For the first time in several years, the terms of a new union contract for school district employees will be known before a school budget vote in New Rochelle, based on information announced today by F.U.S.E., the bargaining unit which represents almost all school district employees. F.U.S.E. President Martin Daly announced to members today detailed information about the proposed contract settlement with the City School District of New Rochelle.
F.U.S.E. Members will get an “across the board raise” of 2.1%, effective July 1 or September 15, 2012 and a 2.6% “across the board the raise” effective July 1 or September 15, 2013. The 0% “across the board” raise, “step” advancement, longevity increment for 2011-12 were not affected. The different start dates reflect that there was “10 month” and “12 month” employees.
According to the F.U.S.E. announcement, the District had proposed raising health insurance premium to 15%, reducing the number of sick/personal days members could accrue each year and re-structuring the salary table but none of these changes were adopted in the proposed settlement. The union made a number of demands that are in the proposed settlement including one major change — providing health insurance for “domestic partners” of staff members.
City Hall Hours will change on a trial basis for one year to run from 8:00am – 4:30pm including a one hour lunch. After one year, a determination will be made if service to schools or the public has been negatively impacted as a result of the change. If not, the hours will become permanent.
There were other changes to use of vacation days for sick leave, increase for earning degrees and educational stipends, vacation days and compensatory time shall be counted as “hours worked” in accruing hours for overtime in a single work week. Sick days and personal days do not count as hours worked. Employees in non-competitive Civil Service titles are laid off in order of inverse seniority, with a few specified exceptions. This is a protection that is not extended by Civil Service Law, but was negotiated by our union for these employees a number of years ago. This does not apply to re-hiring of these employees.
A much-in-the-news topics has been performance reviews for teachers and principals and seniority rights. Daly informed members:
Last week, the State Education Department (SED) has received a report from the Task Force on Principal and Teacher Evaluation. This report is strictly advisory. The SED has not yet issued regulations that would impact the parameters of how the changes in legislation enacted last year must be implemented in local districts. Given that the regulations are not in place, the FUSE and the district have agreed to the following “placeholder” language:
“The parties will continue to negotiate to implement the professional staff evaluation procedures required by Education Law 3012-c and any other applicable legislation. The parties have agreed that appeals of the professional staff ratings will be limited to appeals from “unsatisfactory” ratings and will end with the Superintendent of Schools provided however that in the event Education Law 2510 shall be amended or replaced so as to eliminate “last-in-first-out” rules applicable to layoffs the parties will re-open negotiations with respect to (a) the ratings appeals process and (b) with respect to the criteria which shall be applied
to layoffs which are made other than by inverse seniority.”
The union will hold a general membership meeting on Monday, April 25 at 3:30 and at 4:30 PM to answer questions about the proposed settlement. The membership will vote by ballot in each building on Wednesday, April 27.
Based on a prior statement by Daly, “pink slips” to those staff being terminated as part of the new school budget will be distributed in the coming days.
It is not yet the time to proclaim, “Hallelujah!”
Nice that the public is now enabled to consider a cost factor directly comprising 70% of the budget before voting on the 2011/2012 spending plan. Not nice that there will be scant time by election time for the proposed contract to be circulated to those adult members of the New Rochelle voting public conscious and conscientious enough to care. Extremely not nice that there will be barely a week (?) for citizens to react to the union vote yea or nay (though I suppose it really does not matter; the staff would have to be deranged not to accept salary INCREASES IN THE MIDDLE OF THE WORST RECESSION SINCE THE MIDDLE OF THE LAST CENTURY!).
Positively disgraceful that increases have been offered at all by the management-side (give me a break!) negotiators in this wretched economy of no jobs, no job-growth, and (we should be thankful) 0% inflation. Objectionable that a benefit (domestic partner coverage) would even be considered in this period. The offenses are compounded by the fact that restructuring of the salary table and increasing employees’ contribution to health coverage et al. did not even make it to the proposal. Has anyone in the New Rochelle management-side (give me a break!) negotiating team ever heard of union-side “concessions” or “givebacks?”
So it goes in the public employee workers’ paradise of New Rochelle, NY. “Taxpayers of the World, Unite!”
Where will the proposed 4.5% increase end up at, my bet is 6.3%
How are they planning to stay under Cuomo’s 2% tax cap? You can’t when you’re doling out raises that are over the limit to begin with.
Why don’t we just hand over the keys to the union? They already run the show and obviously no one cares. Why anyone in their right mind could vote for the school budget is beyond me when you hear this kind of news. I’m really starting to regret moving here, the bad news never stops.
Don’t forget, last year we approved a 3.8% tax increase and it turned out to be 5.2% so its anyone’s guess where this years 4.5% increase will end up at but I’m betting around 6.3% and who can afford to pay these increases?
yes and no
There is not a direct correlation between 2.1% across the board pay increase and a 2% tax cap. All salary and benefits account for 70% of the expenses of the district and some fraction of that is the salaries to FUSE members. I am sure someone smarter than me can run these numbers to translate what a 1% across the board FUSE increase means in terms of tax increase.