The Preliminary Delaware Government Performance Review is out. As a former state (not DE) policy guy I am dubious of these types of reports. Policy people who by discipline know how to look at long-term effects are often pushed aside by ideologues in these type of initiatives.
State employees including school employees should be concerned about the recommendations in the areas of health care and pension.
This direct quote from the report reflects an attitude we have seen from the SEBC: "Currently, state employees pay between 3.1% and 10.5% of the State's total premium costs depending on the plan and coverage level. National averages are closer to 15% for employee only coverage. The Delaware State Employees Benefits Committee (SEBC) has already approved the first phase of a plan to bring state employee contributions for health care costs closer to national averages."
First, our benefits are not out of line for other public employee groups. Public entities have long offered good benefits in lieu of salaries. In other words the skill level and education required for many public jobs were not competitive in salary with the private sector, so benefits were used as an enticement for public service.
Additionally, until recently, public employers wanted to be standard bearers for good employment practices. Apparently, there are some decision makers these days who want to join the race down. This last point is significant. In Delaware the state is the largest employer. All working people in Delaware should be concerned with what happens to state workers. The state will be a trend setter.
Finally, of note in this section is a reference to the SEBC initiating phase one of a plan to bring health benefits closer to the private sector national average. So, is that what the recent premium hike was, not a response to claims verses premium, but a plan to reduce benefits?
The report also goes after Double State Share health benefit: "The General Assembly will be asked to eliminate the Double State Share program to require employees and pensioners who are married and work for the State to pay the same employee contributions as other state employees."
If all of this is not enough to make your blood boil, you should also know that the pension section is not much better. "The state should consider creating a new tier of pension benefits for employees hired after a certain date."
Highlights (or low lights) of the new tier: Remove the early retirement provision; change the multiplier from 1.85% to 1.67%; eliminate $7,000 burial benefit; increase member contributions to 3% of salary; if less than 20 years service, the employee pays 100% of coverage.
In conclusion, if you are a DSEA member, support your union, pay your dues, contribute to PAC, care about one another, and hang on it's going to be a bumpy ride.
Friday, July 31, 2009
Wednesday, July 29, 2009
Rage, Rage, Against the Darkness
When I was a policy guy in state government I was amazed and frustrated at how often law was made on ideology and anecdotal evidence. I fear that what is labeled as "education reform" will be lacking in research and heavy on opinion. For example, some policy makers are now discussing teacher tenure and they do not even know what it means.
The general public (including some of the "education reformers") believes tenure means that once at teacher reaches a certain year they are given unlimited job security and cannot be laid off or terminated.
Of course this is a huge problem. That's why we can't get rid of "bad" teachers. Well that, and the teachers' union.
Here is how tenure works in reality. In Delaware, a teacher must have three years teaching experience in the state. Two of the three years must be with your current employer. So for example, a teacher could have 20 years experience with a school district, but if the teacher quits and goes to another Delaware district, he/she would have to put in two years at the new district before tenured again.
Once one is tenured, one can still be "reduced in force" (i.e. laid off), and one can certainly be terminated. Tenure simply means that if the district moves to terminate a teacher's employment the teacher is given a hearing before the school board or a designated hearing officer. At that hearing the teacher has a right to representation. The district also has representation (a lawyer)and is supposed to show just cause for the termination.
In other words, tenure is due process for termination. It is the most basic of employment rights. Truly it is something that all workers should have and it is a sorry statement of American attitude that we think this is something extraordinary.
For almost 30 years private sector employees have seen their unions broken, their wages reduced, and their health care eliminated. We should take note of this and vow that we will not go gently into that good night.
The general public (including some of the "education reformers") believes tenure means that once at teacher reaches a certain year they are given unlimited job security and cannot be laid off or terminated.
Of course this is a huge problem. That's why we can't get rid of "bad" teachers. Well that, and the teachers' union.
Here is how tenure works in reality. In Delaware, a teacher must have three years teaching experience in the state. Two of the three years must be with your current employer. So for example, a teacher could have 20 years experience with a school district, but if the teacher quits and goes to another Delaware district, he/she would have to put in two years at the new district before tenured again.
Once one is tenured, one can still be "reduced in force" (i.e. laid off), and one can certainly be terminated. Tenure simply means that if the district moves to terminate a teacher's employment the teacher is given a hearing before the school board or a designated hearing officer. At that hearing the teacher has a right to representation. The district also has representation (a lawyer)and is supposed to show just cause for the termination.
In other words, tenure is due process for termination. It is the most basic of employment rights. Truly it is something that all workers should have and it is a sorry statement of American attitude that we think this is something extraordinary.
For almost 30 years private sector employees have seen their unions broken, their wages reduced, and their health care eliminated. We should take note of this and vow that we will not go gently into that good night.
Tuesday, July 28, 2009
Health Care Calls
Today, the National Education Association, including all her state affiliates are being asked to contact the US House of Representatives about the need to pass health care reform. The NEA belongs to a giant health care advocacy coalition called Health Care for America Now (HCAN). It is under the aegis of HCAN that the calls are being made. I have pasted the information below. Please call Congressman Castle and ask him to vote for health care for all:
Help us get 50,000 contacts to Congress today!
Call 1-877-264-HCAN (4226)*
The health care reform bill being voted on in the House this week will save you an average of $2,800 per year.1 That bill says those who make more than a quarter of a million dollars a year should help pay for reform by rolling back Bush's tax cuts by just 1%.
Can you call your Representative today and tell them to stand up for health care?
Here is a sample of what you can say:
• Press 1 to be connected to your Representative.
• Please be polite. Ask to talk with someone who can speak to the Representative’s position on health care.
I’m calling from Health Care for America Now to make sure that Rep. Castle knows that we need real health care reform in 2009.
The House health care bill, H.R. 3200, will provide quality, affordable health care for all with good benefits and affordable costs.
Health care can’t wait, please vote for H.R. 3200, America's Affordable Health Choices Act, before you leave for vacation.
Help us get 50,000 contacts to Congress today!
Call 1-877-264-HCAN (4226)*
The health care reform bill being voted on in the House this week will save you an average of $2,800 per year.1 That bill says those who make more than a quarter of a million dollars a year should help pay for reform by rolling back Bush's tax cuts by just 1%.
Can you call your Representative today and tell them to stand up for health care?
Here is a sample of what you can say:
• Press 1 to be connected to your Representative.
• Please be polite. Ask to talk with someone who can speak to the Representative’s position on health care.
I’m calling from Health Care for America Now to make sure that Rep. Castle knows that we need real health care reform in 2009.
The House health care bill, H.R. 3200, will provide quality, affordable health care for all with good benefits and affordable costs.
Health care can’t wait, please vote for H.R. 3200, America's Affordable Health Choices Act, before you leave for vacation.
Monday, July 27, 2009
Furlough Musings
I must say a big thank you to my readers for their patience. I was out of the blogsphere for a few days on vacation in Vermont. If you have been to Vermont, you understand why it is the perfect vacation spot for someone in my line of work. Not only is the state very rural and quiet, but cell phone signals and internet connections are very spotty. One is more or less forced not to work.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
The 2009-10 School Year, dare I say it, is right around the corner. Allow me a few words about the furlough situation.
First, for school employees the loss of pay for the furlough will not begin until the new contract year. We have had a few questions from teachers wondering if their July pay checks will reflect 2.5% less (state portion). The answer is no. That is pay you are receiving for work in the 2008-09 School Year. The first paycheck to reflect reduced pay for furlough will be the first pay period check in the new school year.
Second, districts have not all reacted the same to the issue of the local portion of pay. In approximate terms, teachers receive about 70% of their pay from the state and about 30% from local funds. For education support professionals, the ratio of local to state funds varies from profession to profession and district to district. Therefore, with the five furlough days forced by the state, do school employees still get paid the local portion? It depends on the district. Some districts were quick to react and say 'you are not working those days, we are not paying'. Other districts acknowledge the furlough days were forced, and that they will not add insult to injury, and thus will pay the local portion of pay on those days. Still again, some districts are "buying back" a day or two of furlough so that they can provide some professional development.
Third, districts should be in discussion with local unions to reach concurrence on a plan to implement the furlough days. Those plans are due to be submitted by districts no later than July 31, 2009 to the Secretary of Education, Director of the Office of Management and Budget, and Controller General. This should truly be a cooperative situation. No district administration should be submitting a plan without the involvement of the local unions.
Finally, let us put the furlough situation in perspective. If faced with the choice of a straight pay cut verses furlough, furlough is preferable. With a pay cut you work just as long and hard with nothing in return. A furlough gives you an exchange of time for the money. In a furlough situation the salary schedules return to the Fiscal Year 2009 pay level. This is not to say that we will not have another fight over salary next year, but at least the discussion does not begin 2.5% in the hole. Furloughs have been a pain to administrate. Pay cuts would have been a cinch to implement. We want it to be difficult to take something away from education employees.
In conclusion, furloughs are not a good deal, they are simply a better deal than pay reduction without time in exchange. At the end of the day, money is being taken from you at a time when everyone from the President to Johnny's dad is saying you have to do more.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
The 2009-10 School Year, dare I say it, is right around the corner. Allow me a few words about the furlough situation.
First, for school employees the loss of pay for the furlough will not begin until the new contract year. We have had a few questions from teachers wondering if their July pay checks will reflect 2.5% less (state portion). The answer is no. That is pay you are receiving for work in the 2008-09 School Year. The first paycheck to reflect reduced pay for furlough will be the first pay period check in the new school year.
Second, districts have not all reacted the same to the issue of the local portion of pay. In approximate terms, teachers receive about 70% of their pay from the state and about 30% from local funds. For education support professionals, the ratio of local to state funds varies from profession to profession and district to district. Therefore, with the five furlough days forced by the state, do school employees still get paid the local portion? It depends on the district. Some districts were quick to react and say 'you are not working those days, we are not paying'. Other districts acknowledge the furlough days were forced, and that they will not add insult to injury, and thus will pay the local portion of pay on those days. Still again, some districts are "buying back" a day or two of furlough so that they can provide some professional development.
Third, districts should be in discussion with local unions to reach concurrence on a plan to implement the furlough days. Those plans are due to be submitted by districts no later than July 31, 2009 to the Secretary of Education, Director of the Office of Management and Budget, and Controller General. This should truly be a cooperative situation. No district administration should be submitting a plan without the involvement of the local unions.
Finally, let us put the furlough situation in perspective. If faced with the choice of a straight pay cut verses furlough, furlough is preferable. With a pay cut you work just as long and hard with nothing in return. A furlough gives you an exchange of time for the money. In a furlough situation the salary schedules return to the Fiscal Year 2009 pay level. This is not to say that we will not have another fight over salary next year, but at least the discussion does not begin 2.5% in the hole. Furloughs have been a pain to administrate. Pay cuts would have been a cinch to implement. We want it to be difficult to take something away from education employees.
In conclusion, furloughs are not a good deal, they are simply a better deal than pay reduction without time in exchange. At the end of the day, money is being taken from you at a time when everyone from the President to Johnny's dad is saying you have to do more.
Wednesday, July 22, 2009
Southern Election Rapidly Approaching
Hey, supporters of the Delaware State Education Association, please don't forget that there is a special election is Sussex County on Monday, August 3rd. This is in Senate District 19, the seat now open because of the tragic death of Senator Thurman Adams.
DSEA has recommended Polly Adams Mervine for election in Senate 19. Ms Mervine is a former 2nd Grade teacher from North Laurel Elementary. She left the profession to raise her son and to care for a critically ill family member. However, she still thinks like an educator and understands the challenges and hopes of DSEA members.
This election is so close, and there is so much to do. If you are able to volunteer please do so.
DSEA has a very able staff person acting as point person for our activities in this campaign. Her name is Wendy Kupcha.
To volunteer, contact Wendy at wendy.kupcha@dsea.org or call her at (302) 734-5834.
Some organization have "paper endorsements", meaning that all a candidate gets for the endorsement is the paper saying so. DSEA is determined to have more than paper recommendations. DSEA recommendations come with resources behind them. Most importantly, we activate our membership to volunteer and vote. If you are a DSEA member reading this, please help us keep our fine reputation going. Volunteer.
DSEA has recommended Polly Adams Mervine for election in Senate 19. Ms Mervine is a former 2nd Grade teacher from North Laurel Elementary. She left the profession to raise her son and to care for a critically ill family member. However, she still thinks like an educator and understands the challenges and hopes of DSEA members.
This election is so close, and there is so much to do. If you are able to volunteer please do so.
DSEA has a very able staff person acting as point person for our activities in this campaign. Her name is Wendy Kupcha.
To volunteer, contact Wendy at wendy.kupcha@dsea.org or call her at (302) 734-5834.
Some organization have "paper endorsements", meaning that all a candidate gets for the endorsement is the paper saying so. DSEA is determined to have more than paper recommendations. DSEA recommendations come with resources behind them. Most importantly, we activate our membership to volunteer and vote. If you are a DSEA member reading this, please help us keep our fine reputation going. Volunteer.
Tuesday, July 21, 2009
Nominalization
"Nominalization" is both a grammatical term and a communications term. In the most simple sense, it means taking a verb or adjective and converting it into a noun. For example, the verb "move" becomes "movement" and "careless" becomes "carelessness". In linguistics, nominalization is an altogether useful thing.
In communications the concept may become more troublesome. People who study Nuero-Linguistic Programming (NLP), which involves several disciplines including linguistics and psychology point out faults with nominalization. Some things should be considered ongoing processes without quantifiable ends. Once certain actions are nominalized the next natural reaction is to attempt to define and quantify the new noun. Then, a whole set of rules and dogma grow around the defining, measuring, and quantifying. For example, "loving" becomes "love" with more emphasis on the definition and the quantifying and the qualifying (How do I love thee...) than the practice.
So perhaps I have finally become impossibly and irretrievably lost in the weeds.
What happens when you nominalize "educating" into "education"?
As long as one is living, one is learning. Those who help learning along are in the process of educating and so are often called educators. Those who are being helped in the educating process are usually called students.
But what has been the impact on both educators and students once we embrace "education"? How do we define the "end product"? What does it mean to have received an "education"?
What do we want, and how do we know when we get it?
In communications the concept may become more troublesome. People who study Nuero-Linguistic Programming (NLP), which involves several disciplines including linguistics and psychology point out faults with nominalization. Some things should be considered ongoing processes without quantifiable ends. Once certain actions are nominalized the next natural reaction is to attempt to define and quantify the new noun. Then, a whole set of rules and dogma grow around the defining, measuring, and quantifying. For example, "loving" becomes "love" with more emphasis on the definition and the quantifying and the qualifying (How do I love thee...) than the practice.
So perhaps I have finally become impossibly and irretrievably lost in the weeds.
What happens when you nominalize "educating" into "education"?
As long as one is living, one is learning. Those who help learning along are in the process of educating and so are often called educators. Those who are being helped in the educating process are usually called students.
But what has been the impact on both educators and students once we embrace "education"? How do we define the "end product"? What does it mean to have received an "education"?
What do we want, and how do we know when we get it?
Monday, July 20, 2009
It Will Make Your Head Spin
Federal stimulus dollars, American Reinvestment and Recovery Act (ARRA), are sure to produce opportunity and challenge for the education community. At the heart of the challenges is the fact that big business is a key player in virtually all so called reform movements, including the Coalition for Student Achievement which is the source for a key document being used in Delaware. I am referring to "Smart Options: Investing the Recovery Funds for Student Success."
It is difficult to read this document without getting the idea that the writers believe the way to student achievement is to weaken teacher unions particularly in respect to the rights they bargain around job security, fair evaluations, seniority, and transfers. Moreover the authors, no doubt encouraged by US Secretary of Education Arne Duncan, are charter school proponents. They advocate, "Aggressively close poor-performing schools and replace them with new high-performing schools."
The new improved high-performing (sounds like the same marketing used for deodorant) schools can be "public/private partnerships". Of course these new super duper institutions must "...have control over their staffing, budgets, and time. This may require revising local union agreements." Let us not forget that the new better than Coca Cola schools will need autonomy and "This will require states to free these schools from the majority of state codes and restrictive provisions in union contracts."
The quotes in this post are directly from the document described above. This would be a much longer post if I included every direct and indirect swipe at collective bargaining.
Shall I return to the beginning when I referenced the negative impact of big business in education reform. Essentially, they believe that the problem is the workers (teachers) have too much control of their own workplace (school) and policy (education). Also, the private sector is always better than the public sector so move to a charter system that has the best of both worlds, private control with public money.
In other words, the actual educators should have their power reduced so that a powerful top-down model can be imposed. Community public schools that democratically elect boards and answer to taxpayers for funding will be replaced by charters that take public money but choose their own boards and answer not at all to the public.
So chew on all that while you contemplate making us globally competitive, enhancing student learning, solving the youth drug, violence, and sex problem, all while doing it for 2.5% less pay.
It is difficult to read this document without getting the idea that the writers believe the way to student achievement is to weaken teacher unions particularly in respect to the rights they bargain around job security, fair evaluations, seniority, and transfers. Moreover the authors, no doubt encouraged by US Secretary of Education Arne Duncan, are charter school proponents. They advocate, "Aggressively close poor-performing schools and replace them with new high-performing schools."
The new improved high-performing (sounds like the same marketing used for deodorant) schools can be "public/private partnerships". Of course these new super duper institutions must "...have control over their staffing, budgets, and time. This may require revising local union agreements." Let us not forget that the new better than Coca Cola schools will need autonomy and "This will require states to free these schools from the majority of state codes and restrictive provisions in union contracts."
The quotes in this post are directly from the document described above. This would be a much longer post if I included every direct and indirect swipe at collective bargaining.
Shall I return to the beginning when I referenced the negative impact of big business in education reform. Essentially, they believe that the problem is the workers (teachers) have too much control of their own workplace (school) and policy (education). Also, the private sector is always better than the public sector so move to a charter system that has the best of both worlds, private control with public money.
In other words, the actual educators should have their power reduced so that a powerful top-down model can be imposed. Community public schools that democratically elect boards and answer to taxpayers for funding will be replaced by charters that take public money but choose their own boards and answer not at all to the public.
So chew on all that while you contemplate making us globally competitive, enhancing student learning, solving the youth drug, violence, and sex problem, all while doing it for 2.5% less pay.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
