So, I was 40 minutes late to graduation, couldn't find a parking lot I had enough cash for, finally found one that took credit cards (although their credit card reader turned out to be broken), paid about $14 total to park my car today, and had the worst chain-restaurant dinner I have had in many a year.
But the big bad news was this: My union sold me down the river. The local paper has this hip-hip-hooray article saying we've agreed to furloughs (and by the way, is it completely fucked up that I have to get my information about my own contract from "journalists" rather than my union?). Of course, they've got it wrong. A furlough is commonly accepted to mean a day off without pay. We've agreed to a pay
cut. In fact, our school year will be slightly longer. But everyone is "donating" $95 a month back to the district. Less money for the same amount of work.
And sure, it'll save jobs, but not of anyone I know -- it doesn't impact high school one tiny bit, as far as I can tell.
But wait, there's more. Because I am a good person, I might be willing to give up $95 a month to save the jobs of my colleagues, even though they're strangers to me and there's no appreciable benefit to myself. After all, it might make us look better in the media. It might mean that they can work on getting high school jobs back
next.
Part of the agreement (that was not reported on anywhere) is a "contribution" of $15/$20 (15 the first year, 20 the second) to a health care trust. So in fact, our pay cut isn't $95 a month; if you add "donations" and "contributions," it's $110-115.
Oh but wait -- elementary teachers work about an hour less a day, but make the same salary as high school teachers. That's fine -- I've never complained about that. But high school teachers also attend a 90 minute meeting once a week that is voluntary, but that we get paid for (in addition to normal teaching time). It's called Common Planning Time. For this 6 hours of work time, I make another $137 per month (less if there are fewer meetings). Elementary teachers don't get this, and perhaps that's not fair. But now, they're not going to pay for that time anymore. That's $137 less per month for me. Add that to the $115 from earlier, and now I'm losing out on $250 per month. To save the jobs of strangers. It doesn't help my students. It doesn't help my colleagues. It doesn't help me. I don't even get any days off.
Could you live on $250 less every month? I could probably make it work, but it would be a big hit to our budget. Hell, that's $5,000 in two years.
If it gets ratified by the union members (which it probably will -- elementary teachers have less to lose, more to gain, and are a much bigger voting block), I lose a fat wad of money.
If it doesn't get ratified, the next news article will read:
Greedy bastards won't give up less than $100 a month to save young, motivated teachers. So it's pretty much a lose-lose situation.
If you're interested, the rest of the deal is more or less this:
It will take longer to get vested in the retirement system. Sucks for people about to retire, but probably necessary.
They will change some co-pays on prescription drug benefits.
They won't give a rebate on prescription drug co-pays anymore (they used to with Kaiser, up to $200).
They'll contribute a smaller amount to the health coverage of retirees who move out of Sacramento.
They'll try to pass a parcel tax.
They'll close schools the whole week of Thanksgiving, but we'll work two other days we used to have off.
They'll let us use those CPT hours towards our professional development required hours.
And of course, the $95 donation and the $15-20 contribution.
There's also some business in there about trying to do stuff quickly and using the savings elsewhere if we somehow get some extra state or Federal money.
In two years, whatever money we're saving on the health plan through the co-pay changes and whatnot will go back into our salaries as a raise (but there's no guarantee as to how much that will be). (Oh yeah, and we haven't had an actual raise since 2005, so don't imagine we're keeping up with the cost of living.)
Anyway, I'm kind of mad at the whole thing. The party line is that "donations" are better than furloughs because they don't affect retirement, and now we have the "moral high ground" in being able to say "we were the only ones who didn't want to shorten the school year. We were looking out for the kids."
I'm also mad because they should have given us the details earlier. They should give people with personal email addresses the information as soon as it's available instead of printing it, copying it, and driving it to school sites (probably could have gotten us the information a full day sooner). If they HAD to drive it around, they should have hit high schools first, knowing that we're on half days and have to go attend graduation ceremonies (giving us less time to review the information and decide and hold a vote). I mean, honestly it's bullshit that I had to learn the details from blogs, Facebook, the KCRA website, and Sacbee.com. They said they used this survey we took in order to negotiate, but the survey didn't say a blasted thing about pay cuts. It was about
actual furloughs.
I'm still pro-union, and I'm still glad I'm able to represent my site, but I'm not proud to be the one representing SCTA to my colleagues right now.