SALEM – A longstanding dispute over MSAD 58 teacher contracts went public Tuesday, with the school board and teachers union releasing dueling statements in the wake of an arbitration process that has identified health insurance as the biggest stumbling block before a new contract can be signed.
Teachers represented by the Mt. Abram Teachers Association have been working without a contract since the end of the 2012-13 school year. Following a series of collective bargaining sessions, the two parties proceeded to arbitration in July 2014. That process, in which a panel comprised of an arbitrator representing the board, the association and a neutral chair hear the positions of both sides and issue a ruling, concluded in December with the panel’s list of recommendations.
The panel addressed three issues in its ruling. It set wage increases at 0 percent, 2 percent and 2.5 percent for 2012-13, 2013-14 and 2014-15, respectively; this addresses the previous 2.5 years and next six months. It recommended adding language to the contract to allow the district to utilize Department of Education-required teacher “‘effectiveness ratings,’ if available” to conduct layoffs, if necessary.
Finally, the arbitrators recommended a health insurance premium split of 85 percent for the district and 15 percent for the individual teacher’s premium; with a 75/25 percent split for family premiums. Arbitrators did endorse the preexisting policy of utilizing percentages to pay health insurance premiums between teachers and district, rejecting a proposal to adopt a dollar cap on the district contribution.
“To abandon this concept [percentage-based, shared premiums] and to adopt the concept of a dollar cap on the District’s financial contribution to its employees’ health insurance premiums would represent a major conceptual change ….” the panel wrote in its findings.
The arbitration panel’s recommendations were discussed by the association and district, most recently on Jan. 13. At that point, the board indicated it could accept the net 4.5 percent salary increase, if increases would go toward teachers employed by the district upon the date the agreement was signed.
The board has argued against the panel’s recommendation in regards to health insurance. Instead, it offered to have the district contribute a fixed dollar figure, not a percent, toward health insurance premiums. According to the district, it has modified its position in favor of the teachers twice: once to add a 3 percent increase to the contribution year-to-year, and a second time to allow the district’s fixed dollar contribution to go toward three different plans.
What it cannot accept, the board indicated in a statement released Monday, is the risk to the district associated with covering X percent of a health insurance premium. Under the preexisting contract, the board noted, the district’s share of a family plan premium increased from $12,313 in 2006-07 to $16,192 in the current fiscal year.
” … the Board has no control over the premiums that are assessed by the [Maine Education Association Benefits Trust],” the board wrote in its statement. “This new premium assignment system makes it tremendously difficult for schools to anticipate, and budget for, its insurance costs from year to year.”
The board indicated that both sides had worked hard over the past year to resolve the contract issues but have been “unable to resolve these issues.”
“The Board remains willing to listen to proposals from the teachers that address the Board’s legitimate concerns regarding the MEA Benefits Trust tiered rating system, the risk to our small school system of rapidly rising insurance costs, and the Board’s desire to be able to better predict what its insurance costs will be from year to year,” the statement concludes.
The association issued its own statement late Tuesday, saying that the board’s proposals “don’t actually save taxpayers money” and would “effectively destroy our ability to retain or compete for quality educators.” The association was willing to increase the teacher’s share of health insurance premiums by 2 percent, the statement said, but rejected the argument that sharing premium costs via percentages and the MEABT system placed the district at risk. Instead, the association says, the statewide trust pools teachers into a single, health insurance system that reduces the scope of rate hikes year-to-year.
“In the last three years, while the private sector in Maine has seen an average rate increase of over 7 percent annually, our premium increases have averaged only 1 percent,” the statement says. “Using MEABT protects our district from risk, exactly the opposite of what the Board’s lawyer is trying to claim.”
The MATA also argues that since the contract would expire in August, any decisions in regards to health insurance premium cost sharing would not be relevant to the budget, as the district had already covered its insurance-related costs over the past 2.5 years. It maintains that offering to increase teacher contributions represented a “significant concession” on the part of the association, and that it had asked the board not to make contractual changes designed to “pre-negotiate” the next contract.
The association also claims that the board is proposing to place teachers three years lower on the experience scale, an element of the contract not included in the board’s statement but one that the MATA says had been communicated verbally during negotiations.
“The Arbitration Report doesn’t recommend any such change,” the association says in its statement, “and the result would be serious professional damage to anyone who teaches for MSAD 58.” The association, the release went on to say, was willing to take a reduction in salary scale, something the MATA claims would cost the district less money.
The MATA’s statement concluded by asking MSAD 58 residents to contact their board members to end “needless and wasteful stalling,” referred to in the letter as being chiefly represented by the board’s legal fees. The utilization of a board-hired lawyer during negotiations has been a public point of contention between the two sides, and one that is frequently brought up during the public comment portions of board meetings. At the 2013 budget meeting, voters, including teachers wearing “Students First, Lawyers Last” buttons, moved to cut $40,000 out of the administrative cost center, specifically targeting legal assistance during negotiations.
The board has maintained, through statements made by directors at meetings, that utilizing a lawyer is typical business practice when negotiating a contract.
To read the arbitration report and the MSAD 58 Board statement in its entirety, click here.
Keep up the good work school board members! Don’t give in to all the teachers demands. No one else is getting raises or mostly paid for insurance (unless you are one of the 51% on welfare). MSAD 58 needs to get its spending under control if it wants to stay open.
I agree with Steve. The teachers can pay a percentage for health insurance just like the rest of us do. The days of insurance being paid by the employer is done. SAD 58 can’t spend anymore…..period!
… Teacher contracts are public on many of the local school district’s websites. Go ahead and compare Mt. Abram’s salary to local schools and THEN tell me they need to get their “spending under control.”
The board is wasting money…steps are based on teacher experience and are a NATION WIDE system, asking an educator not to be given 3 steps is saying that their experience is not a benefit to the district. It seems to me as teachers are willing to take some insurance increases as long as they get their steps. Are you seriously suggestion that teacher take home less money for the job the perform than what they take home now? Because that is what the SAD 58 is asking teachers to do. Would you do your job for less money? If teachers are being asked to pay more for insurance, so should administrators who get 100% of their family plans cover by the district. It is time we are fair an equitable. SAD 58 should want to retain quality experienced teacher. If what is proposed goes through only new teachers and teachers who district hop will come here. Do you really want a teacher who districts hops to teach your children? It is time for the Board to act responsibly and truly act in the best interest of children and of the organization. The Board is not acting in the best interest of anyone. It is time that they provide the teachers with an acceptable offer ( a compromise on both sides).
MSAD 58 spends more $ on legal fees than the Augusta School District!!!!! I pay taxes to support our local economy and to educate our kids NOT to send over $175,000 in tax dollars to pay for a Portland lawyer to NOT negotiate the teacher contract. At the district budget meeting the last 2 years, the public spoke loud and clear, DO NOT WASTE OUR $ of lawyers!
The ONLY group benefiting from this contract mess is the Portland lawyers who LOVE MSAD 58 and the school board. They have convinced the board that dragging this out is the best move.
Contact your board member and end this craziness, keep our $ here in N. Franklin County educating kids where it belongs.
Why hope your teaching colleagues get less? Teaching is a difficult job for teachers who have to teach a core class-a class students do not want to learn about. Music is different. Hold out teachers for what we all deserve! Shame on you Steve!
What is good for the goose should be good for the gander…let the teachers buy into ACA (aka Obamacare). It was their union leaders who helped usher in the monstrosity. It should be beneficial to them, far better than employer provided health care anyway. Remember. It is going to save you $2500 on your premiums right out of the box. You get to keep your doctor. You even get to keep your plan the way you like it. If you don’t believe any of that then you are just a hater.
I’d like to know the credible source that backs up your 51% comment Steve.
Hi, I’m writing in for potential clarification in regards to the post from “Really?” I’m not sure if you have perhaps mistaken the above poster named only “Steve” for me. I’m Steve Muise of Farmington, and I teach music in MBSRD. I only post pictures on the bulldog and I occasionally try to write positive comments if a community member or student does well. I only post with my full name, (and occasionally along with my wife Debby) so I hope there is not an incorrect assumption of identity in this case.
It is high time for both parties in this mess to grow up. The teachers and admins should both be paying a larger share of the cost for their insurance. They should relize that if this mess goes on long enough there will simply be no MSAD 58. The board should be willing to pay teacher what they are worth. that means we finely answer the question “why can’t Jonny read and wright. and do simple math. so grow up already!!!!!!!!!!!!!
ps a lawyer is standard in all contract talks I believe
It is very clear to me that teachers are asked to do far more now than ever before due to the Common Core standards. What is also clear to me is that there is gross overspending in the maintenance/transportation department which is very obviously OFF LIMITS if anyone questions the monies being spent there. It’s not a lack of transparency, it’s a matter of downright defense by a certain board member to protect this portion of the budget. Why? Past history, I assume. It’s not right, it’s not fair. There are a lot of places where the purse strings could be tightened, including in the teachers’ contract, but if the public were truly allowed to understand the transportation/maintenance section of the budget, you would be appalled. It’s not the bus drivers, custodians or maintenance people that are overspending; it’s not even the fault necessarily of the directors of maintenance. It’s simply that in our own homes we cut back, re-evaluate, and strategize ways to save our own money. This part of the budget is held above all others and will not be examined nearly as carefully as the money for teachers, or even for money that directly impacts programs for our children.
Teachers realize that the public won’t view these issues the same way that we do; this negotiation has consumed our lives for three years now, and its a challenge to step back and consider the point of view of people who might be just hearing about it. However, we have made an earnest attempt to do so, and address the concerns of all stakeholders in our district, which is why we feel confident in sharing our proposals.
For the record, teachers are offering to
1. Pay more for our own insurance, and
2. Accept a significant cut in the salary base (the largest percentage cut in the history of our district, in fact)
This offer comes in *less* expensive than the offer described in the Board’s press release. Salary and benefits combined, what we are asking costs taxpayers less money (!). While ordinarily we could understand some people siding with Board negotiators, we find it hard to believe that ANYONE benefits from an offer that costs more, while managing to be worse for teachers and the quality of education in our district. Isn’t that a lose-lose?
This concession, without question, makes us weaker than surrounding districts when it comes to attracting and retaining good teachers for our kids. However, we *do* genuinely want a settlement, and after three years, we decided we could live with this if it meant being able to move forward. Most of us are taxpayers too, and while it is standard to involve a lawyer in contract negotiations, it is NOT standard to spend more than $150,000, a figure which dwarfs what even massive districts like Augusta pay. Those of us who spend 3-5 hundred dollars every year on supplies for our classrooms have no love for wasted budget money, believe me.
In any case, now that the issue has been made public, teachers welcome community involvement. Our schools are the responsibility of all of us, and this ongoing dispute is damaging them, without question. We feel like our solution ends that in a way that preserves, as much as possible, the quality of our schools AND the limited budget resources we have. Please, if you feel like you have any stake in this issue, make your voice heard.
Very sad.. but mostly for the students.
Dont kid yourself school board and teachers association,
the students hear it, see it and have felt it.
I think that before anyone makes a comment, they should know all of the facts- facts- and dollar figures. I am not sure at this point where a true representation would be offered and who you could go to for that. Just as this contract period is ending and not settled yet, another one is right on it’s heels….with no resolution. I wonder how everyone would feel if there was no MSAD 58 and we shipped our kids elsewhere? I think the high school has suffered so many cuts, that at this point, other high schools in the area would offer our kids so much more opportunity. I have heard that the teachers in the high school are really taking their poor attitudes out on their students and it is really affecting their education at this point and wonder….what is done about that? Are their consequences to those actions? Probably not because they are part of a union. Speaking personally- the teachers in the elementary schools are wonderful to the children and very nurturing. I just think its a shame that this can’t get settled and don’t envy anyone involved in the process.
Thank you, TiredOfGames. Well said.
Just sign the Contract and go teach.
The school board has gotten greedy in the name of looking
out for the taxpayer, teachers have become defensive
and feeling unappreciated. Most importantly, students have
become disenfranchised throughout this process. I am appauled at
how the students have been affected. .
Makes me wonder-who is driving this
train? Hopefully not a lawyer or a union.
And at what cost?
Both sides please compromise-
Compromise and listen to each other, for the most important reason
you both are there- for the STUDENTS.
If this continues into the next contract,the next three years,
enrollment will decrease as parents choose
other districts.
Concerned, I think that before anyone makes a comment, they should know all of the facts. Please, Concerned, take your kids and your poor attitude toward Mt. Abram to another school. Take Rob with you.
If the district wants to lose the pillars of their community, the ones who occupy 70 percent of your children’s time for nine months of the year, then maybe the administration should pony up and and sit in the classroom dealing with kids who don’t care.
Kids are being affected by this in different ways.The fact that the Strong School does not have concessions anymore because teachers aren’t willing to do any extra as they previously have stated is disappointing.To begin concessions years ago and then back away because of the budget issues sends the message to the kids that the teachers don’t want to do the extra for their concessions.The kids did not have to know anything about that had someone stepped up and ran concessions for them. I agree that all teachers are underpaid and that they are stretched thin as it is.There needs to be a compromise.If employees in the district have to pay for any part of their insurance than why shouldn’t an administrator. After all administrations want to end budget issues too correct.Enough is enough lets think about our great employees and our kids before we begin to lose some of these great employees because of money issues.The money spent on lawyers is ridiculous!The fact that this is still going on and years ago could figure out issues on our own is upsetting.Someone needs to swallow their pride on the school board and appreciate our teachers and want this to end.The money spent on lawyers could have went to many useful things for children in this district…Shame On You.If the whole point here is to save money and offer our kids more as a district at the end of the day then why are we giving it all to Portland Lawyers. Upsetting that there is still no end in site.
I believe we have very good teachers in this district. I also believe that you do not need to shame the School Board. They have a thankless job and do not get paid much if any for all the time they put in. They are only trying to save taxpayers money. As far as the teachers not working at the Concession booth why don’t you concerned parents take it over. I also believe that the teachers should pay more for there insurance. Most of us have had to pay more for insurance.