"My hope is that not just the teachers union, but the administrators, everybody will start to look at some of the things the city did, whether it's furloughs, deferred raises, no raises," said Mayor Richard A. Moccia. "If they don't, then the only thing you're going to hear is 'Programs are going to have to be cut.' I think there has to be -- and I'm going to quote President Obama -- 'We're all in this together,' and we all have to make sacrifices."The Norwalk Federation of Teachers, Norwalk's teachers union, negotiated a three-year contract in October which included a 1.35% raise for the coming year. Bruce LeVine Mellion, NFT president, said in today's paper that discussions regarding concessions are premature.
"We think there are other ways, other avenues, other venues to address the budgetary issues and concerns. But it's not going to be the reopening of collective-bargaining agreements that we have concluded negotiating," LeVine Mellion said. The city has "a joint committee between the BET and BOE to find efficiencies. We have retirements, we have attrition. Examine the budget fully, see what can be done and then discuss (concessions)."Meanwhile in Stamford, an arbitration panel issued an award on Monday which curtailed raises for Stamford teachers, eliminating raises altogether for the coming year and allowing for only limited raises the two following years. In addition, health insurance co-payments and deductibles increase in 2010-11.
Read the Wynne Parry's full story in Tuesday's Stamford Advocate.
Eventful contract talks, which began in August, approached a conclusion Monday, when a three-member arbitration panel released an award sharply curtailing raises for city teachers -- completely eliminating them next year -- while increasing health care contributions.
Although the award must still go before the Board of Representatives, it makes the school board's task of keeping its budget request as low as possible more feasible...
Starr touted the award as a means to keep teachers working.
This spring, the school board won't have to budget the $5 million increase to cover teachers' wage and step increases, meaning "we are that much more likely to keep teachers employed," he said.
Last year, other elected city boards cut the school budget by $7.4 million. As a result, the schools lost more than 40 positions, according to Stamford Education Association President Lora Rossomando.According to the article, teacher were upset by the negative tone of the negotiation process.
"A settlement which was within reach, and certainly would have promoted a more positive relationship between the teachers and the district," she said in a statement. In it she also called the Board of Education's insistence on no wage increases in 2010-11, "shameful."What do you think about this? Is it unfair to ask teachers to give back raises? Or is it a sign of the touch economic times?
Posts
NPS teachers JUST saved taxpayers 5 million dollars in health care concessions...please don't forget this fact.
ReplyDeleteCertainly it is true that teachers are currently slated to get(small) raises while many of us working parents are getting laid off or experiencing pay cuts, however, I still beleive that teachers in general are grossly underpaid. We want to continue to attract the best teachers in Norwalk.
ReplyDeleteI would like to I would like more specifics on what "programs" will need to be cut to prevent tax increases. I'm sure there are many programs that are not working or are not working in the way that they were designed to do. I can't help but think that there has to be other avenues of savings before we look at teacher pay.
How about do-nothing administrator pay?
ReplyDeleteLet's not forget the administrators got a 3% raise handed to them by the BOE...no arbitration...no increased cost to health benefits... That's more than double what the teachers are getting... The teachers, as the first poster pointed out, have already reduced the budget burden...now is the time for those building administrators to chip in to lower the budget.
ReplyDeleteNorwalk Mom raises some very important questions that deserve a response.
ReplyDeleteFirst, I don't think that student programs need to be cut to balance the budget. Secondly, there are many different costs which the various employee contracts impose on the City other than salary and health benefits. Perhaps it is in these areas that we will need to consider making some collaborative, mutually beneficial changes. But, before proposals are talked about in public, we owe it to our very dedicated employees to sit down with them and try to figure out where we might have some common ground to find the savings we need.
Third, there are budget areas that are funded but which are essentially reserved-- in other words, we appropriate money for jobs that are never filled, overtime that is never used or expenses that are never incurred. I am trying to get a handle on all of those items so that we can reduce that funding (which ties up money).
Finally, the Finance Committee will be meeting on the first Thursday of every month (although we will add additional meetings as needed-- the meetings are scheduled to be in Room A-330 and start at 7:30. Agendas will be made available (you can also email me and I will put you on a list to receive the agendas-- colarossis@norwalkps.org).
Steve,
ReplyDeleteWhile I agree with you whole-heartedly about your possible money-saving solutions and find there is a very real opportunity to realize true savings/reductions in the budget from the areas you pointed out, I think you are missing the point of the poster pointing out the teachers making consessions and not the administration. Collectively speaking, the amount of money saved by reducing raises in the administration pales in comparison to the savings of re-negotiating raises with the teachers(mainly because of the huge difference in the number of teachers hired versus administration), I think the notion of solidarity needs to be considered by the administration. This token attempt to show they stand with the teachers and other staff who have also taken a reduction in some form perhaps will not only show they are serious in supporting the budget but also that they are holding themselves to the same financial standards as all other employees. The gain in respect and collegiality by thiss move would by far outweigh the loss of 1 years raise increase. I think this is what's lacking in this city.
My other disappointment is that there was absolutely no discussion during the approval to hire/appoint the Tech. Dir. and the Dir. of Elem. Ed. While it was a consent agenda, meant to move through routine agenda items quickly to allow the board to get to more important matters, as you can see from the discussions here about the 2 appointments, that is as far from truth as possible. The board members should have certainly questioned the recommendations of the appointments and also asked about all other finalists to properly debate each person's qualifications and qualities as well as their deficiencies. The citizens of this city feel slighted when they see appointments being made with absolutely no discussion what-so-ever. Not a peep. What should have happened was to wait for the permanent Superintendent to make the recommendations, not the interim, no offense meant to him.
By reading and hearing all of the bloggers posting their disappointment with the 2 appointees, it shows me and should also show you how much of a colossal mistake that has been made on the part of the school administration by making the recommendations to the board in the first place. What stings even worse is the blind approval the board gave to the appointments and how that perpetuates the perception of ignorance. What's next on the agenda, the search for weapons of mass destruction?
I am sorry for the negativity and mean no disrespect. You seem very literate and articulate. Perhaps the board should collectively answer/address some of the concerns in these blogs. It might give us the impression that the board is made off human beings too, in addition to showing how serious the board is in its sincerity with the public on matters posted here. Look at the topics here that are important to people. The 2 glaring topics are the achievement gap and the staff hirings. If you joined the two topics together, there is a real concern the new hires will have a negative impact reducing the achievement gap, not narrow it, thus the number of comments on both topics.
This might be a good place to start.
Just what the BOE needs to do--take direction from anonymous posters with who knows what for a personal agenda. It's bad enough the BOE is already taking leads from the teachers' union and feels no shame in raises issues at BOE meetings which Mr. Colarossi introduces with the statement, "many parents have come to me and said. . ." I don't want to see the board deal in hearsay. That is shakey ground that allows any BOE member to throw any item on the table and mask it with the perfunctory statement of "I had many parents report that we should (you fill in the blank)." I expect more from my BOE.
ReplyDeleteThe two central office hirings were only on the consent agenda? There was a day when the superintendent would present to the board the background and accomplishments of the candidates. Unless the board discussed this in an executive session, how else would the board members have enough information to make informed decisions? From recent history, we all know what happens when the board blindly accepts the recommendations of the superintendent. Also, there should be a public statement to present these people to the public.
ReplyDeleteI have asked before, as has at least one other person posting here: Will there be an interview with the elementary director?
I've tried to contact the new Director of Elementary Ed and haven't heard back from her. I'll try again this week.
ReplyDeleteMoina: At first, I looked forward to Ms. Marinaccio's interview with you, but as the weeks go by, I wonder why on earth would she want it?
ReplyDeleteI have a lot of respect for you as a journalist, but the multitude of anonymous bloggers on this site are starting to look like the sharks on yourct.com.
There are several people: administrators, retired administrators, a few teachers - with their own agendas taking very cheap shots. It seems like a small, select group didn't get their way and will stop at nothing to discredit a fine educator.
I do not think it's wise to begin talking about cutting programs so early in the budget discussion.
ReplyDeleteSome of you may recall that a few years ago our former Superintendent recommended an operating increase of about 7.8%. He backed up his recommendation by arguing that various programs would be cut if the recommendation was not approved.
When the dust had settled (put differently: after the city called his bluff), the BET and Council okayed an increase of roughly 3.8%; which, if I remember correctly, was pushed up to a little over 4% when some additional state aid came to the city.
The important point was that no programs were cut, even though the final budget numbers were about half of the original recommendation. This is a large budget; there are potential savings all over the place.
For example, the 7 elementary reserve teachers are essentially a contingency fund; I doubt very much that they will be needed. Also, last year I noticed that the number of middle level special education administrators was quite high; if that configuration is still in place, it should be modified.
And, of course, Mr. Colarossi and Ms. Haynie have raised a number of points about the budget that should be addressed. Some could lead to savings.
Finally, I am troubled by the seven members of the BOE who voted to send the budget to the city without adequate discussion of a number of issues and while there were still about 10 days before the deadline.
It was their responsibility to review every line item and send over a document that truly deserves to have the BOE's name on the cover.
It seems to me that by not responding to Moina's request for an interview, the new Director of Elementary Education must be something to hide. Yes, some of the bloggers may seem like sharks, but if there was nothing to attack, the sharks would go away. Let us know the full qualifications of these people so that the sharks will (hopefully) have no carcasses to feed on. If there is truth to the bloggers' claims, then the public deserves the same accountability from the Board as we expect from the staff.
ReplyDeleteWe have been promised transparency. If the new appointee does not provide her backgrouned, perhaps it can be revealed in another way?
12:38 - I can see where administrators might have an agenda in questioning the director of elementary schools, but why would teachers and retired administrators do it? Also, I can't tell from any of the postings (about this, at least) if someone is an administrator, a teacher, a board member, or whatever. How do you know?
ReplyDeleteAnon 11:13 a.m., although you are certainly free to bash me, I can't seem to recall any time when I've claimed to have heard reports from parents when that wasn't true. Also, we need to develop a more cooperative relationship with all of our unions, the students and the taxpayers-- being respectful of all of their groups is what should be expected of all officials.
ReplyDeleteRegarding the discussions concerning the hiring of the 2 new directors, there was extensive discussion while we were in Executive Session.
4:28 PM, good point.
ReplyDeleteIt bothers me that the newly appointed Director is being protected from the public she serves. Don't we deserve to know what her qualifications are? Quell the supposed 'cheap shots' by providing the truth.
Norwalk residents are bullies, plain and simple. They are not interested in truth, just cheap gossip, which is why we rely on blogs as our public forum.
ReplyDeleteIt is almost amusing to see the protests about mistreatment of central office administrators, some of whom have been the most vicious gossips I have ever known in my professional life. Backstabbing is a sport for some, and others have gotten where they are over the backs of colleagues. Protest all you want, but anyone who wants an administrative job needs to be able to defend him/herself. NOTE: This is not an indictment of the director of elementary; it is a commentary about the collective group.
ReplyDelete5:05 AM, Yes, there are some gossips, some backstabbers, but no more so than in any other school system or business office. I am amazed at the negativity of your comment. It is just as vicous as the group to which you refer.
ReplyDeleteThe only point with which I agree is that 'anyone who wants an administrative job needs to be able to defend him/herself.'
The Director of Elementary Education needs to toughen up and give an interview. If she can't face this blog, how will she fare with the elementary principals? In my humble opinion, the 'good old boys' (as they have been referred to here) will eat her up and spit her out within a week.
Show some spine, Carol M., and face the parents.
6:17 - I don't know your experiences in the school district, and I don't have a way to compare the amount of low behavior to that found in any other work environment, but such behavior in Norwalk is unacceptable and it will change only after people admit that it is a problem.
ReplyDelete1:17, the behavior of which I speak runs rampant everywhere, and I know from experience. To think that Norwalk will be different from the rest of the world is unrealistic.
ReplyDeleteAre these people with 'low behavior' to whom your refer truly a problem? I'm not so sure. The negative people who exist are there for a reason. If there were no people with negative issues, we would have no problems to fix. Norwalk has had its share of problems and then some and even some more after that. Why not welcome the thoughts of these people and consider their input. Perhaps there is truth in what they write.
3:14 - Whether such behavior exists everywhere or not, it is unacceptable, and yes, it truly is a problem. It is a problem when people self promote by bashing others (and I'm not referring only to bashing on the blogs; it happens in interpersonal communication, too). It is a problem when pettiness and self promotion become the basis for decisions. It is a problem when vendettas blind people to the facts that ought to inform their thinking.
ReplyDelete"If there were no people with negative issues, we would have no problems to fix" - I assure you that there are plenty of problems to fix, without these "negative issues." The people with these attitudes and behaviors get in the way of the real issue the district faces: student outcomes.
Board of education members often have people who "confide" in them, giving them "information that they should know," whether about district history or about individuals within the district or about "the way a situation really is." I hope that the board members in Norwalk are sophisticated enough to be critical thinkers when they get such information because sometimes it says much more about the person who is communicating it than it does about anything or anyone else. Also, sometimes it is simply dishonest, whether because it is a packaged half-truth or it is someone's personal interpretation that has been presented as fact.
5:59 AM, You write about the 'real issue the district faces, student outcomes.' Perhaps you have not connected the dots? If the board appoints an inexperienced person to lead the elementary schools, won't the student outcomes be affected? I don't see how negative comments about the people appointed, IF TRUE, isn't about student outcomes. If the comments are not true, then let the newly appointed directors state that. An interview with the Director of Elementary Education is necessary, with all questions answered so that Norwalk parents know what to expect from this person. Ignoring a request for an interview is not only arrogant, but not smart.
ReplyDeleteI am also sure that you underestimate the Board of Education. Of course they weigh what is said. They are not an unsophisticated group of know nothings. Of course, if something is said and the Board sees that 'it' looks like a duck, quacks like a duck....you know the rest.
9:28 - I must not have made myself clear; you and I are in agreement. My complaint is not about people who blog their complaints. It is about some of the people who have been in leadership positions in the NPS.
ReplyDeleteAs for the sophistication of the Board of Education, how did they appoint someone who appears to lack what most of us consider to be the qualifications for a key administrative job? I'd guess that someone lobbied them and that that person didn't do the lobbying for the good of the school district.
An interview with the new director of elementary (or at least some public statement about the qualifications of the director) may convince at least some of us that our assessment is wrong. Until I see that, I'll have to fill in the blanks myself.
11:59, from what I heard, I don't think that someone lobbied for this person to get the job. I really believe you are wrong about that, unless the superintendent did the lobbying. I did hear that he likes her.
ReplyDeleteI agree with you on the director of elementary. She needs to be a big girl and submit to an interview if she wants to have half a chance at gaining the respect of the big boys (who are ready to take her on, I am sure).
1:38 - If the director of elementary agrees to an interview, there will no doubt be people who will criticize what she says. However, it is better to have her present facts than to have everyone guess at what the truth is. In the absence of information, people speculate about what the truth is, and they may easily be painting a picture that is more negative than the truth.
ReplyDeleteWere I in her place, I would be dreading an interview, but I would force myself to do it. She has some formidable principals who will not make her life easy, especially if they believe that she lacks the qualifications for the job. If they think she lacks courage, it will be even worse.