The RTMEA Position Objectives for a Settlement Negotiate. We have - - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

The RTMEA Position

Objectives for a Settlement

 Negotiate. We have not been across the table with the

Board since October.

 A fair and equitable contract for the members and the

community.

 Set a standard for future negotiations.

Negotiation’s History

 Began in January 2009.  Board threatened to keep everyone out of school until

September 1, 2009.

 Slow progress to October.  In November, the Board rolled back their economic

position to their January proposal.

 Refused intensive mediation and requested fact-

finding.

 One member attended fact-finding and we have not

met since October.

 Why did we take a strike vote?

What are the issues?

 Involuntary Transfer  Association Leave  Hours – Teacher day and Teacher Year  Planning Periods  Base Compensation – Wage Scales  Supplemental Compensation  Insurance Benefits  Tuition Reimbursement  Class Coverage  Sick Leave Buy-back  Grievance Procedure

…..I am persuaded that the District has been a prudent guardian of the publics’ funds and, as a result, does not appear to be facing imminent financial crisis. Be that as it may, the District has recently experienced a reduction in its tax base, and is justifiably concerned about increasing its wage obligations in a challenging economic environment and certain increases in the costs of health care and pension. I am also persuaded that based upon historical experience in this and other districts, the incremental costs the District will actually be required to pay will likely be less than it has

• projected. I am also of the view that the Association has

made a good case that its members should receive an actual increase in wages over-and-above increases resulting only from movement on the salary schedule.

Fact-Finder’s Decision

Fact-Finder’s Report

 Proposed vs. actual

increases?

 Have not paid a proposed

increase in ten years.

 Cumulative average from

01-04 was 10.47% less than bargained.

 Cumulative average from

05-08 was 9.31% less than bargained.

Year RTM Proposed RTM Actual Savings 2001 4.90% 2.98%

• 1.92%

2002 4.90%

• 1.21%
• 6.11%

2003 4.90% 3.63%

• 1.27%

2004 4.90% 3.72%

• 1.18%

2005 4.00%

• 0.82%
• 4.82%

2006 4.00% 3.85%

• 0.15%

2007 4.00% 1.80%

• 2.20%

2008 4.00% 1.85%

• 2.15%

2009

Fact-Finder’s Report

 Since the last

time we negotiated a contract, our actual average is almost $13,000 less than projected.

Year RTM Proposed RTM Actual Projected Average Actual Average 2001 4.90% 2.98% $58,992 2002 4.90%

• 1.21%

$ 61,883 $58,281 2003 4.90% 3.63% $ 64,915 $60,396 2004 4.90% 3.72% $ 68,096 $62,644 2005 4.00%

• 0.82%

$ 70,820 $62,132 2006 4.00% 3.85% $ 73,652 $64,524 2007 4.00% 1.80% $ 76,598 $65,688 2008 4.00% 1.85% $ 79,662 $66,904 2009

Fact-Finder’s Report

 While our members

have not been able to keep up with CPI, our tax money has been growing in the General Fund.

 Despite the large

balance, a 3.5% increase has been recommended for next year.

Year General Fund Balance Change 2003 $4,893,374 2004 $5,447,842 11.3% 2005 $6,575,399 20.7% 2006 $6,579,187 0.1% 2007 $8,628,165 31.1% 2008 $10,956,524 27.0% 2009 $14,491,702 32.3%

$0 $2,000,000 $4,000,000 $6,000,000 $8,000,000 $10,000,000 $12,000,000 $14,000,000 $16,000,000 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 General Fund Balance $4,893,374 $5,447,842 $6,575,399 $6,579,187 $8,628,165 $10,956,524 $14,491,702 Balance

The General Fund

Funding of our Pension

• Since 2001, our members contributed an average of 7.1%
• The district contribution has averaged 4.23%
• The district received a 50% refund each year
• The final district contribution was actually 2.2%

Rose-Tree Media Budget

2008-09 Budget 2009-10 Budget 1000.100 $26,906,160.00 1000.100 $28,749,782.00 2100.100 $2,419,766.00 2100.100 $2,551,169.00 2200.100 $4,053,649.00 2200.100 $4,030,305.00 2400.100 $559,889.00 2400.100 $562,364.00 Totals $33,939,464.00 Totals $35,893,620.00 Salaries $22,178,712.45 Salaries $23,455,711.52 Cost % 65.35% Cost % 65.35% Increase 5.76%

• There are four lines in the budget labeled “Instructional

Salaries.”

• 65% of the total was spent on our members.
• 65% of the this year’s budget would allow a 5.76 %

proposed increase.

Our Experience and Education

Bachelor Permanent Masters Masters + 20 Masters + 40 Masters + 60 PHD 2009 14 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 13 2.00 0.00 1.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 3.00 12 2.30 0.00 1.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 3.30 11 5.00 0.00 5.80 0.00 1.00 0.00 0.00 11.80 10 6.00 0.00 5.80 0.00 1.00 1.00 0.00 13.80 9 9.00 0.00 7.00 0.00 1.00 0.00 0.00 17.00 8 8.95 2.00 8.80 2.00 6.00 3.00 0.00 30.75 7 1.00 3.00 19.00 5.00 1.00 1.00 0.00 30.00 6 0.00 1.00 10.00 2.00 2.00 3.00 0.00 18.00 5 3.00 14.00 3.00 3.00 4.00 0.00 27.00 4 0.00 8.00 1.00 3.00 2.00 0.00 14.00 3 3.00 11.00 3.00 1.00 7.00 0.00 25.00 2 0.00 6.00 0.80 0.00 2.00 0.00 8.80 1 0.00 5.25 1.00 1.00 4.00 0.00 11.25 5.00 52.40 8.50 9.00 30.00 3.00 107.90 Staff: 321.60

Incremental Cost for 2009

Bachelor Permanent Masters Masters + 20 Masters + 40 Masters + 60 PHD 1 2 $323.00 $155.00 $300.00 $300.00 $300.00 $300.00 $300.00 3 $251.00 $206.00 $300.00 $300.00 $300.00 $300.00 $300.00 4 $191.00 $211.00 $300.00 $300.00 $300.00 $300.00 $300.00 5 $349.00 $290.00 $300.00 $300.00 $300.00 $300.00 $300.00 6 $374.00 $365.00 $2,059.00 $2,542.00 $1,730.00 $2,292.00 $2,314.00 7 $751.00 $1,119.00 $2,275.00 $1,943.00 $1,728.00 $2,292.00 $2,319.00 8 $1,804.00 $1,373.00 $2,276.00 $2,760.00 $2,325.00 $2,893.00 $2,318.00 9 $1,078.00 $2,427.00 $2,167.00 $2,758.00 $3,662.00 $4,200.00 $4,245.00 10 $1,390.00 $2,166.00 $2,664.00 $3,665.00 $4,201.00 $4,247.00 11 $3,278.00 $3,034.00 $3,315.00 $3,970.00 $4,198.00 $4,247.00 12 $4,855.00 $4,334.00 $4,377.00 $2,324.00 $4,202.00 $4,245.00 13 $6,073.00 $5,634.00 $7,345.00 $6,949.00 $3,602.00 $4,248.00 14 $5,218.00 $6,501.00 $5,466.00 $5,166.00 $2,256.00 $2,281.00 15 $5,615.00 $6,501.00 $4,853.00 $4,148.00 $4,597.00 $4,699.00

How do we compare?

1 Tredyffrin

• Eastown School District (Chester)

2 Lower Merion School District (Montgomery) 3 Radnor Township School District (Delaware) 4 Unionville

• Chadds Ford (Chester)

5 Wallingford

• Swarthmore (Delaware)

6 Upper Dublin School District (Montgomery) 7 New Hope

• Solebury School District (Bucks)

8 Great Valley School District (Chester) 9 Methacton School District (Montgomery) 10 Central Bucks School District (Bucks) 11 Wissahickon School District (Montgomery) 12 Rose Tree Media School District (Delaware) 13 Haverford Township School District (Delaware) 14 Hatboro

• Horsham School District (Montgomery)

15 Council Rock School District (Bucks) 16 Colonial School District (Montgomery) 17 Lower Moreland Township (Montgomery) 18 Garnet Valley School District (Delaware) 19 Downingtown Area School District (Chester) 20 Haddonfield Borough (Camden)

• From 2007 to 2008, we

went from #23 to #12.

• 7 of 11 Central League

schools are ranked in the top 20.

• 9 of 11 Central League

schools are ranked in the top 50.

• We are ranked with an *

‘*’ – best bang for your buck!

Central League Comparisons

 Compensation for

• ur veteran

teachers is below average compared to our peers

 Our members pay

more than anyone for benefits

 Our tuition

reimbursement ranks 10th out of 11

*grandfathered career rate. School District Career Rate Lower Merion: $101,129.00 Radnor: $ 97,066.00 Wallingford-Swarthmore: $ 96,000.00 Tredyffrin-Easttown: $ 94,900.00 Haverford: $ 90,070.00 Springfield: $ 88,000.00 Garnet Valley: $ 84,300.00 Upper Darby: $ 88,400.00 *Ridley: $ 72,825.00 Average: $ 90,298.89 Rose-Tree Media: $ 87,329.00 Increase to reach League avg 3.40% Compare to other Top 50 6.57%

Central League Comparisons

$- $20,000.00 $40,000.00 $60,000.00 $80,000.00 $100,000.00 $120,000.00 Lower Merion $101,129.00 Radnor $97,066.00 Wallingford $97,066.00 Tredyffrin-Easttown $94,900.00 Haverford $90,070.00 Upper Darby $88,400.00 Springfield $88,000.00 Rose-Tree Media $87,329.00 Garnet Valley $84,300.00 Ridley $72,825.00

R

• s

e T r e e M e d i a

Salary Comparison

2005-06 2009-10 Difference Increase needed to give 96 veteran teachers a cost of living increase (30% of our members) Burnett, Valerie $ 115,134 Bluebello, Linda $ 135,394 $ 20,260 Callahan, Anne $ 86,942 Callahan, Anne $ 135,394 $ 48,452 Learn, Sharon $ 127,030 Eves, Grace $ 135,394 $ 8,364 Kerr, Denise $ 148,000 Kerr, Denise $ 174,115 $ 26,115 Golder, Susan $ 116,000 Gilbert, Angela $ 135,394 $ 19,394 Linden, Patricia $ 94,990 Linden, Patricia $ 135,394 $ 40,404 Taylor, Steve $ 116,000 Taylor, Steve $ 135,394 $ 19,394 TOTAL TOTAL % Change Administration $ 804,096 $ 986,479 22.68% Difference: $ 182,383 $ 181,876 All RTMEA Members $ 20,596,758 $ 22,178,712 7.68% One Veteran Teacher $ 82,414 $ 87,329 5.96%

$0 $20,000 $40,000 $60,000 $80,000 $100,000 $120,000 $140,000 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009

$82,414 $84,070 $85,751 $87,329 $87,329 $86,942 $100,000 $111,532 $130,500 $135,394

Salary

Teacher vs. Administrator

Compensation Summary

 The position of RTMEA is to ensure a Cost of Living

increase for our senior members.

 A cost of living plus increment raise would be a

projected average increase of 5.4% per year.

 Our request is less than the budgeted increase for this

year.

 The district is in a position to offer a fair contract for

• ur members since they have saved millions of dollars
• ver the past four years on account of retirements and

attrition.

What are the issues?

 Involuntary Transfer  Association Leave  Hours – Teacher day and Teacher Year  Planning Periods  Base Compensation – Wage Scales  Supplemental Compensation  Insurance Benefits  Tuition Reimbursement  Class Coverage  Sick Leave Buy-back  Grievance Procedure

Supplemental Compensation

 We would like to add 41 current positions plus ten new

positions.

 A cost of living increase throughout the contract.

Fact-Finder’s Recommendations ...I see no good reason why the 41 existing positions should not be added to the agreement’s list of supplements. As for the 10 new positions proposed by the association, the Agreement appears to grant the District the right to determine new positions and, consistent therewith, I would not recommend that negotiations over an overall agreement be burdened with such issues. As for increases in Supplemental Compensation, I do not believe the District’s current position reflects the importance of the student activities made possible by supplements, and recommend that the supplements be increase by 2.5% in the second and forth years of the Agreement.

What are the issues?

 Involuntary Transfer  Association Leave  Hours – Teacher day and Teacher Year  Planning Periods  Base Compensation – Wage Scales  Supplemental Compensation  Insurance Benefits  Tuition Reimbursement  Class Coverage  Sick Leave Buy-back  Grievance Procedure

Health Care Recommendation

… I recommend that the District be given the flexibility to attempt to control costs by changing its core insurance and prescription plans as proposed and that the Agreement require a 9% employee premium contribution for the term of the agreement. I recommend that the dental insurance premium be increased to $6.50, that there be no change to the vision plan contribution of $6.00 per month and that the of life insurance coverage limit be increased to $65,000.

0.00% 1.00% 2.00% 3.00% 4.00% 5.00% 6.00% 7.00% 8.00% 9.00%

0.00% 2.50% 2.07% 3.90% 8.00% 8.00% 0.00% 0.00% 4.52% 9.00%

Central League Co-payment

What are the issues?

 Involuntary Transfer  Association Leave  Hours – Teacher day and Teacher Year  Planning Periods  Base Compensation – Wage Scales  Supplemental Compensation  Insurance Benefits  Tuition Reimbursement  Class Coverage  Sick Leave Buy-back  Grievance Procedure

Tuition Reimbursement

….The District cannot expect the Association to knowingly agree upon language that will effectively exclude 90% of its members from a benefit. Considering present and foreseeable economic realities, it is equally unrealistic for the Association to believe that the District has agreed that it will pay up to $3,882,240.00 per year in tuition (18 credits per year @ at up to approximately $640 per credit for a potential yearly individual total of $11,520 for 337 members of the bargaining unit.) Given the status of bargaining on this issue and the presentations of the parties, I recommend that the system for distribution contained in the 2005-2009 Agreement continue and that the tuition reimbursement pool for the 2009-2010 year be set at $120,000 and be increased by $10,000 for each year of the Agreement.

500000 1000000 1500000 2000000 2500000

$200,000$150,000 $41,000 $2,315,520 $932,640 $250,000 $217,000 $200,000 $514,560 $110,000

Tuition Reimbursement

• Our position has been full reimbursement for two classes
• r six credits per year.
• Three districts reimburse per teacher.
• Eight districts reimburse members from a pool.

How will work to rule effect the future?

The classroom. Athletic and extra-curricular

participation.

Summer preparation.