No surprise: MPS is cutting teachers because of out-of-control employee costs
Yesterday it was reported that Milwaukee Public Schools is cutting 684 jobs, which includes 260 teachers. The reason? Out-of-control employee costs, thanks to the teachers’ union.
The first thing you’ll hear is how the district doesn’t have money, and more tax money needs to be directed to MPS because it’s for the children. But the problem is not that the district doesn’t have enough money. I’ve reported several times on how the enrollment is declining while the budget keeps going up. The total budget gets increased year after year, and on a per student basis, the budget is skyrocketing. Witness:
The problem with MPS is the employee costs. In March it was reported that the average MPS teacher salary is $56,500, with an average benefits package of $43,505, for total average compensation of $100,005 per teacher. I’m not saying teaching isn’t a tough job or that teachers aren’t important. But I do think the compensation package in MPS is way too high. Remember that this is a 9 month job, so if you annualized the pay and benefits, that equals an annual compensation package of over $133,000.
Enrollment is going to go down again, but the district still wants more than $1.3 billion for the school year. The newspaper reports:
Generally, staffing reductions each year follow projected reductions in the number of students in the district. MPS expects enrollment to decline by 2.1% next year, but staff cuts will be three times that much, or 6.4% of its workforce. The proposed budget cuts 260.5 teaching positions, or 4.5% of the teaching staff.
The district is asking for $1,314,279,423, which would be a slight decrease from the prior school year. But with enrollment expected to fall 2.1%, that still means the district wants to spend $16,352 per student. And they’re telling us it’s impossible to provide a good education for that amount of money???
The problem again goes back to compensation and benefits. MPS is reporting that for every $1.00 it spends on wages in 2010-2011, it will spend $0.74 on benefits. In the real world (read: private industry which is self-sustaining), benefits typically cost about 30% of wages. MPS has a benefits cost nearly 2.5 times higher than the real world.
The only way MPS can deal with such high compensation costs is by reducing the number of employees. It’s simple math. (Not that I expect anyone in MPS to be able to do math.)
I’m sorry, but there are plenty of companies that offer very good benefits to their employees at a much lower cost than MPS offers them. It is time to face reality: We cannot afford the kind of pay and benefits demanded by the teacher’s union.
The teachers cry that there are too many children in each classroom, yet the teachers themselves have created this situation. It would be simple to start cutting benefit costs. One way would be to put the employees in a more cost-effective health insurance option. But the union won’t allow it. By demanding such high pay and benefits, the teachers are effectively forcing the district to reduce the number of teachers.
MPS teachers could still have jobs with excellent pay and benefits if they were willing to be reasonable. They have the ability to force their union to work with the district to fix the budget problem. They simply won’t do it.
The “beauty” of the situation is that the union can effectively hold the child’s education for ransom. Beyond that public school serves as daycare for may fully employed family units (I guess there is a chance that this will be less a worry with unemployment being what it is). This means that any disruption to school services which results in more days out of school is a direct pain to many of the people in the voting district. In short the union negotiates from a position with leverage which makes reclaiming any established overages painful and unsightly.
I would love to see more districts pull the plug. Fire everyone, renegotiate contracts from scratch. Renegotiate with a vengence. There are plenty of people with education degrees and teaching licences who are currently unemployed – I’d be willing to bet they would work with out union representation for the opportunity to be employed. There was a time when unions were benificial. There will be a time when the power swings to far to the employers side…. that time is not now. Abandon your unions, because their leadership has lost sight of their purpose (and it is the members that will suffer not the leaders).
-Drive By
Average sala ray $56,000 per year. Poverty level at best. Benefit package which includes retirement and health insurance should not be the metric against which teachers are measured. This situation is no different than a private employer offering to pay 100% of health insurance costs for employees and fully fund a retirement package. This situation exists not only in Milwaukee but throughout the state. Every single school district is being forced to cut educational staff or eliminate programs within the district because of funding issues. State funding for schools is decreased; charter schools are pulling dollars away from the district; enrollment is down etc. Has anyone questioned why charter schools don’t have any special ed, emotioinally disturbed kids etc? They are all sitting in MPS as the charter schools are not required to take special ed kids. Has anyone looked at no-educational staffing at MPS? For example why does a school need a 2 boiler engineers and 2 apprentice boiler engineers? Why are these functions not outsourced to private contractors? Is it fair to the kids to have 35-38 kids in a class. No the teachers did not per se bring this upon themselves – more of a cram down. It’s just like the private industry mantra – does more, with less resources for less money.
Sorry, but $56,000 is NOT poverty level by any stretch, especially not when you consider that the employees only have to work 9 months out of the year. And yes, the overly generous benefits packages SHOULD be factored in when looking at compensation. The fact is that the health and retirement benefits are far beyond what is provided in the public sector, and that is why the cost is so high.
People like you keep saying that there are “funding problems” with schools. That’s completely false. If there is a problem, it is a SPENDING problem. MPS gets more and more money each year, and the amount is SIGNIFICANTLY more when you look at it on a per-student basis. There is no funding problem, only a spending problem. So if the teachers continue to demand pay and benefits that are far beyond a reasonable level, then the only way to cut costs is by cutting teachers. If the teachers would be willing to accept pay and benefits at a reasonable level, then more teachers could be employed. The teachers have made their choice, and now they must live with the consequences.
An you cite the “private industry mantra”.of do more with less… and you of course disregard reality. In MPS they are actually DOING LESS WITH MORE. And they still want even more and want to do even less.
It’s obvious that you just don’t get it Tracy. You have not sat through school budget meetings, you have not observed 35-38 kids a a classroom. It’s not just MPS. Go visit the Shorewood School District website and you will read about the budget problems there -
In Superintendent McCann’s remarks prior to the discussing the budget recommendations on March 15, he shared a list of possible budget cuts that were discussed but not included in the budget recommendations at that time for a variety of reasons. These included:
• Begin band and orchestra in sixth grade
• Eliminate Directorships for performing arts staff
• Eliminate all budget support for athletics or ask students to pay full cost to play sport
• Eliminate budget support of all clubs or ask students to pay full cost of club
• Eliminate budget support for drama productions or ask students to pay cost of
participation
• Eliminate SIS librarian (.5)
• Elementary art no longer taught by specialist and taught by classroom teacher under
direction of SHS/SIS art teacher
• Elementary music no longer taught by specialist and taught by classroom teacher
under direction of SIS/SHS music teacher
• Eliminate one elementary guidance counselor
• Eliminate elementary world language grade 4-6
• Reduce Director of Instruction by 30%
• Reduce health aide positions by 20%
Again please note, these items are not included in the current recommendations. The district still has an approximate $203,000 gap between revenue and expense for the 2010-2011 school year. The difference between this amount and the amount reflected in the budget recommendation packet is the district received notice at the end of March that we will have a $47,000 reduction in Title I funding for the 2010-2011 school year due to a large reduction in Title 1 federal funds to the state.
I am sure that the same postings would apply to Nicolet, Glendale, Whitefish Bay, Wauwatosa, South Milwaukee etc. All these schools are going to do more with less. Get out of your Ivory Tower and come visit the trenches where the battles are being fought.
I haven’t looked at the budgets for other schools. This article is about MPS. MPS is not doing “more with less.” They are doing less with MORE. The numbers don’t lie. MPS gets more and more money each year. Classroom sizes are growing, but it’s not because MPS doesn’t have enough money. It’s because of the way they spend it. They’re getting more money, but the only way to make the budget work is to reduce teachers and all sorts of “extras” so that the outrageous teacher salaries and benefits can be paid.
There is no ivory tower. This is simple math. The cries of “we need more money” are simply crap. MPS is getting more money. It’s how they choose to spend it that’s the problem.
The money is spent wrong wrong wrong.
Thirty students per teacher equals around $500k per teach/class pair.
Assume around $120k for teacher (salary $60k +benefits $40k + $20k defined pension contribution into an IRA, no guaranteed benefit pension.),
That leaves $380k.
Buy each kid 2 netbooks (1 for home, 1 for school)…$50k
Buy each kid a set of books new each year…$10k.
Buy each kid breakfast and a box lunch each school day…$50k
Let the teacher sped $5k decorating/outfitting the room at the beginning of the school year and $500 every month afterward.
So, we are now down to $260k.
How much would it cost to rent a room for a class, along with tables, insurance, utilities, and high speed internet? Let’s say $50k (way too much, I think though).
That still leaves $200k per teacher/class pair.
Does anybody think the class I describe is worse off? It is clearly better off and at 60% of the current cost of educating a student.
Wouldn’t something like this [1] be better for students, taxpayers and teachers? I think so. Bureaucrats and administrators won’t like it though.
[1]
http://purpleslog.wordpress.com/2007/06/06/my-dream-for-a-21st-century-us-educational-system/
I don’t think any of those MPS business/operations cost savings from that study [1] were ever enacted either.
[1]
http://www.jsonline.com/news/education/42716407.html
Did you happen to take a look at administrative expenses relative to student enrollment? I would be interested to see if there was a comparable reduction in this expense. I am guessing not.
Incidently I did take a look at some of the Shorewood School District budget information. It appears enrollment has gone down by 20 students but they are requesting a budget increase of $795,000. Sound to me like doing less with more is the mantra there as well.
Let me correct myself a budget gap of $795,000, and overall budget increase of $100,000 despite student reductions.
Oh, Education Maven,
This is such a hot button with me, because I see about 20-30 school district budgets per year. I respond to questions about appropriations and spending. I read board minutes for the entire year and am very involved in the financial reporting (I can tell you exactly what the difference is between fund balance and net assets as an example). I think it’s safe to say – I’m in the trenches (just not on your side).
See, I think your disconnect comes at line one of your first post. Average salary of $56,000 (last census had $52k as median household income) being poverty level is insane. If you said – “thats the median household income for the state” I might believe that.. but certainly wouldn’t have sympathy. What your saying is that the average teacher makes in 9 months more money than half the households (some dual income) in the state. And has a nice benifit package to boot… (thanks unions). Seriously – what % of the private sector has 100% paid for health insurance and a defined benifit retirement plan paid for? Poverty level… if there is white tower thinking here I believe I know where it is occuring.
I know I know.. the budget process is a pain in the butt. Every year that you don’t have substantial teacher turnover that pesky payroll cost line increases (manditory step increase? pay for seniority over perfromance? Thanks unions?). Even when then number of students enrolled decreases. Did your district enact emergency salary freezes or eliminate COLA adjustments? Or are you saying that nobody in administration thought that the revenue number used in the budget was subject to changing with the real world changes. I think it’s more likely that you have competent people involved in the planning it’s just that their hands are tied on 90%(or greater) of the budget which is required for matching federal funding, paying debt service, and union contracts. None of those three items base themselves on real world conditions.
The impact is that when the real world seeps into your cozy public sector education corp, (which is what a SD is) by way of decreased state tax collections which impact funding levels, 90% of your budget is locked in and unable to adjust. You laundry list of potential cuts… that is your fight for 10% of the budget that remains.
Want to fix this? Break the system. Federal funding for schools is an abomination in educational impact and administrative upkeep – kill it. States can collect and distribute tax just as well as the feds. Debt service, disallow special governmental districts from issuing bonds (up financing the new building is going to get more interesting). Payroll – break the union stranglehold. I know plenty of newly minted hungry teachers that would love an opportunity to do the job. I bet they would work for less and maybe even accept a defined contribution retirement plan.
Oh, and I’m not soft on administrative overhead either. We need fewer school districts with more schools. Lets get some economies of scale going in this information age. We dont need a finance director and superintendent for every 4-6 schools. We know that teacher to student ratios are getting worse… I bet admin to school ratio is getting “better” over time.
Yes it’s broken – I wait for the comming colapse so we can rebuild. And looking at state budgets and income projections… it is an issue of when not if.
To Education Maven:
Number 1:
I go to a Private University and my master degree full time classes do not come anywhere near 16,000/year!!!
Number 2: $56,000/year (180 days of actual work as required by state law) equates to $38.89/hr. Maybe you feel that is poverty, but I for one wished I made that much. (Average wage in WI is only 38,500 in 2009). If they actually worked 48 weeks (240 days or a 50% increase) they would pull in a $84,000/year which is hardly poverty (less than $22,500/year with a family of 4) see http://aspe.hhs.gov/poverty/09poverty.shtml
If you extrapolate out to just 56K that would mean a family of 13!!!
Number 3: Show me a classroom of 35-38. Name the school and which class is taught… You’ll be hard pressed to find one without at least 1 most likely 2 aides!!! For the most part the grades 1-6 averaged just 22 according to WEAC!!! If you look at the private high schools vs public high schools you’ll find that they are about 2-3 times larger in the private than public. (see http://www.trulia.com/school-district/WI-Milwaukee_County/Milwaukee_Public_Schools/ this lists all High Schools in Milwaukee)!!!
I suggest you go back to MPS and learn that (oops sorry less than 50% graduation, that would be difficult for you to do), basic econ101.