Category Archives: Contracts

by | September 13, 2008 · 12:01 pm

Why Arbitration Is Rarely a Good Idea

The Adverts, “Bored Teenagers” (click to listen or download)

Portuguese Joe. “Teenage Riot” (click to listen or download)

I’ve written many times about why it is rarely best for School Districts to use the arbitration procedure available under the Qualified Economic Offer law (most extensively, here).  There is new evidence from Wauwatosa of the harm that arbitration can cause.

In that district, the Board has chosen to invoke arbitration; in response the teacher’s are “working to contract.”  That means that they have ceased to volunteer their time outside of required hours and duties.

According to WauwatosaNow, “a lot of teachers are cutting back on volunteering for after-school activities and writing letters of recommendation for students.”

Although involvement in many co and extra curricular activities is paid and contracted, not all is.  Our teachers volunteer because they care and the efforts they put in as volunteers often make connections with potentially “disconnected youth.”  With no volunteers, fewer connections, more bored and disconnected youth, more delinquency….

One more thing to think about next time you hear complaints about School Districts avoiding arbitration.

Thomas J. Mertz

Leave a comment

Filed under "education finance", Best Practices, Budget, Contracts, education, Local News, School Finance

by | July 16, 2008 · 10:47 pm

We Are Not Alone #22 (Referendum Roundup)

It must be that time of year, or more likely the “going out of business” state finance system continuing to take its toll on districts in Wisconsin. Five more districts have placed referenda Fall ballots. That brings the total to ten by my count, eight for operation and maintenance and two to issue debt for, renovating and upgrades.

I posted before on the September 9 Colby measures, one of the debt referenda. Interestingly like Colby’s, the other debt referendum — A November 4th vote in the Clinton Community School District — also includes an attempt to move toward energy efficiency and environmentally sound practices, in this case via a Geo-Thermal heating system (Milton is also looking at Geo-Thermal). With this and the other items, Clinton is trying to plan for the future in ways that our school funding system makes nearly impossible.

The district could wait to ask residents to pay for new projects, but [Board President Randy] Gracyalny said gambling on the economy improving and prices going down isn’t a move he wants to make.

“Where will we be three years from now?” he asked. “I don’t know. No one knows. We know where we are now.

“Yeah, we might not absolutely need this, this year. But if we put it off too long, it’s going to get to that point of making some tough cuts.”

It is a smart approach and I wish them the best (more here).

In the districts seeking to pay for operations and maintenance it is the usual recipe of costs rising faster than allowed revenues, with added seasoning of declining enrollments for some.

Taking them in chronological order, Wausaukee will vote on August 19th. This is the “do or (probably) die” referendum. You can read lots more about Wausaukee in previous posts. Sadly, our local media has had nothing to say about this. Nothing. Even the Chicago Tribune picked up the story, but not our Madison newsies. The district has posted a “Fact Sheet” on the referendum and — as they have to — are moving ahead with the dissolution planning. The linked story from the Peshtigo Times is worth reading, especially the lengthy statement Board member Dave Kipp offered before voting against dissolution. Rather than excerpt that, I offer excerpts from a letter to the editor by Gert Wilson, “Retired Teacher”:

Democracy has diminished and that is sad because children learn from adults and what they see is disrespect for others’ opinions and bossy individuals who control meetings to delay or stop procedures. Of course, all people are not guilty of such actions.

We have seen this also at Coleman, Crivitz and Wausaukee in regard to education. The Times has been overwhelmed with nasty discussions, critical items in the paper and parents discussing issues in irate voices along with school boards. As usual, the students pay the price. They probably will, if Wausaukee folds and students have to ride to Crivitz. When will they eat, sleep and do school work? (emphasis added)

Amberg, a few years ago, opted to join the Wausaukee School District. Was that an error? Now it is possible these student will ride to Crivitz. Teachers, school boards and parents, are you happy about all your adult complications? I give credit to all who try to make it right.

Small towns cannot survive peaceably when all this divides friends and parents and teaches some children to rebel, be bossy, be bullies, show disrespect and have drinking problems.

You tell ’em Gert. There is also a good commentary on the Wausaukee situation from Ken Krall at NewsoftheNorth.Net.

Deerfield, Neillsville, and Montello will all vote on September 9.

Deerfield is asking for a five-year nonrecurring, with annual amounts starting at $275,000 and going to $475,000 (another version of planning for the future). Deerfield appointed a Citizens Advisory Committee last year to work on the plan and surveyed the community before proceeding. They’ve also put together a very nice web page explaining the what the referendum is about. Madison could learn some things from our neighbors fifteen miles to the East.

Neillsville has been experiencing declining enrollment at a rate of 30 or more students a year and started out as a low spending district in 1993 when the revenue caps were put in place. This is a double whammy. District spending levels are still based on what they spent over 15 years ago; because the caps are set on per member basis, declining enrollment –especially in small districts — makes it increasingly hard to cover fixed costs such as heating and transportation and almost impossible to pay for diverse offerings that larger districts take for granted. As Superintendent John Gair said: “”We’re at the point now where departments are made up of one person in some cases. If we reduce (spending) any more, we’re going to lose programs for kids.” To meet these challenges, Neilsville is asking for a five-year, $300,000 a year increase in the amount of revenue they are allowed to collect.

According to District Administrator Jeff Holmes, Montello is one year away from joining Wausaukee in dissolution (or exploring consolidation). Last September two referenda were defeated; one operating and one to borrow for things like resurfacing the parking lot and replacing air conditioning. They cut for administrators last year and have not replaced retiring teachers. This time they are going to ask for a two-year non recurring $950,000 increase in their revenue limits. If it passes, two years isn’t very long. Unless the Governor and the Legislators do something quick, they will have to go back to the voters again.

Lafarge, Mercer, Seneca, and Pittsville all have November 4 referenda scheduled.

Some may remember that in 2000 disputed ballots in the Lafarge referendum went all the way to State Supreme Court, which after years of litigation upheld “the intent of the voter” precedents and a referendum victory (unfortunately that same year the US Supreme Court threw away precedent and the Constitution and gave the Presidency to George W. Bush). This time Lafarge is one of two districts (thus far) asking for a recurring referendum, in the amount of $250,000 annually.

In Mercer they’ve reached the final year of a three-year nonrecurring referendum and the wolf is at the door. A rigged state finance system and declining enrollment are threatening to blow the house down. They also convened a Task Force, which laid out the options:

  • Approve the new referendum to keep the school open.
  • Close the school and dissolve the district.
  • Consolidate with another district.

“Dissolving” was also mentioned. They are asking for four-year, $350,000 per year revenue cap relief.

Seneca is another small enrollment, rural district with declining enrollment. I’ve described above what this does to the ability to give students the education they deserve, the Institute for Wisconsin’s Future’s Atlas of School Finance goes into more detail. They are asking for $800,000 a year on a recurring basis.

Pittsville covers 440 square miles and serves 686 students. Wrap you mind around that and you will understand that districts like this are essential (consolidate into a district that serves 1,300 students spread over 1,000 square miles?) and do not enjoy the economies that larger, more compact districts have. Because of these these issues and projected declining enrollment, the plan in Pittsville is to decrease staff even if the three-year $175,000 nonrecurring referendum passes.

These posts are a lot of work, but they are also rewarding. I learn about the districts in Wisconsin, the good they are doing, their hopes and dreams. I urge you to visit a few of the district web sites linked here; look at the pictures, read the mission statements, find things like Pittsville’s “Why enroll your child at Pittsville?” and sense the pride and dedication. You will find it rewarding too.

On most of these web sites I also see the logo for “The New Wisconsin Promise,” and wonder if the slogan “A Quality Education for Every Child” is some kind of sick joke. Our schools — even those in dire financial straits — are still doing a fine job, but how much longer can they and we hang on?

Why can’t we put in place a way of investing in our children’s future that makes those words an accurate boast? Why not Governor Doyle? Why not Senators and Assembly members? Why not?

Take the five minutes to click the links and ask them. Maybe if enough of us do, something will change.

Thomas J. Mertz

Leave a comment

Filed under "education finance", Accountability, AMPS, Best Practices, Budget, Contracts, education, Elections, finance, Gimme Some Truth, Referenda, referendum, School Finance, Take Action, Uncategorized, We Are Not Alone

by | June 17, 2008 · 3:21 pm

Where’s the QEO? (again)

At times I feel like a broken record, asking the same questions over and over again. But as long as our news media continues to leave essential information out of their reports — like pages missing from the middle of a book –, I’m going stay stuck in this groove.

The inspiration today is the story in the Wisconsin State Journal by Sandy Cullen on the arbitrator’s decision on the 2006-2008 MMSD contracts with the Madison Teachers Incorporated affiliated clerical, security and educational assistants bargaining units (disclosure: My spouse is a Special Education Assistant with MMSD). The question (and some of the text) is the same as this post from over a year ago on the MTI teacher contract negotiations: “Where is the QEO?”

If the story had been solely about the district employees covered by the arbitration, leaving out the QEO might have been acceptable. But teachers are part of the story Cullen wrote and once teacher contracts — and the place of health insurance in these contracts — are raised, some discussion of the Qualified Economic Offer Law is needed.

In brief, (quoting from my previous post), “The QEO requires districts that wish to avoid arbitration to offer each year a total package that is at least 3.8% larger than the previous contract. Total package means salary and benefits combined. With health care costs rising that has meant very small salary increases for Madison’s teachers…. This mix or balance has been their choice, how they have wished to “spend” their 3.8%. The state says this is their money and that health care is part of collective bargaining.”

The clerical employees, the security employees and assistants bargain on a very different court of play, one without the floor (or ceiling) provided by the QEO and one that is less orientated toward a single “total package” figure.

As John Matthews of MTI notes in Cullen’s story, ” “I expect they will now come back and try it [to obtain a change in health insurance providers/choices] again with the teacher group.” When that happens, some fool will no doubt point to this arbitrator decision or the the contracts negotiated for administrators or even Dane County employees and accuse the Board or the District or the Union of malfeasance if the changes don’t go through.

A basic understanding of the QEO exposes these comparisons as absurd. For this reason, in the interest of informed public discussion is is essential that all discussions of teacher contracts in Wisconsin include some explanation of the QEO.

A couple of other issues with Cullen’s article.

This paragraph is a bit one-sided and misleading:

“It certainly will be a benefit to both our employees and the taxpayers,” said Superintendent Art Rainwater, adding that the savings were applied to salary increases for the employees affected.

There is nothing wrong with quoting Supt. Rainwater’s view, but good journalism requires some analysis of that view or at very least an acknowledgment of alternative interpretations. On the point Rainwater makes in this paragraph, Cullen provides neither. I think the MTI negotiating team (and according to MTI employee surveys, a majority of the members of the bargaining units) would disagree that it is a benefit to the employees. After all, they fought tooth and nail against the change. The arbitrator’s decision also had some interesting things to say about the “quid pro quo” trade off of wages and insurance choices (“The Arbitrator concluded that the Employer demonstrated by clear and convincing evidence the need for a change, but it failed to establish by that standard that it offers a quid pro quo for the change“). What is clear is that the 2.5% and 2.9% wage increases are near or below the rate of inflation and that they are exactly the same as the increases proposed by the Union, without any health insurance changes. If I read the statement and the District’s position correctly, they are saying the only way we can provide cost of living increases to some of our lowest paid employees is by cutting their benefit costs. I realize that the broken school finance system creates hard choices, but this kind of balancing the books on the backs of the those at the bottom is not a very attractive idea (I can’t find a copy of the administrator agreement or salary scale, does anyone know what annual increases they receive?).

The other thing that bothered me is that you have to get to the last paragraphs of Cullen’s story to learn that this contract expires in September. The parties spent untold hours and dollars reaching a settlement that will be active for all of 2 1/2 months (the insurance portion, only for a month, beginning August 1). There is no attempt to estimate these costs — including the services of hired guns contracted by the district — anywhere. The story cites a $1.6 million savings for next year. That is probably true because negotiations for the next contract will begin with the terms of this contract, but there really is no guarantee. The only guaranteed savings are for the month of August, 2008 (about $130,000, minus administrative costs involved with the changes).

This isn’t about whether the arbitrator, the district or the union were right or wrong; it isn’t about costs and benefits of WPS as an insurance provider. My primary concern here is the lack of quality reporting and how this lack makes it more difficult to have informed public discussion of issues that should be of concern to all of us.

Thomas J. Mertz

1 Comment

Filed under "education finance", AMPS, Budget, Contracts, education, Gimme Some Truth, Local News, School Finance, Uncategorized

by | June 7, 2008 · 1:05 pm

The Teacher Project Film

From Public Schools Insights:

In this third and final installment of our interview, [Dave] Eggers announces his plans to create a new documentary depicting the professional lives of teachers. (You heard it here first.)

Eggers and Oscar-winning documentary filmmaker Vanessa Roth are collaborating on a film they hope will do for teaching what An Inconvenient Truth did for the environment. Featuring footage taken by teachers themselves, the film aims to offer a first-hand view of the challenges educators face every day–and to inspire greater public support for teachers’ work.

Eggers3.jpg

Eggers’ advocacy for public schools and educators took center stage at the TED (Technology, Education, Design) Conference, where “the world’s leading thinkers and doers gather to find inspiration.” (No, I wasn’t invited.) At TED, Eggers introduced Once Upon a School, a new project that shares stories about communities supporting public education and challenges adults across the country to become involved in their local public schools.

Hear Eggers describe his forthcoming documentary project and Once Upon a School in part III of Public School Insights’ exclusive interview

Hat tip to Jim Horn, Schools Matter.

Are We Better Off: Reading, Writing, and Landscaping, Mowing lawns, scrubbing bathrooms, selling stereos: How teachers make ends meet By Dave Eggers (Mother Jones).

Thomas J. Mertz

Leave a comment

Filed under "education finance", AMPS, Best Practices, Budget, Contracts, education, finance, National News, nclb, No Child Left Behind, School Finance

by | February 18, 2008 · 8:46 am

Paul Soglin on Merit Pay

wedge.gif

 Paul Soglin has a good post up on some problems with merit pay and related issues.

Time Magazine Gets An ‘F’ on Merit Pay for Teachers

The line, “It’s hard to argue against the notion of rewarding the best teachers for doing a good job.” in the Time Magazine article, How To Make Great Teachers jumped out at me.

It is very easy to make the argument.

There is a false assumption, an unarticulated premise, that workers, particularly teachers, perform better if they are financially rewarded with additional compensation.

We all work to make a living. We do better work for a variety of reasons. Actually most people do better work when motivated by pride in their job, not additional compensation.  That is why educators recognize that the most successful schools are the ones where the principal motivates the entire faculty to work as a team. 

If any kind of financial incentive is given, it should be to the entire faculty, not to individuals.

The Time article needs examination in other areas:

  • We never forget our best teachers – those who imbued us with a deeper understanding or an enduring passion… Wrong. I did not like Mrs. Gertz and frankly, I do not think she liked me. My sixth grade teacher was most unpleasant, especially when it came to adjectives and adverbs. She taught me how to write, she was not what I would call a great teacher. But she did her job.
  • …the nation will need to recruit an additional 2.8 million over the next eight years…Finding and keeping high-quality teachers are key to America’s competitiveness as a nation. The solution is not a merit pay system; the solution is recognizing the value of educators and paying them what they could make in the private sector.
  • Research suggests that a good teacher is the single most important factor in boosting achievement, more important than class size, the dollars spent per student or the quality of textbooks and materials. I am not sure which is most important, but the studies I read indicate that the quality of the faculty, the amount spent on education, which is reflected in class size, and parental involvement are the three major factors.
  • Why do teachers bail? One of the biggest reasons is pay. U.S. public-school teachers earn an average annual salary of less than $48,000, and they start off at an average of about $32,000…And there’s evidence that the best and brightest are the first to leave.  Hello, Wisconsin Manufacturers & Commerce (WMC), are you listening?
  • It’s too soon to say if ProComp (an incentive pay system) will raise achievement in Denver, but a pilot study found that students of teachers who enrolled on a trial basis performed better on standardized tests than other students. Great, but do the kids who performed better on the standardized test learn anything?  Now we have teachers teaching for the test,’ not teaching so that the kids learn to think.

Nate at Proletariat had some good thoughts about collaberation and merit pay a while back.

 Governor Jim Doyle and Barack Obama both support merit pay. Hillary Clinton does not.  More on presidential candidates and education here and here.

 

Thomas J. Metz

Leave a comment

Filed under AMPS, Best Practices, Contracts, Elections

by | February 2, 2008 · 5:44 pm

Quote of the Day

nerad.jpg

When Nerad was hired in Green Bay, the first person that he notified was Eric Jeedas, a Madison taxi driver he has known since their childhood in Kenosha. Last week the pair talked again. This time Nerad was a finalist for the Madison post.

“I would imagine that you folks in Green Bay know that he’s a good guy and competent, and I think that Madison will be very fortunate to have him,” Jeedas said. “Is he up for the job? No question.”

Dan Nerad has proved he was up for every job he’s tackled over the past 33 years, and no doubt he has what it takes to lead Wisconsin’s second-largest school district. We wish him all the best as he begins the transition.

From January 30, 2008 Green Bay Press Gazette editorial.

Thomas J. Mertz

Leave a comment

Filed under Contracts, Local News, Quote of the Day, Uncategorized

by | January 28, 2008 · 8:14 pm

Green Bay Educator Offered Madison Superintendent Job

From WKOW:

nerad.jpgDr. Daniel Nerad

Two sources close to the process of selecting a new Madison Schools Superintendent tell 27 News the position has been offered to Green Bay School District Superintendent Daniel Nerad.Green Bay School District spokesperson Amanda Brooker told 27 News Nerad, 56, would not comment Monday on the selection process.Madison School Board President Arlene Silviera also declined comment.School Board members had identified Nerad, Miami-Dade Public Schools administrator Steve Gallon, and Boston Public Schools Budget Director James McIntyre as the three finalists for the position.School District officials have said an offer of the job would be followed by salary negotiation and a site visit by school board members to the candidate’s home area.

Nerad is a Wisconsin native who was named state superintendent of the year in 2006.

Nerad told the Capital Times last week he has passed on other appealing offers to leave his Green Bay position during his thirty year career there. Nerad told the newspaper the Madison opportunity was “unique” because of his admiration for the district’s work and his family’s strong ties to the city. Nerad’s son, Benjamin, is a Madison-based legislative aide for Rep. Tom Nelson (D-Kaukauna).

If Nerad accepts the position and contract terms are finalized, he would replace Superintendent of Schools Art Rainwater, who retires June 30.

(I think) I can say now, he was my first choice. In his public discussion, he hit John Dewey, equity (in a way that I liked), state school finance reform and was great on community involvement and the idea that schools are about more than academic learning. Dewey is a hero to me and the others are issues and ideas near and dear to my heart. Much good about the others, but Nerad fit my desires best.

Congratulations.

Thomas J. Mertz

Leave a comment

Filed under Contracts, Equity, Local News

by | January 27, 2008 · 1:36 am

Money well spent

When the Board of education decided to hire Hazard, Young and Attea to consult on the Superintendent search, there was some grumbling (in Madison there is always some grumbling).  Although the process is not complete, I think the money ($50,000 if I recall correctly) appears to have been well spent.

Everyone I’ve talked to, including Board members, has had good things to say about the qualifications of all three finalists and what each would bring to the district.  I think it is just as important to note that each would bring very different strengths, that the Board has been given a real choice. 

To me that is exactly where they should be at this point; faced with a hard decision, but one that is between distinct choices.

Best of luck to all involved.

Thomas J. Mertz

Leave a comment

Filed under Contracts, Local News, Uncategorized

by | October 24, 2007 · 4:07 pm

MMSD Superintendent Ad

Posted on Education Week

Superintendent
Madison Metropolitan SD
Madison, WI

The Madison Metropolitan School District serves 25,000 students in the capital city of Wisconsin. The school board seeks a student-centered educational leader with demonstrated success in a diverse environment. The successful candidate should offer leadership to challenge and engage students at all points along the education performance continuum. He/she must be a collaborative and visionary leader with unquestioned integrity. The new superintendent also must possess excellent organizational and fiscal management skills.

The board desires an accessible superintendent with the ability to develop positive working relationships and deal fairly with a wide variety of constituents and stakeholders. The new superintendent must be a consensus builder who considers all points of view before making decisions.
For more information about this highly desirable district and opportunity,
go to http://www.madison.k12.wi.us/contact.htm.
Compensation will be nationally competitive.
Screening begins in December and the position is available July 1, 2008 with the expectation for transition prior to that date. Additional information and online application is at http://www.hyasupersearches.com.

Hazard, Young, Attea & Assoc., Ltd.
1151 Waukegan Road • Glenview, IL 60025
Tel: 847-724-8465 • Fax: 847-724-8467
An Equal Opportunity Employer

Thomas J. Mertz

Leave a comment

Filed under AMPS, Best Practices, Contracts, Local News

by | September 23, 2007 · 5:38 pm

Collaboration and Merit Pay

Nate at The Proletariat has a worthwhile post on how the metric of individual merit present in most (all?) proposals for instituting merit pay for teachers fails to recognize the collaborate reality of our schools.

Excerpt (full post here):

In the beginning of the school year you are likely to see ESL, Title, and Reading Recovery staff all chipping in to assess children in reading. You are also likely to see Title staff in your room delivering instruction along with the classroom teacher. It is also highly likely that in order to meet the academic needs of other students, a teacher will send students to other classrooms, and other students will come to yours.

This sort of collaboration is not limited to reading, but also occurs in math, science and social studies. It is that old Vygotskian proverb that the interaction or process of H20 can not be explained by isolating the individual elements. Isolating a classroom teacher from their larger ensemble or school culture is akin to examining a fish out of water. Meritocracy will discourage all the behaviors that educational school reform has been based on for the last ten years. Teachers will become resistant to collaboration with other teachers and staff which has been so essential to student progress.

This is yet another reason the business models for education reform don’t make sense.

Thomas J. Mertz

Leave a comment

Filed under AMPS, Best Practices, Contracts, Local News