taken on an educator’s own time and dime.
As for the aides and behavioral therapists -the people charged with teaching our most vulnerable students – that job is a revolving door because the starting salary is so low. Just about every aide I know has a second job they’re running to at the end of the school day. Add the fact that the school system caps part-time aides at 19 hours so that it doesn’t have to pay health benefits, and you have a revolving door that just spins all the faster.
In this profession, it’s all about attracting and retaining the top people in the field. If Newton can’t do that, to say that Newton Public Schools is at a significant disadvantage is an understatement.
Irene, “the way teachers have been treated” over the past several years was the result of contracts with which they agreed, including the most recent one-year extension. It’s hard to imagine that their able union leaders and they would have agreed to something that’s unconscionable. Yes, those past agreements admittedly doesn’t suggest a resolution to the current dispute, and you’ve pointed out a number of items worth concern.
NewtonMom, you say, “If we keep reducing the amount of money we spend on the schools and salaries for teachers . . .” We haven’t been reducing the amount of money, and no one is suggesting a reduction. It’s the appropriate amount of increase, and over what period, that are some of the issues on the table.
Jane,
I did not mischaracterize the step system at all. We said the same thing using different words. I said quite clearly that teachers top out:”While some percentage of teachers top out of the 15-year salary schedule and don’t get step increases, there is also a longevity payment that is awarded annually.” Perhaps you can advise what percentage of teachers do top out. I’m guessing that it is somewhat shy of half of them; or that over half are still receiving step increases each year. But yes, it is the overall cost of the step system that is in place forever.
On professional development, I am not playing loose with the facts when I use the term release time. The contract says: “It is the Committee’s policy to allot substitute days for purposes related to instruction, such as visits to other schools and attendance at conferences. A teacher or group of teachers may apply to the school Principal or the Office for Curriculum and Instruction the use of these substitute days.”
More generally, I don’t understand why you try to mischaracterize what I’ve said to make your points. If your points have validity, you don’t need to demean my reading of a contract to which your union has been an equal party for these many years.
Paul – NPS continues to add programs/initiatives every year. These are great programs that I support, but they are expensive (full day kindergarten, the one-to-one Chromebook initiative and other technology updates, and the change in high school start time are examples).
I think that you’d agree that if you initiate programs that add to the bottom line, then you need to cover the cost of those additions. That did not happen this year. Over 20 years, the school allocation has increased by 4.6% to cover new curriculum, new programs, new initiatives, etc. In the last 8 years, the allocation increase was 4%. This year it was reduced to 3.25%, yet new, very expensive initiatives were added to the program.
If Newton wants its educational program to remain stuck in 2019, then that needs to be stated. if you’d like Newton to offer a 21st education (new technology, upgrades, later high school start time), then the school allocation will by necessity need to increase.
Jane, I think you and I totally agree that the allocation needs to be consistent with the educational objectives the city wishes to pursue.
BTW, don’t get me started on use of technology. I have real concerns that many communities’ zeal on that front is not consistent with the best pedagogical approaches. See this article as an example: https://www.nytimes.com/2011/10/23/technology/at-waldorf-school-in-silicon-valley-technology-can-wait.html. A quote:
“Schools nationwide have rushed to supply their classrooms with computers, and many policy makers say it is foolish to do otherwise. But the contrarian point of view can be found at the epicenter of the tech economy, where some parents and educators have a message: computers and schools don’t mix.”
Paul – The release time is a mandatory part of the work day. Going to a PD is considered work. I know that’s hard for people to understand, but if teachers don’t collaborate on new curriculum and programs, then they lose substantial value.
I’d prefer not to guess what number of teachers top out after 15 years, but I will get the facts from a reliable source. If, in fact, the percentage of teachers who do not reach the top of the scale is anywhere near 50%, then we are losing a massive number of young teachers, and that should be a concern to everyone.
Newton teachers, like everyone else, agreed to a very low salary increase during the Great Recession with the assumption that during good economic times, the city would begin to get us back to a competitive wage, which as noted means that we are within range of comparable nearby communities. The weak 2015 contract was after working without a contract for a year and a half and a protracted work action.
We’re now in the midst of a second highly contentious dispute and that’s not good for Newton Public Schools. This is by no means my first rodeo in terms of contract disputes, but I can say with confidence that of the 15 I’ve been involved in, this is one of the three worst ones. Over the years, doing work actions to get to a negotiated contract has become part of the job description. Is this any way to run a school system? Is this how you want teachers to spend their time and energy?
I am not demeaning you, Paul. You provided an incomplete (and an inaccurate in some places) picture of the very contentious contract dispute we’re in the midst of right now and I’m trying to present the facts, without guesses.
Paul – We began with no technology in the late 80′ s and had to build bandwidth/hardware/software/ etc. from scratch. It’s been a massive project. Everything from taking attendance to entering grades and school communication is done on the computer right now. Technology at some level is simply not a choise
Students do not spend an exorbitant amount of time on computers in the NPS. Even if it was a good idea, there aren’t enough computers/Chromebooks to do so. Cell phone use is banned in every class that I know of. It’s an item you can take off the list of worries and concerns.
Paul, thank you for bringing up this very important topic. It needs a lot more public discussion. You ended with: a
” a desire to offer a competitive package balanced against a need to ensure that there a reasonable financial result over the term of the contract.”
So the teachers are NOT getting a competitive package if nearby areas are offering sometimes as much as $10K more and we are ranked #103. That’s nowhere near the top Paul. I think we can all agree that is NOT competitive. In terms of the financial result, we already know that our amazing and high real estate value is tied to excellent schools (it’s why I moved back).
So in those terms, the city is refusing to offer a competitive package despite an EXCELLENT financial result (Newton schools highest in the nation, great real estate value.)
Which is why the teachers I speak to feel demoralized. They’ve done their job and kept their end of the bargain, the city has not. Working on an expired contract is not okay, Paul for anyone, not police officers, not school psychologists. Should we get started on the “excellent results” of having services for the many stressed out kids in this city? How do you put a price on that? I thought you were a man of the people, not just the parks?
Why they gave us those chromebooks I have no idea. We don’t need them or want them. They funded full day K which is great, but is that good management to do that before you finalize the contracts for 5 unions at the school?
And the Mayor is spending money from the operating budget on many other initiatives such as $400,000 for architecte fees for NewCal and I believe another $550K for other developments. That’s money away from teachers from the same till. It does send a message whether you agree with it or not, on what our priorities are.
“We” need to take care of our most vulnerable citizens first, our employees.
I disagree with your definition of “we.” Please don’t speak for us parents as we disagree with the Mayor’s cut to the allocation and the school committees’ allocation of that money AND making a budget with an unsigned contract is not good faith.
Thanks again for giving this some much needed ink.
I didn’t say this: “If, in fact, the percentage of teachers who do not reach the top of the scale is anywhere near 50%…” I said that I’d guess that over 50% are still within the step system. I asked you if you had specific information on that point. You don’t. That’s fine. Maybe someone else does.
And there you go again, Jane, saying: “You provided an incomplete (and an inaccurate in some places) picture of the very contentious contract dispute.” I focused on one item in my post, saying quite clearly that it was one item in a wide variety. “There are lots of moving parts in a negotiation like this.” And, you have not found inaccuracies in what I have said about the salary system. Yes, you are quite clearly trying to demean me to make your points. But if you think that’s a way to be persuasive, please feel free to continue.
Others in the know have explained how the original post is misleading on the numbers more accurately and eloquently than I could , but I’d just emphasize the point about “competitiveness,” which isn’t addressed in the OP.
Whether one personally thinks a certain number or a certain increase results in a “good” or “fair” salary or a “good deal” for teachers is largely irrelevant to the ultimate issue, which is retaining the teachers who make our schools what they are.
What matters is what the market is for good, experienced teachers and aides. If other nearby districts are paying better salaries — which it appears they are—we will lose teachers and aides. This is true in every employment situation. Teaching in Newton does not carry with it an inherent advantage to teaching in, say, Concord or Wellesley or Acton that is going to incentivize teachers to stay here and accept lower pay. The fact that this seems lost on people is simply astounding to me.
Jane, I just have to think what I would do if I had to beg my boss for a reasonable salary increase every 2 years. I don’t think I would last long with that company. At some point it becomes not just about the money, but about respect and company culture and treatment of employees. My heart aches for our teachers, as I know I personally would not tolerate such treatment.
Kim, I’m a parent, too.
And I’m certainly not here to defend the mayor’s choices.
But, really, what kind of statement is this: “I thought you were a man of the people, not just the parks?” You leap from a post about this topic to question my underlying values or commitment to people. It’s that kind of personal disparagement that undermines good discussion of the issues and dissuades many from participation in these fora.
AD: exactly. This is what I said in my original comment as well. It’s irrelevant what someone considers a good deal if a teacher can get a better one 10 minutes down the road in Wellesley or Needham.
Paul, I thanked you twice politely in two posts. I related facts and you are hyperfocusing on one line, that really is a sincere question? You did put your very personal opinion out there in this op-ed piece, when you said “we.” I am very sincerely questioning your commitment to labor and “the people.”
I see you at so many meetings advocating for parks so I was shocked when I saw your headline and conclusion. And disappointed. You say you are not taking a position but almost everyoone else in this thread took it as oversimplifying things, taking a position with your conclusion.
btw you can definitely define “competitive salaries.”
I wish you would respond to that instead of calling me out for saying what “we” are thinking as we read your piece. I don’t think I owe you an apology but certainly would like to focus back on the discussion points I brought up. .
Kim, you say, again: “I am very sincerely questioning your commitment to labor and “the people.”
It’s really interesting to me that a post in which I clarify an aspect of the salary issue gets transformed into a conclusion that I haven’t reached. I actually start with the point that I am not taking a position on the the 2 % or 3% issue. So, I wonder what you think is my “conclusion” other than a desire to have this contract resolved quickly and consistently with overall city objectives.
As to what is competitive, that is a matter of interpretation and policy. There are wage issues. There are other issues. There is a policy decision to be made by the School Committee as to how much that matters to them. And, of course, there are the individual and collective decisions made by the teachers.
I am calling you out (again) because you continue to make assertions about my values. If you think that’s persuasive, you are free to continue along those lines. But don’t expect me to stand silently when you do so.
Paul, you wrote a personal piece about a very controversial problem we are facing, then made a summary that positioned you a certain way. I asked you a question, after very politely thanking you and telling you why I was asking that — about your conclusion and use of the word “we.”
It was not rhetorical. By “the people” i mean the teachers, and police officers, labor. I “wish” you would use your power to advocate for the finalizing of 6 expired union contracts – five years for the police and over a year for the NTA.
Can you answer my question instead of this path?
Completely independent of how I might feel about the percentage amount of any impending raises,
I find it highly inappropriate that teachers are sending fliers home to parents regarding their contract status. It is distasteful, unprofessional and smacks of extortion and strong arming.
This practice was SOP when my kids were in the schools, and it is a shame that this tactic has endured. Shame on the NTA for promoting this…..
Paul Green, NTA is not sending anything to anyone. This has been organized and paid for by the concerned parents, like Kim and myself. This is entirely grassroots movement of concerned voters because we see with our own eyes what this lack of competitive wages for teachers and aides does to our kids, and we want it to stop NOW.
Let’s look at this another way. The average teacher salary in Newton is equivalent to the average teacher salary in Quincy. Let that sink in.
Or how about this one: a teacher would have to pay almost 70% of their PRE tax salary to afford the average rent for a 2 bedroom at the 28Austin St apartments.
Another fact that confirms our teachers are NOT being paid competitively: they make 32% less than their peers in Weston and are 18% behind Brookline. (Source Niche.com, data is a few years old so if anything, the comparisons are worse.)
And let’s collectively think about the above while still holding in our minds the fact that the contract expired A FULL YEAR AGO and that only a memorandum of understanding has held everything in place.
How would you feel as an employee knowing all the above? An even simpler question is: Don’t our children merit teachers that feel valued and paid competitively?
Has the NTA encouraged or discouraged your actions?
“Distributed by teachers to parents”
means the NTA is onboard with this whether they organized this specific action or not.
Again, I find it inappropriate and even a bit sleazy. Parents are obligated to pay taxes so that our politicians and the teachers union can negotiate their compensation. Parents are not obligated nor should they be compelled by guilt or strong arming to do the work of the teachers union and our Democrat politicians…
I’ll be happy to dig up the flier I have in my files to provide some context and history for you and our readers….
….And even further Irene….
Just below the second paragraph of your flier in bold type it is written….
“Some Important Points The NTA
is asking for…”
Nothing happens in a vacuum, there isn’t even a small chance that the NTA wasn’t aware that this these fliers were
being distributed especially with their name featured prominently…
I think Paul Levy is getting unfairly scorched here. I just went back and re-read his post. He seems to be getting beat up for things he hasn’t said and attitudes he hasn’t professed.
I think the only thing he’s guilty of is being a bit oblivious that it’s pretty near impossible to make any comments in or around such a contentious issue as this, without being seen to be picking sides.
I’m sympathetic, since I occasionally have done the exact same thing.
How about we replace the contentious “we” with an “I” and take Paul at his word.
Thanks, Jerry!
Paul Green I assure you that NTA did not encourage us in any way, shape, or form – it was 100% our initiative paid out of my own pocket. There are many more parents who feel the same way and have told us they made copies of our flyer and will be distributing it. I had parents drop everything that they were doing to come out and help us distribute the flyers. I know this goes against what you want to believe but that’s what happened.
“Our teachers’ salaries used to be 9th in the state, and now they are 85th or lower”
Question about the salary comparison …where does the ranking referred to above come from? Is it a comparison weighted by experience/step ranges or is it an overall average? What is the time frame that this changed in ranking has occurred? Is there any insight on how we got to this position? Just trying to understand the data beneath this statement and how we ended up there.
Clearly avg salary is only part of the issue when you have aides not being compensated for all tasks that they do to support the children. That is one area the School Committee should not be nickel and dime-ing. The time spent communicating with others in regards to the child they are working with should most definitely be compensated. That communication is key in helping that child succeed. In the long run they (the school system) are just increasing costs by not supporting that child in the best possible manner.
Paul Green – NTA has a flyer that we’ve been distributing to people in the community for the last four months. Parents read the flyer and responded to it. That’s how the parent flyer came about. Plain and simple.
Paul Levy- You state that release time is for professional advancement. My explanation merely provided accurate information. Newton does NOT provide release time for courses or PD for professional advancement. Release time provides teachers with new tools that the school system provides so teachers can do their current job with greater expertise. As an example, at today’s release time, middle school teachers are learning about the new reading assessment that will provide them with significantly more data about the reading level and potential issues of their current students.
Jerry – I don’t believe that taking isolated quotes from lengthy posts out of context and refuting them is good form. Paul “guessed” at how many teachers are still receiving step raises – I said I didn’t know but would contact a reliable source to find out the facts. My statement was then restated as I simply didn’t know.
A group of strong female voices are speaking up about a post that should have and could have been better researched if the poster had chosen to speak to people who are well informed about the topic he wrote about. I good with that.
To answer Kim’s question, I didn’t talk about competitive salaries in my post. I used the term “competitive package” because being competitive is often more than about a particular salary. It’s about wages today, wages over time, benefits, the type and cost of health care, and numerous working conditions. Likewise, there is no single answer as to what is competitive. And the answer depends in great measure on the degree to which a school committee or other employer decides it needs to enhance its value proposition to attract and retain the caliber of people it wants. In deciding on that, one’s decision could certainly be informed by retention rates (e.g., turnover), the degree of difficulty in hiring new people (how long does it take, what percentage of people accept your offers, etc.), as well as other factors. Those decisions are policy matters at a high level. And, realistically, they must also be informed by looking at the short- and long-term impact on your organization’s financial picture.
(Just an example to illustrate this theme: I mentioned in an earlier post that when I was running a hospital, we could not try to match the highest salaries in Boston for our nurses, but we were hopeful that other terms and conditions of employment, as well as the manner in which we treated and valued our nurses, would be satisfactory in making us competitive. And it did: We had a very, very low rate of turnover and a very high rate of staff satisfaction. To anticipate someone’s objections (Thanks, Jerry!), I am not proposing that or any particular approach here.)
Wow, now Jane says:
“A group of strong female voices are speaking up about a post that should have and could have been better researched if the poster had chosen to speak to people who are well informed about the topic he wrote about.”
No one has yet offered a substantive critique of my discussion on how the salary step system works or other aspects of the salary system. That was the heart of my post.
I’m stunned that Jane would dip into the whether those commenting here are male or female or other gender. I’m pretty sure that all perspectives are welcome and equal here, irrespective of gender.
Just last week I went to back to school night at Newton South. I was surprised to find that the 9th grade honors math class has 31 students, French and Physics classes each had 26 students. Only English and History were at 23 and 22 students. Upon followup with the math dept, there are multiple classes with over 30 students this year. I took a look at the enrollment report from Nov 2018 which shows zero math classes with over 30 students. So what happened? Enrollment increased at South (again) and apparently there was no budget to add more FTE to the math dept. And there is no contract cap on class size for math (there is for other subjects.) This is what is happening to our teachers, they are getting squeezed.
Paul – Please reread my first post. This is the most straightforward explanation:
-The salary scale has 15 steps
-Therefore it takes 15 years to move to the top of the scale-most people begin teaching at 24/25. Even if a teacher begins his/her career in another district, when they take a job in Newton, they do not return to Step 1. They begin at whatever step they left their former district.
-After that point, teachers/staff receive the negotiated salary increase.
In addition, young teachers in this era have additional significant expenses – specifically student loans incurred from the two-year Master’s programs for an MEd that the state required after the passage of the Ed Reform Act of 1993. I can say with confidence that when a candidate has a Master’s from a high quality program, your resume rises to the top. These programs typically cost $30,000 each year.
This means if a teacher is offered two jobs, the system that offers the higher salary scale has more than a significant advantage – it’s simply a financial necessity for a candidate with student loans will take the better paying job.
Newton can play with numbers all it wants, but the reality is this: other excellent school systems are offering higher salaries.
Liz, my daughter’s bio class at NSHS is 29 kids. I almost fell off my chair when I heard it. Other parents were commenting on class sizes as well.
Paul,
Do you have any understanding of the role that aides play in the NPS? There are some fundamental misunderstandings regarding how these professionals function. They unscrupulously contribute to the bettering the lives of students in countless ways. Hordes of people make sweeping generalizations about the art of teaching. There is a simple solution: I advise you to sit and absorb how laborious and taxing the job is. Once that task is complete, follow a teacher from the beginning to the end of their day. The NPS educators execute on a level of excellence. Therefore, there should be parity in pay with the surrounding districts. If not, NPS will continue to lose out.
Paul,
You’re sort of having this debate as if you haven’t already posted on this topic. You’re already on record as saying that you don’t believe NPS teachers should have top salaries. My and others interpretation of your use of the term “competitive” is made in that context.
The reality is that many in Newton don’t share the same values with you on teacher pay. Many want our NPS teachers to be at the top of the pay scale. I understand why you and others don’t agree, and are more focused on near-term fiscal prudence.
You keep raising your experience running a hospital and your negotiations with nurses. Teachers aren’t nurses. They are the lead practitioners in this system, and the reality is that you don’t bargain the same way with your star clinicians- the good ones leave or never come there in the first place. We don’t want NPS to be like BI Deaconess. We want MGH.
Newton is one of the most expensive places to live in the state. One of the most expensive in the country. One of the most expensive in the world. And schools are a major driver of that. Young families aren’t paying $1-1.5M for starter homes in Newton because they OK with very good teachers. They want the best. Skimping on teacher salaries is penny-wise, pound foolish. We’ll keep sliding down the rankings of best school systems and their associated test scores- however imperfect they may be- that’s all we have and they matter to new families considering where to live. We’re living off a reputation for schools that is increasingly in the past, and will catch up with us soon.
Teachers matter. We want the best. You pay the best if you want the best. Period.
This is a request for the person who comments as “Paul” to choose a new user name since we also have Paul Levy and Paul Green as active participants.
Hmm, Paul says, “We don’t want NPS to be like BI Deaconess. We want MGH.” That’s interesting in that the quality of care in the two places is identical. But the rates charged by MGH to insurance companies, and indirectly to you, are 15 to 25% higher than the rates charged by BID.
By the way, if you’ve been in a hospital, you’d know that the lead practitioners are the nurses. They are the ones who are with the patients hour by hour. The doctors just drop by from time to time and perturb things.
“You’re already on record as saying that you don’t believe NPS teachers should have top salaries.” I think I’ve said that there is a policy choice to be made on that matter and that I have real concerns about the budget implications of trying to match the rates paid by other communities: “Achieving the rate of pay in surrounding communities would be a budget-buster, making it all the more difficult to fund other educational priorities and interfering, too, with the Mayor’s other stated priorities with regard to future pension obligations and the like.” https://village14.com/2019/09/03/welcome-back-to-school/#axzz60dqmMzgb
My sons class of 2020 has been a bubble in elementary school and middle and now high school. Most of his academic classes have 30 kids!!!! As a senior I thought he would have fewer kids but not the case.
Band has 80+ kids and one teacher and one aide twice a week. How does one teacher have 80 plus kids to herself? Because she is amazing and kids want to play but there can’t be individual time with that.
There was a full time band aide when my son started in 9th and that was cut.
As a parent having that many kids in class is insane.
Btw, band is a major class that meets as often as math or English. It meets four out of five days a week.
@Liz and other parents: Have your School Committee folks informed you of the state of the schools? Are they content with the budget allocations that have been made over the past few years? What are the School Committee candidates saying they would do or do differently? I spoke with one NPS teacher and I asked whether they are directing any of their questioning or responsibility for lack of a teacher contract not only on the Mayor but also on the School Committee? Are the SC members current and potentially future – willing to push the Administration and the City Council to increase funding for our schools? How about the City Council candidates? They are the ones who ulimately vote for the budget. Are they willing to vote against budgets that don’t adequately support our teachers and our schools?
Paul:
LOL. Was that a rebuttal or a confirmation of my point?
Your excerpts read exactly as someone who has been a public-facing executive making a politically unpopular point- that you don’t believe teachers in Newton should get top salary. You speak of fiscal constraint and trade-offs, not the importance of having the best teachers- just data that ours aren’t leaving with their current salaries. It’s pretty clear for all where you stand on the issue. I don’t know why you have to obfuscate with all of these word games. Pretty silly if you ask me.
It’s OK to say you don’t want to pay Newton teachers’ at the top range.
Good luck Irene. A better approach and use of your time and the time of those helping you would be to find one parent in each of Newton’s 8 Wards to run against the current school committee member in that ward in the next election cycle.
Better yet, have these individuals announce now, thereby putting those incumbents on notice, and have these candidates spend the next two years beating the incumbents over the head with this issue. If you crystalize, distill, and disseminate the City of Newton’s long history of screwing around with the teachers union every single time their contract comes up, you will get the eyes and ears of people
already here with children in the schools, and those considering making Newton their home. It won’t be necessary for a single one of your candidates to win for you to make your point and get your message across and show our city pols how angry you are,
especially when they are trying to give themselves a raise…
Nothing motivates action like the fear of a challenger to an incumbent.
Suggest to Gail Spector that her class write
an in depth piece about the history of these contract negotiations, how they have affected teacher morale, and how the uncertainty has hurt recruiting and retaining the best educators. It would
be a topic worth researching, writing a long form piece about and printing in the Globe. Having the readership of the Globe outside of Newton getting a peek at the history of the city’s behavior come contract time might raise a few eyebrows also.
Unfortunately, however well intentioned your fliers are, they most likely will end up in the trash after one read and wont have any lasting affect.
Amy: all good questions. I am totally in agreement in everything with my ward’s SC committee representative. Regarding city counselors – we will be asking all candidates these questions.
Paul Green: thanks for the suggestions, I am 100% in agreement with my SC representative from Ward 8, so I am good there. But you are right – we have to pressure our elected representatives to make sure that they represent the views of the people that elected them. And we are also in agreement that the history of contract disputes in Newton is very unfortunate and needs to stop.
To Paul,
I am beginning to understand where we part company, and I’ll get to that in a moment. But first, I need to comment on your characterization of me as “as someone who has been a public-facing executive making a politically unpopular point.” If you look through my history as a public-facing executive, I think you will find that I have been direct and clear about making public policy arguments, even when politically unpopular. Here, too, it is not obvious what point is politically unpopular. The comments on this post have tended to come from people who have a similar point of view. That sample of comments, though, may not reflect the majority view of people in town. In any event, I don’t really care what is politically popular. I write as a private citizen, a parent, a resident, and a taxpayer. (By the way, I write under my full name, and anybody can look up my background. You might want to try that, too. It’s liberating.)
On the merits of the broad compensation issue that you address, I think it is perfectly appropriate to recognize that the problem is not simple. You and some others assert that having the “top” salary for Newton teachers is desirable and, indeed, necessary to ensure a high level of education services in the city. That is a matter of judgment on your part, but it is by no means proven or necessarily the case. In my comments, I have suggested that being competitive is not just a matter of salaries, that there are other important factors to consider. I have suggested that there are data that can help evaluate the issue. I have also suggested that it is reasonable to weigh different salary proposals in light of the city’s overall finances. Any prudent School Committee would consider this combination of factors in preparation for its negotiations with the union. None of that is the least bit silly.
But, as I stated at the outset, this post was not intended to be an argument for or against the 2% or 3% cost of living adjustment. It was to explain where that single item fit into the general salary picture, a topic that was prompted by my friend’s email. That explanation of the salary structure is, as best I can tell, correct. For people here to extrapolate from that truthful explanation to the various assertions that have been made about my character, my values, and whatever you tried to assert in your characterization are clever argumentative ploys, but they don’t help illuminate the issues. Further, their use sends a chilling message to others who disagree with you who might want to make comments–a result counter to the purposes of the open discussion we are lucky to have in this forum.
This is a little more complex than just “Newton teachers are only the 85th best paid in the state!” https://patch.com/massachusetts/boston/average-teacher-salaries-ma-school-districts-state-numbers
Per those numbers, Newton teachers’ average salary is roughly $10,000 behind Needham teachers (a community I use because the geographic location and school type is one likely to draw Newton teachers away). That seems ridiculous and really out of line with the quality of teachers we want here in the city. But, per the 18-19 contract, a teacher with a master’s degree in Newton on the 14th step will make just over $89k; the same teacher in Needham will make just over $94k. That’s only a $5k difference for the same teacher…seems less bad at this point, right?
And, the truth is that most teachers with 14 years on the job have cobbled together enough additional coursework to get themselves on the MA+30 or MA+60 track. For the MA+60 Newton teacher, the pay rises to $102k; in Needham that teacher makes just under $104k. Really not too much difference…not the type of difference that would cause a teacher to leave a district where they hold professional status (thus making it more difficult to be let go) to go to a district where they would have to re-earn that status. This is especially true because, in my experience, teacher tend to be a risk-averse group (not always!) who value security over total dollars.
Teachers in Newton also have, on average, fewer students than their Needham peers, (just under 12 compared to just over 14) which may make for better working conditions. And, as Paul L suggested, there are issues beyond compensation such as work environment and school mission/culture that play a part in retaining the right people for your school and district.
I don’t say any of this to suggest that we pay Newton teachers less, or that we should not pay aides at a much higher rate…both groups deserve more money, especially the aides, and I applaud the NTA for making aide compensation a big issue in this negotiation.
But, I don’t think the “all the good ones will leave” argument holds much water; I think the “public servants should make enough money to live in or near the community they serve” means more to me and shows the respect we should have for the folks who do this great work with our kids.
@Paul L
I didn’t say anything about your values, only pointing out that your comments are tilted towards fiscal prudence and providing reasons why top salaries aren’t everything, while providing little on concerns on teacher quality. So if you “happen” to make points mostly on one side of the argument, it seems odd that you’re clinging to this notion of neutrality on the general question of teacher pay. Every poster here who has disagreed with you has reached the same conclusions about your posts for precisely that reason. You obviously have a point of view on whether you believe our teachers should have top salaries, it seems extremely clear from your posts what that is, and yet for some reason you don’t want to clearly say it directly. Extremely odd.
You raise other factors beyond salary- other communities have those factors too. So it’s a great point to make, but in practice salary is the overwhelming driver here. At the end of the day, it comes down to outcomes, and all of the data we have (as imperfect as the quality data you stated for BI vs MGH) suggests were not at the top, and declining over time. To not think there is a correlation between our rankings on outcomes and salaries of the professionals responsible for those outcomes, takes magical thinking. I’ve always liked you, but stunned on this one.
This is getting repetitive, Paul. Read the comment above yours for at least one alternative view. I don’t know anyone who is suggesting that raises are not warranted. I’ve outlined considerations that I think are important to think about.
And “liked me?” I don’t know who you are or if I even know you. (You withhold that information from me and other readers.) Yes, you did choose to characterize my comments in a manner that had nothing to do with the merits of the case. Then, when I call you on that, you say you didn’t.
Paul L., I think you have tried to remain neutral here, but I’d like to hear what you think the number should be. To my way of thinking, the 3% (which becomes 12.55% over four years) is reasonable because:
1. The CPI the last two years has been over 2%…which means a 3% raise is an actual raise, not simply keeping up.
2. The cost of housing in greater Boston has accelerated equally or more quickly than national CPI, and the rental market has become one of the most expensive in the country (https://www.wbur.org/bostonomix/2019/06/19/rent-affordable-housing-crisis-income-ranking) . The truth is, we want our teachers to live as close to the school they teach in as possible because that encourages them to do more for that community. A shorter commute means a teacher is more likely to stay after school to help a student one on one, more likely to attend plays, games, and other events, more likely to volunteer for student functions…all things that make for a stronger, better school community.
3. Our Newton teachers work with a generally more diverse and needy population than many comparable districts. If I go back to Needham, for example, Newton has 50% more students who qualify as economically disadvantaged and more than twice as many ELL students. Despite those challenges, Newton scores on the MCAS are pretty similar to Needham scores. It suggests that the teachers in Newton are doing outstanding work…and they should be paid that way.
I realize that paying teachers more is a choice that comes with trade-offs in other areas, and I’d like to hear you, Paul L, make a case for less (or more!) pay for teachers that outlines why those trade-offs mean more to you…and should mean more to us.
Thanks, but as I said at the start, I’m not going to do that. The people in the negotiating room have (or should have) much more information on which to base their decisions than we have on the outside. Also, it’s the nature of such negotiations that there are usually trades made across the multitude of issues as the parties come to a comprehensive agreement.
I’m going off duty now for several days so I’m going to close down comments here. Thanks to all for your thoughts.