of effect of ratified contract
November 22, 2004
Bridgewater
Raynham
Easton
East Bridgewater
West Bridgewater
Massachusetts
Legislation & Politics
USA
Legislation & Politics
World
Education
Bridgewater-Raynham Schools
Massachusetts
USA
Archives (past stories)
Opinion/Analysis
Joseph Gillis Jr.
You can do something!
I was happy to see quick turnaround on my request for detailed teacher information in order to analyze the effects of the ratified contract. I did not receive the date information for "current years of service" - and this is important to accurately predict costs. However, there are some details that can be learned from the 13-page printed report:
a) In 2003, the Dept of Ed website (corrected per Supt. McIntryre's request) showed 352.8 teachers with an average salary of $56,390. The data provided lists 343 teachers with a computed average salary of $61,750. {I did not request part-time teachers, and there was no notation of teacher status, so for calculation purposes all teachers were considered full-time} Note that this salary does not reflect any Longevity payments that many teachers currently qualify for - current contract sets these at between $600 and $2000 extra each year based on consecutive years of service.
b) Of the 343 teachers listed, 184 were recorded at 'Step 13'. This is the highest contract step in the current agreement. 53.6% of the staff has this designation.
c) Based on the Hire Date in the printed report, 79 have 20 or more years of service. This represents 23% of total teaching staff.
d) 63 teachers, or 18.4% of the staff, have at least 13 years of service, but total service could not be accurately determined from the data provided. Since the "current years of service" was not provided, nor was a second date (effective start date) that would allow for its calculation, I had to do a determination. I flagged any teacher who was a 'Step 13', but the provided hire date was less than 13 years. These could be teachers brought in from another system, or teachers who returned to B-R after an absence. They correctly receive compensation at their step level, however this step is based on a piece of data not provided. {There is nothing incorrect about this - my company maintains multiple dates for these situations - and that is why we report more than one date when analyzing staff.}
It is unclear what to make of the listing of 343 teachers. I had been repeatedly told of the many teachers lost over the past couple of years. Ten fewer teachers.
As far as the number of teachers that would be elegible for the 'Super Step 20', that number is between 79 and 142. These teachers would be eligible in year 2 of the contract for the 'Super Step' extra salary of $1000. They would also comprise the group of eligible participants in the new 'Longevity Plan' allowing for the extra $6000 in lieu of Sick Time Buyback and future claims to any other 'Longevity Plan' payments.
Based on the current contract steps and formulas, the Sick-Time Buyback appears to max at about $20,284. (Max days is 185, multiplied by 27.5%, multiplied by salary (max $73,360), divided by 184 days.)
