So under the current contract, a teacher with a Masters Degree and 12 years of experience makes $72,372. The proposed contract, $51,808. The new salary schedule, increased health care costs, and lack of sonority MIRROR the working conditions the citizens of Brecksville have been experiencing for years.

It’s time to hit the reset button on excessive salaries and generous benefits. I applaud the school board for boldly seeking fiscal stability. I’m not sure the teachers' timing is appropriate considering nearly 1,000 teachers state-wide were laid off this year.

Mark,
Would you be OK with a $20,500 pay cut?

What does "rolled back" mean?

I don't understand. Meredith, you would get a $20,000+ pay cut?

I think Meredith misunderstands. There would not be an actual pay "cut" in salary. It would really be a long term freeze because no one would see raises until the salary number proposed on the Board salary schedule "caught up" with current salaries. As an example, the 50+% of the staff (the Board never references in their examples )who have received no raises the past two years because they no longer receive experience raises or raises for continuing education graduate credit hours will likely be frozen at their current salary for about the next 10+ years (in addition to the two years frozen already). I'm in favor of some more freezes for experience, but a 12+ year freeze for 50+% of our teachers?
The same will happen to the younger teachers, but to a slightly lesser degree for graduate coursework ONLY. Steps will still be frozen unless the Board decides to give experience raises. Based on this Board's current actions, the teachers are well within their rights to be mistrustful.
EVERYONE will be subjected to a far-inferior medical plan with triple prescription co-pays and a required minimum $3,000-$5,000 deductible. Office co-pays will NOT be applied to that deductible. The employees already pay a premium of about $150/month for dental, medical, and prescription. There is no vision coverage that I can see in either proposal. It would go up to about $175.00/month. I don't think that is unreasonable.

Robert-
You seem to have analyzed various aspects of the contract, so maybe you could clarify something. What do people mean when they say they are getting 14% of their salary towards retirement?
As I understand STRS, teachers have to pay 10% in lieu of paying into social security, and this will be increasing to 14% over the next 4 years. And the district puts in its share for each employee, just as as employer would in the private sector, towards social security.
I'm not trying to debate here the amount each pays or receives or when they can collect, because that it is an entire debatable issue. I just don't understand the debate about the comment I keep reading.
Also, IN MY OPINION, I don't think ANY districts should be paying the teachers 10% portion, as well as the districts portion - just as no private employer pays into social security for an employee. To me, any juggling of numbers to justify doing this was just that - juggling of numbers - saying that a district would pay 10% for an employee is like giving a 10% raise. And I do understand the ramifications of calling it one thing instead of another.

Different circumstances, but what if the Board does something similar to what Reagon did in the early 80's with the air traffic controllers. And, they may have the backing of people in Brecksville as many are anti-union and these Board members were voted in. There are lots of experienced teachers as well as new teachers who would jump at the chance to have a teaching job in Brecksville should the teachers stand there ground. Sure, it would be bumpy road at first, but in no time things would start to click and run smoothly and to the satisfaction of many. And, the tide is turning. More and more are saying, go ahead and strike, leave, replace them.
People often overestimate their value - but let me remind you: anyone can be replaced. And, the success and achievement of the student in Brecksville is largely due to the individual, family and community - besides the teacher.

lyn- I sincerely appreciate the opportunity to answer in a factual manner. STRS collects 24% of an employee's salary for their eventual pension. Ohio Revised Code requires the employer to contribute 14% as their share of the total STRS premium toward a teacher's pension. How the remaining 10% is paid to STRS is up to each district. In BBH, the teachers pay their own 10%. As for the administration, their 10% has always been picked up and paid by the district (Board). When the seemingly imminent passage of Issue 2 (SB5) loomed last fall, one of the law changes would've been an outlawing of any district's ability to pay the employee share of the 10% STRS premium for ANY employee. As a result, the BBH Board decided to assess the Administration that 10%, but they received it back immediately as a salary increase. Translation...the Board still pays the Administration's 24%...but in a more creative way that was meant to circumvent the potential law change last fall. The extra silver lining the Board gave them is that their salary has, in effect, gone up by 14% for STRS purposes. That salary number is what is used to calculate their ultimate pension, thus increasing their final salary/pension by 14%. It's a shell game.
In response to your comment about the employee share going up to 14% from 10%, you are correct.
Continued...

Also, the Social Security reference reminds me of something no one has brought up either. Teachers who have accrued Social Security credits at any point in their life are penalized for receiving STRS benefits. For every dollar a teacher receives from STRS in their pension check, a dollar is deducted from their Social Security benefits. That seems quite unfair to me.

My final point is below...

Thank you, again, for allowing me to answer your question. I really believe that we have the right to our own opinions, but they should have some type of factual information on which to form them. I talk to a lot of people from each "side". I make my best attempt to confirm or deny what I hear. Then I form my opinion and share what I have verified. Based on what I've learned over the last week, I am really starting to believe that our Board is simply trying to blow up the unions. I am not a conspiracy theorist by any means, but the facts I continue to share are really leading me to believe that it's not really about money; it's about vilifying our hard-working employees who are with our kids every day. I don't begrudge Administrators their pay, benefits, etc., but they clearly have as sweet a deal as the union workers. Why isn't the Board addressing ALL the employee compensation packages, not just the ones who pay union dues? And you know the saddest part? That tunnel vision is going to hurt our students, athletes, parents, aides, coaches, teachers, etc. Can't people see that the teacher's pay is a red herring?

lyn- I, too, appreciate the polite debate. It makes it so much easier get to real issues that matter to people most. Just a few thoughts:
1. There are certainly less administrators, but my primary point was about the Board's constant publicizing of the union workers' pay and benefits while not publicizing administrative contracts at all. A prime example is what I said about the new treasurer. He is a retire/rehire making the same amount on Day 1 of his contract as the former treasurer (who left just days ago) made on the last day of her contract. Is that fiscally responsible? Why hasn't the Board been quoted in news articles and press releases as hiring a newly retired treasurer from Lakewood at the same salary as the outgoing treasurer?
2. Administrative contracts go from 10 months to 12 months, with most having 10 month contracts. I've seen with my own eyes teachers staying as long as 10 days after their paid/contracted days end and coming in as early as 2 weeks before their paid/contracted days start again in August. So that means the teachers are putting in as much time (at a minimum) as the building administrators (with the exception of the high school principal). There are administrators at the BOE (Supt., Treasurer, Business Manager) who have yearlong contracts, but they get 3-4 weeks of paid vacation. Teachers' "vacations" are unpaid.
Continued...

I would like to look at the ODE website for our administrators' average salaries. Do you have the link? I have seen every one of the BBH administrators' contracts and none of the full-time administrators make less than $103,000. They also have a district-supplied cell phone, unlimited Personal Days, and paid vacation days (varying in amount based on whether they are a 10 month or 12 month administrator.) In addition, they receive one free physical paid 100% by the Board. There are other "perks" that union workers don’t get, but I think I've made my point.
Our family has been financially affected by pay-to-play and the abolishment of high school busing, which I am not happy about, also. Unfortunately, I've heard from quite a few community members whose children have graduated, and they say parents should assume at least the pay-to-play costs at 100%. I disagree with them, but that sentiment is out there. Concessions of any type will not change these voters’ minds when a levy comes up.
Continued...

As far as teachers giving back...my opinion is that a freeze for experience would be an indication of the teachers' dedication to our kids. They should still be compensated for the graduate coursework they pay for with their own money, on their own time (like summers and weekends), to be better teachers for our kids. In return, this community needs to pass a new money levy. And since the Board talks about "shared sacrifice" all the time, their "share" should include concessions from administrators and a reduction of the Board members' stipends. The combination may get back high school busing (which doesn't really save the Board much money anyway) and reduce pay-to-play fees.

By the way, is everyone aware that BOTH unions are meeting with a federal mediator? Everyone talks about teachers, but the reality is that our kids may not see even one familiar face this fall if both unions are on strike.

lyn- Thank you for the link. I will take a look at it and see if I can draw any comparisons or find any discrepancies when put side-by-side with our administrators' actual contracts.

Be careful about reading Buckeye Institute. There are seven administrators on there who haven't worked here anywhere from 1-6 years. I also looked at (about) the first 30 teacher names and found 8 who have been retired as many as 4 years.
They also have building data only through the 2009-2010 school year; a full three years ago.
I printed the school data page and will let you know if there are any discrepancies after I do some research about the actual teachers in each building.

Also, of the 12 administrators that are accurately listed at Buckeye, exactly 1/2 work 260 days, but they get paid vacation out of that time. Four work 210 days, one works 218 days, and one works 230 days. All of them also get paid vacation time within those allotted days, but it varies by contract for each person. Don't forget, they ALL also get UNLIMITED Personal Days (days you can use for any private reason).
My point is, all is not what it seems on Buckeye or from other sources that don't have the actual contracts for the actual people.

I'll let you know what else I find.
Thank you, lyn, for being open-minded and willing to continue investigating what is really true., wherever that may lead both of us :)

lyn- WOW! The ODE website has a lot of information!!!

So far, I have compared what ODE has for average teacher salaries and the number of full-time teachers with Buckeye Institute's data in the same two categories using the same year. As I suspected, Buckeye is not only way off on who our administrators are (as I posted earlier), but they are also off in the average teacher salaries and way off in the number of full-time teachers.
Salaries are off by as much as $1500 and the number of full-time teachers is off by 36 teachers.

So far, NOT ONE "fact" on Buckeye has been correct, and 2 of the 3 areas I've checked so far (that are "hot buttons" on here) are way, way off.

Let's stay away from Buckeye Institute. Their data is clearly flawed.