Sides sparring over benefits, salary as negotiations continue
By Mike McGann, Editor, The Times
EAST MARLBOROUGH — New talks for a contract between the Unionville-Chadds Ford School District and its teachers may be more protracted and complicated than similar talks two years ago, as both sides appear to be far apart on terms for a new three-year deal to replace the pact that expires June 30.
The district held a briefing Friday to discuss its proposal — offering an average of 2.08% percent yearly increase in total compensation (roughly 1.26% of which is salary) — while the teachers’ union publicly revealed its position (seeking a roughly 5.01% increase), via a presentation released via social media. The district’s proposal will be made public during the Board of Education meeting Monday night.
The two sides have been talking a couple of times a month since December, but don’t appear close to a deal.
The difference in the two proposals amounts to about $1 million in the 2015-16 budget year, out of a proposed budget of about $80 million.
Although published reports that suggest that the district is asking teachers to accept pay cuts are not accurate — the three-year deal the district proposed calls for salary increases of .58%, 1% and 2.5% — the two sides have not found common ground as yet.
At least from the presentations released Friday, it appears the two sides are far apart — and the potential is there for a more contentious process, more akin to the stormy 2010-11 talks which required state mediation and imposition of status quo terms, as opposed to the calmer 2012-13 talks, especially reflected different takes on the situation in both presentations.
The union argues it hasn’t seen a salary increase since 2012 and that total salary is down since 2009-10 and that it is being asked to accept the “worst” health care package in the county. The district is countering that Act 1 tax limits and spikes in the costs of teacher pensions will lead lead to layoffs, program cuts and larger class sizes in the district if the union’s proposal were accepted.
While the district offered up board members Gregg Lindner and Keith Knauss — two of the three board members on the negotiating team and Superintendent of Schools John Sanville to make the district’s case, Unionville-Chadds Ford Education Association President Scott Broomall did not respond to a request for comment.
In its presentation, the teachers union blasts the district’s proposal, saying that it “would keep teacher salaries frozen to the point that we would be average or below average compared to other schools in the county.”
The district, on the other hand, said that granting the union proposal would be difficult to justify to the public — as the salary increases are larger than the average area resident is seeing, with most residents seeing little more than 2% salary hikes yearly.
Also, Lindner and Knauss noted, just keeping a status quo situation, with no raises and no changes to benefits, would amount to a 1.85% increase in the 2015-26 budget year. The last time the district imposed status quo, teachers stopped participating in non-mandatory afters school activities, leading to the cancellation of a number of student activities.
While both sides stick to their talking points as part of the ongoing negotiation, the reality for parents and taxpayers may be a bit more difficult to decipher. While neither side’s claims technically are inaccurate, it is important to put each of the arguments in some context to evaluate their weight.
While it is true that overall professional staff salary is lower than it was in 2009-10, much of that is because of a lower headcount. Current professional staff totals 318, while during the 2009-10 school year, staff was as high as 332. Reacting to the financial downturn of 2008-11 and mounting pension costs, the district cut personnel counts in administration, support and professional staff.
However, the teachers argue that the district is asking the professional staff to, in essence, “double dip” — again contribute to the pension payments they have been making all along by taking smaller salary increases. Much of the current pension crisis stems from a 2001 state law that allowed the state and school districts to underpay into the pension system — in some years as little as 1% of salary — while teachers continued to pay 7.5% or more of their salary into the fund.
Teachers also argue their salary scale is already lower than four neighboring districts, Kennett, Great Valley, Tredyffrin-Easttown and Phoenixville and continuing such policy will make it difficult for the district to retain and recruit top new teachers.
The district leadership disagrees and says Unionville-Chadds Ford remains a top destination for teachers in the area — and clearly among the best places for teaching staff in the county.
“In all the time I’ve been on the board, I don’t recall ever losing a teacher to a neighboring district,” Board Finance Chair Keith Knauss said.
Where the battle lines though appear to be drawn is over healthcare. While district officials declined to be specific in what changes they were seeking, the UCFEA blasted the district proposal, saying it “would give new professional staff the worst health package in the county” and exclude spouses from the plan.
The district proposal does call for “carve outs” in cases where spouses have similar benefits available at work, they would be required to take them, rather than use school district benefits. Benefits would be available for spouses without healthcare plans — and the proposal matches current policy for administrators and support staff in the district.
The practice, in part because of the Affordable Care Act, is becoming more common in the business world and even in the public sector, although Unionville-Chadds Ford would be the first school district to implement such a plan in Chester County, were both sides to agree to it.
