BREA President, Steve Beatty, on behalf of the Executive Committee of the Bridgewater-Raritan Education Association has requested his membership to boycott this evening’s 7:00 PM school budget meeting of the Bridgewater Township and Raritan Borough Councils at Bridgewater’s Municipal Complex.
It appears to be a reversal of strategy, as other such meetings have been populated wall-to-wall with association members. This does not necessarily portend a meeting room devoid of people coming to the mike to express their views. A petition of undisclosed origin has been selectively targeted asking that the municipal councils make little or no further cuts. It could be presented to the councils this evening unless there has been a change of plans.
BREA leadership has also informed its members that it has “received reliable information that . . . the town councils will announce a cut to the school’s budget this week in excess of $2.4 million, perhaps even over $3 million.” That claim has not been confirmed with either municipal council as of this writing – we will find out tonight.
Showing posts with label BREA Wage Freeze. Show all posts
Showing posts with label BREA Wage Freeze. Show all posts
Wednesday, May 12, 2010
Tuesday, May 11, 2010
Does this Man Hold the Key?
Among those, I believe that Jeffrey Brookner, the president of the Bridgewater-Raritan School Board, is highly influential, at least in this stage of the process.
More than anything else, the contentious issue of further reducing the budget or of coming up with merely token cuts or none at all is a major policy decision.
Consequently, Mr. Brookner’s position on additional budget reductions as he advances his views constitutes a major policy stand which will demonstrate his mettle in dealing with the voters’ message delivered in the April 20th election.
In one of the public meetings which I attended since the school budget was first proposed in December, 2009, someone raised the question of why the entire custodial staff was being outsourced. Mr. Brookner responded that this district could no longer afford above-market salaries for their services.
If that’s true, then there needs to be a compelling reason as to why all other employees in the three bargaining units representing teachers, support staff, principals and supervisors will have the benefit of above-market contract salary increases, in addition to the above-market salary rates of the previous two years.
The Bridgewater-Raritan Education Association’s piece of the pie is a 4.35% contract increase beginning July 1.
Note: The committee charged with representing the two municipalities and the school district in discussions which took place on May 6th is composed of the following officials: Denise Carra and John LaMaestra for Raritan Borough; Matthew Moench and Christine Henderson Rose for Bridgewater Township; Jeffrey Brookner, Lynne Hurley and Michael Schilder for the school district.
Tomorrow evening at 7:00 PM, the Bridgewater Township Council and the Raritan Borough Council will meet in a special joint meeting at the Bridgewater Municipal Complex to discuss and to possibly take action on the failed school budget.
Wednesday, May 5, 2010
Bridging the Gap
Collegiality and civilized discussion prevailed among the municipal councils of Bridgewater Township, Raritan Borough and the Bridgewater-Raritan Board of Education last night in the meeting room of Bridgewater’s new municipal complex.
Nonetheless, it was evident from comments made by officials of the three groups that there is still a long way to go to reach agreement on an acceptable school budget-reduction number.
In remarks at the outset of the meeting, Bridgewater Council President Matthew Moench said that “the council has not decided on a number.” In reference to what seems to have become an iconic budget-reduction target e.g., the $2.4 million which “corresponds to a (one-year) wage freeze,” Mr. Moench added that, “it could be more, it could be less.”
Reading from a prepared statement, Bridgewater-Raritan School Board President Jeffrey Brookner outlined the cuts that were already made since the budget was originally proposed in mid-December, 2009. Perhaps referring to the tripartite, 7-person committee that I discussed in my previous post, he said, “We will debate whether even more cuts are needed. The answer, he added, is simple . . . (we can absorb) $500,000 from recent retirements. Any more cuts will negatively impact education.”
The $500K to which Mr. Brookner was referring is known in education circles as ‘breakage.’ It represents the difference between the higher salaries of long-tenured personnel who retire, and the lower salaries of their replacements. It’s an even larger number if there are no replacements.
However, ‘breakage’ is found money and should be kept off the table in the committee discussions. That $500K will most likely grow to what could be $1 million or more by September, especially if Governor Christie extends the notification time to encourage more high-salaried staff to retire between now and the start of the next school year.
‘Breakage’ is not a budget-cut line item and it should not be considered as a reduction to the 2010/2011 school budget. That would be the easy way out and it leaves no buffer for next year. That brings us back to the possibility of a $2.4 million wage-freeze.
Nonetheless, it was evident from comments made by officials of the three groups that there is still a long way to go to reach agreement on an acceptable school budget-reduction number.
In remarks at the outset of the meeting, Bridgewater Council President Matthew Moench said that “the council has not decided on a number.” In reference to what seems to have become an iconic budget-reduction target e.g., the $2.4 million which “corresponds to a (one-year) wage freeze,” Mr. Moench added that, “it could be more, it could be less.”
Reading from a prepared statement, Bridgewater-Raritan School Board President Jeffrey Brookner outlined the cuts that were already made since the budget was originally proposed in mid-December, 2009. Perhaps referring to the tripartite, 7-person committee that I discussed in my previous post, he said, “We will debate whether even more cuts are needed. The answer, he added, is simple . . . (we can absorb) $500,000 from recent retirements. Any more cuts will negatively impact education.”
The $500K to which Mr. Brookner was referring is known in education circles as ‘breakage.’ It represents the difference between the higher salaries of long-tenured personnel who retire, and the lower salaries of their replacements. It’s an even larger number if there are no replacements.
However, ‘breakage’ is found money and should be kept off the table in the committee discussions. That $500K will most likely grow to what could be $1 million or more by September, especially if Governor Christie extends the notification time to encourage more high-salaried staff to retire between now and the start of the next school year.
‘Breakage’ is not a budget-cut line item and it should not be considered as a reduction to the 2010/2011 school budget. That would be the easy way out and it leaves no buffer for next year. That brings us back to the possibility of a $2.4 million wage-freeze.
Monday, May 3, 2010
The Silence of the Leaders
Except for the Superintendent of the Bridgewater-Raritan School District, Dr. Michael Schilder, there seems to have been a veil of public silence over the school budget from two leadership groups, the supervisors and the principals. Dr. Schilder, through his presentations and comments at public meetings, as well as through a series of e-mails to a recipient list has been very expressive in his views about that topic.
So has Mr. Steve Beatty, President of the Bridgewater-Raritan Education Association which represents mostly teachers, but also includes secretaries, custodians, maintenance workers and others. (Lately, he has not spoken before the board of education or either municipal body.)
But the principals and supervisors, each represented by their own union, seem to be comfortable with officially remaining in the public background; and lately, it appears, letting Mr. Beatty speak for them on the much publicized question of a wage freeze for the upcoming academic year.
The principals and supervisors were the first to endorse a contribution to their health care benefits. Together with a give-up of certain other educational expenses, those concessions were subsequently adopted by the BREA.
A thoughtful person has to wonder what might happen now, if the principals and supervisors were to take the lead and to reconsider their previous rejection of a one-year wage freeze. It’s not too late.
Instead, since their initiative with the health care concession, the two unions seem to have linked arms with the BREA.
Why is that? At a time when the superintendent of schools and the entire non-bargaining team have already given up their salary increases for next year, why are the principals and supervisors still resisting? Please . . . Don’t tell me that they have already contributed enough through a 1.5% concession towards health care benefits.
It would be unwise to minimize the total impact of health care concessions which, for the BREA alone represents a $1 million give-back to the district. Notwithstanding, let’s also remember that those contributions are already scheduled to go into effect by law as soon as existing contracts expire. On July 1st, the BREA finds itself in the last year of its three-year wage agreement.
This is the consequential issue: The Bridgewater-Raritan community is staring at the stark possibility of further significant reductions to the school budget. Only a $2.4 million wage freeze might assure that more teachers will not lose their jobs.
Thanks for reading, and stay engaged.
So has Mr. Steve Beatty, President of the Bridgewater-Raritan Education Association which represents mostly teachers, but also includes secretaries, custodians, maintenance workers and others. (Lately, he has not spoken before the board of education or either municipal body.)
But the principals and supervisors, each represented by their own union, seem to be comfortable with officially remaining in the public background; and lately, it appears, letting Mr. Beatty speak for them on the much publicized question of a wage freeze for the upcoming academic year.
The principals and supervisors were the first to endorse a contribution to their health care benefits. Together with a give-up of certain other educational expenses, those concessions were subsequently adopted by the BREA.
A thoughtful person has to wonder what might happen now, if the principals and supervisors were to take the lead and to reconsider their previous rejection of a one-year wage freeze. It’s not too late.
Instead, since their initiative with the health care concession, the two unions seem to have linked arms with the BREA.
Why is that? At a time when the superintendent of schools and the entire non-bargaining team have already given up their salary increases for next year, why are the principals and supervisors still resisting? Please . . . Don’t tell me that they have already contributed enough through a 1.5% concession towards health care benefits.
It would be unwise to minimize the total impact of health care concessions which, for the BREA alone represents a $1 million give-back to the district. Notwithstanding, let’s also remember that those contributions are already scheduled to go into effect by law as soon as existing contracts expire. On July 1st, the BREA finds itself in the last year of its three-year wage agreement.
This is the consequential issue: The Bridgewater-Raritan community is staring at the stark possibility of further significant reductions to the school budget. Only a $2.4 million wage freeze might assure that more teachers will not lose their jobs.
Thanks for reading, and stay engaged.
Saturday, May 1, 2010
Impasse on Bridgewater-Raritan School Budget
The President of the Bridgewater Township Council, Matthew Moench, was advised on Friday that the three major bargaining units for the Bridgewater-Raritan School District have rejected the two municipalities’ request to accept a voluntary wage freeze amounting to $2.4 million for the 2010/2011 school year.
Mr. Moench expressed disappointment that the only “the only solution offered was $1 million from budget salary ‘breakage.’” This is a rather arcane term that represents the differential between the higher salary of retiring staff and the lower salary of new staff.
The higher salaries of long-term employees are always built into the budget at the outset, because there is no way of knowing in advance how many experienced, higher salaried personnel will retire. It’s important to note that, according to Moench, “school administration says that there is now $500,000” worth of known ‘breakage,’” half the number claimed by the BREA.
“There was not any plausible solution offered,” Moench said and, “essentially, we were told, ‘we are not helping; good luck,’” He added that “They (the union representatives) don’t think we will cut $2.4 million or more . . . they really are misreading the public. If the $2.4 million salary freeze had been proffered, we would have accepted it. At first, some council members thought that was too low. Now, it could be a larger number.”
“We asked for a wage freeze in the hope that they would have cooperated. Union representatives put themselves ahead of their fellow colleagues and kids. They had a chance to practice what they preach, and they didn’t do it.”
Steve Beatty, speaking for the Bridgewater-Raritan Education Association of which he is President, as well as for the other two administrators’ unions representing the Principals and the Supervisors, offered another view.
Mr. Beatty rebutted by claiming that, in combination, the three union groups have already given up a total of $2.4 million in concessions, although not as a wage freeze he admits. He arrived at that number by stating that the $1.6 million in forfeited education reimbursement expenses and in the 1.5% of salary volunteered as a health care contribution, when combined with $0.8 million in ‘breakage’ already equals $2.4 million.
“What difference does it make where the money is coming from?” he asked.
Beatty continued, “We are not trying to be greedy. We are looking at the long and short term. What is being asked of us is political.”
When asked why each of the three bargaining units did not take the municipal councils’ request for a $2.4 million wage freeze to their rank and file for an up or down vote, he responded, “We truly believe that the executive committee(s) has a handle on how members feel. We talked to people and teachers and we listened.”
Beatty also volunteered that originally, the BREA did not want to accept any cuts in advance of the budget vote at the April 20th election. “We would have liked to wait until after the vote,” he said, “but we were prodded, pushed and bullied” into concessions before the April 20th election.
Also asked how he thinks the public will feel after this, he said “I’m pretty sure it will be bad and we will have some angry people; we will also have some on our side; it’s hard to say. My fear is that the councils have made up their mind. If we don’t agree, the councils may cut $3.5 million or more. It’s possible.”
Mr. Moench expressed disappointment that the only “the only solution offered was $1 million from budget salary ‘breakage.’” This is a rather arcane term that represents the differential between the higher salary of retiring staff and the lower salary of new staff.
The higher salaries of long-term employees are always built into the budget at the outset, because there is no way of knowing in advance how many experienced, higher salaried personnel will retire. It’s important to note that, according to Moench, “school administration says that there is now $500,000” worth of known ‘breakage,’” half the number claimed by the BREA.
“There was not any plausible solution offered,” Moench said and, “essentially, we were told, ‘we are not helping; good luck,’” He added that “They (the union representatives) don’t think we will cut $2.4 million or more . . . they really are misreading the public. If the $2.4 million salary freeze had been proffered, we would have accepted it. At first, some council members thought that was too low. Now, it could be a larger number.”
“We asked for a wage freeze in the hope that they would have cooperated. Union representatives put themselves ahead of their fellow colleagues and kids. They had a chance to practice what they preach, and they didn’t do it.”
Steve Beatty, speaking for the Bridgewater-Raritan Education Association of which he is President, as well as for the other two administrators’ unions representing the Principals and the Supervisors, offered another view.
Mr. Beatty rebutted by claiming that, in combination, the three union groups have already given up a total of $2.4 million in concessions, although not as a wage freeze he admits. He arrived at that number by stating that the $1.6 million in forfeited education reimbursement expenses and in the 1.5% of salary volunteered as a health care contribution, when combined with $0.8 million in ‘breakage’ already equals $2.4 million.
“What difference does it make where the money is coming from?” he asked.
Beatty continued, “We are not trying to be greedy. We are looking at the long and short term. What is being asked of us is political.”
When asked why each of the three bargaining units did not take the municipal councils’ request for a $2.4 million wage freeze to their rank and file for an up or down vote, he responded, “We truly believe that the executive committee(s) has a handle on how members feel. We talked to people and teachers and we listened.”
Beatty also volunteered that originally, the BREA did not want to accept any cuts in advance of the budget vote at the April 20th election. “We would have liked to wait until after the vote,” he said, “but we were prodded, pushed and bullied” into concessions before the April 20th election.
Also asked how he thinks the public will feel after this, he said “I’m pretty sure it will be bad and we will have some angry people; we will also have some on our side; it’s hard to say. My fear is that the councils have made up their mind. If we don’t agree, the councils may cut $3.5 million or more. It’s possible.”
Wednesday, April 28, 2010
Status of Negotiations with Bridgewater-Raritan Schools’ Bargaining Units
In a telephone call this afternoon, Matthew Moench, President of the Bridgewater Township Council, provided an update on the status of negotiations with the teachers’ association, as well as of talks with the principals’ and supervisors’ groups.
Mr. Moench confirmed that on Monday, April 26th, the following parties had met in a preliminary closed-door meeting to establish an initial sounding of positions:
Present at Monday’s meeting were Mr. Moench on behalf of the Bridgewater Township Council; Denise Carra, Raritan Borough Council President, Mayor Jo-Ann Liptak, and John LaMaestra, Borough School Board Liaison. Bridgewater-Raritan Board President Jeffrey Brookner and School Business Administrator/Board Secretary Peter Starrs were participants.
Also there were Steve Beatty, President of the Bridgewater-Raritan Education Association; as well as the two leaders of the Bridgewater-Raritan Principals’ Association and the Supervisors’ Association.
Negotiations, which are still in progress, center on the “possibility of further concessions and cost savings,” beyond those already built into the failed budget, according to Mr. Moench. This afternoon he was still actively “discussing options” with the bargaining units on behalf of those on the Bridgewater-Raritan negotiation team.
Mr. Moench added that he has requested the unions representing the teachers, principals and supervisors to get back to him by “Friday at the latest” with their proposals. He indicated that he “feels that they are doing their best,” and “believes that they seem to be acting in good faith.”
Without revealing its contents due to the sensitive nature of ongoing negotiations, he volunteered that he had a 45-minute discussion this afternoon with BREA President, Steve Beatty.
Because the voters of Bridgewater and Raritan rejected the school budget on April 20th, New Jersey law requires that the municipalities of the school district review the failed budget and forward their recommendations to Executive County Superintendent of Schools, Trudy Doyle.
As readers of this blog understand, there has been much pressure from Trenton for a total one-year wage freeze.
The current budget includes BREA concessions for health care (1.5% of salary) and tuition reimbursement in the amount of $1.4 million. These are offset in the current budget by reinstated budget cuts of the same amount.
The principals’ and supervisors’ associations also have agreed to pick up 1.5% towards their health care premiums. The Superintendent and all non-bargaining personnel are already on board with a one-year wage freeze.
Mr. Moench confirmed that on Monday, April 26th, the following parties had met in a preliminary closed-door meeting to establish an initial sounding of positions:
Present at Monday’s meeting were Mr. Moench on behalf of the Bridgewater Township Council; Denise Carra, Raritan Borough Council President, Mayor Jo-Ann Liptak, and John LaMaestra, Borough School Board Liaison. Bridgewater-Raritan Board President Jeffrey Brookner and School Business Administrator/Board Secretary Peter Starrs were participants.
Also there were Steve Beatty, President of the Bridgewater-Raritan Education Association; as well as the two leaders of the Bridgewater-Raritan Principals’ Association and the Supervisors’ Association.
Negotiations, which are still in progress, center on the “possibility of further concessions and cost savings,” beyond those already built into the failed budget, according to Mr. Moench. This afternoon he was still actively “discussing options” with the bargaining units on behalf of those on the Bridgewater-Raritan negotiation team.
Mr. Moench added that he has requested the unions representing the teachers, principals and supervisors to get back to him by “Friday at the latest” with their proposals. He indicated that he “feels that they are doing their best,” and “believes that they seem to be acting in good faith.”
Without revealing its contents due to the sensitive nature of ongoing negotiations, he volunteered that he had a 45-minute discussion this afternoon with BREA President, Steve Beatty.
Because the voters of Bridgewater and Raritan rejected the school budget on April 20th, New Jersey law requires that the municipalities of the school district review the failed budget and forward their recommendations to Executive County Superintendent of Schools, Trudy Doyle.
As readers of this blog understand, there has been much pressure from Trenton for a total one-year wage freeze.
The current budget includes BREA concessions for health care (1.5% of salary) and tuition reimbursement in the amount of $1.4 million. These are offset in the current budget by reinstated budget cuts of the same amount.
The principals’ and supervisors’ associations also have agreed to pick up 1.5% towards their health care premiums. The Superintendent and all non-bargaining personnel are already on board with a one-year wage freeze.
Tuesday, April 27, 2010
Will Collegiality Win the Day?
Officials at the meeting further explained that the impact of such a freeze to the current combined tax levy of Bridgewater and Raritan would be to drop it from 4.95% to 2.83%, a 43% improvement. The actual breakdown for each municipality results in separate levies, each of which is determined by formula.
Yesterday, representatives of each municipality, the board of education, the three school unions, and administrator(s) met in a preliminary closed-door meeting.
Although no communiqués have yet come from that gathering, it’s safe to assume from discussions at Saturday’s Raritan Borough meeting that the key topic would be the question of a wage freeze for the three major bargaining units, the BRPA, the BRSA, and the BREA, unions representing the principals; the supervisors; the teachers, secretaries, and others, respectively. (The Superintendent and non-bargaining personnel have already consented to a one-year wage freeze.)
Further buttressing the assumption that the main topic on the table is a one-year freeze of salaries was the conference call last Friday by Education Commissioner Bret Schundler with municipal and school officials, as reported in The Star-Ledger. Schundler is encouraging “government officials, who will determine local tax levies after reviewing the defeated spending plans to reach out to union leadership during the process.”
Schundler claimed that “There are times when a third party, such as a town council, can help two parties look at another side.” He added, “In a negotiation between a union and a school board, they (municipal officials) are the counter-parties to the discussion.”
Thus, there is no reason to doubt that the critical topic at the moment is whether or not union members will get to vote on a voluntary wage freeze.
Saturday morning at the Raritan Borough Municipal Building, the requests from the audience – virtually all teachers – to Borough officials seemed to be unanimous in not wanting any further cuts to programs or personnel. The exchange was quite informal. It lasted for two and a half hours. At times, there were very personal and emotional pleas made from concerned teachers and other union members. (The BREA has already agreed to $1.4 million in concessions in exchange for a similar amount of reduced cutbacks – a net wash in the budget.)
What would you do if you were a teacher or other union member and knew that taking a full 4.35% wage freeze with no other conditions attached would save programs and the jobs of your colleagues? Would you claim your personal seniority and watch the pink slips go out, or would you take that one-year hit?
The answer is not easy – not if you are the one making the decision. I’m convinced that most people in Bridgewater and Raritan recognize this. They, too, have suffered the pain of absorbing hard economic hits.
We are all waiting for the answer. Will collegiality win the Day?
Photo Commentary: In the picture above, Raritan Borough Mayor Jo-Ann Liptak and the Borough Council take comments from the audience about the failed Bridgewater-Raritan school budget at the April 24th emergency meeting in the Raritan Municipal Building. (Single-click the image for a larger view)
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)