Special Edition - April 2002
the e-publication of OCEA
In this issue (click on the links below):
Special Edition April 2002, Number 5 Negotiation & Insurance
Penalties for Public Service
NSEA Endorses Guinn
Silent Auction
Testing Parody
Web Links
GIVE LIFE: GIVE BLOOD! Negotiation & InsuranceAs of press time, OCEA and the District were still at impasse and headed toward arbitration. The dates for the two-day arbitration hearing are June 13 and 14.
Some members have requested Jeffery Greb’s remarks to the School Board on April 23. Here they are in full:
"OCEA is concerned about the gradual erosion of educational quality in the Carson City School District.
The single greatest factor determining educational success for students is the knowledge and ability of their classroom teacher. The District’s growing difficulty in recruiting and retaining highly qualified teachers is bound to have a deleterious effect upon the quality of education.
This is not to say that the teachers more recently employed by the District are not dedicated, hard-working individuals; however, no amount of dedication and effort can substitute for experience. The knowledge and ability of a first or second year teacher is no match for that of a twenty-year veteran. This experienced workforce is what is shrinking, and unfortunately we are not retaining the numbers of teachers necessary to eventually take their place.
This District is losing 5-10% of its teachers each and every year. Many of these are lost to retirement, an inevitability that can be foreseen and prepared for by the District. It is the others that we cannot afford to lose: those with three to five years of experience and just coming into their own in their profession.
There are two main factors leading to the District’s difficulty in recruiting and retaining teachers. The first is quite general and endemic to the profession at large. Fewer and fewer people seem willing to make teaching their career. The rewards are few and ephemeral, and with the increased bashing of our system of public education, they are almost solely intrinsic. Nationwide, 50% of teachers leave the profession within the first five years. Nevada is no exception. In fact, with our structural revenue deficit, our state cannot effectively compete with others for the best and brightest.
The second factor is unique to Carson City. Simply put: this District does not offer a salary that is competitive relative to its neighbors. Education students at UNR are not impressed by insurance benefits. They are in their early twenties and have yet to know illness. If they already plan to teach in Nevada, they will get the same deal on retirement no matter where they work. They are focused on salary.
Those who do come here to work are usually unaware of our salary relative to the rest of the state at the time they are hired. As they gain experience and network with teachers throughout the state, they learn of our relative position. They learn that by any measure teachers in Carson City are among the lowest paid in the state year after year. That our salary schedule has increased by only 2% since 1998-99. That virtually all of our neighbors, some of whom have declining enrollment numbers, have found money to go to salary again this year, while our District, with increasing enrollment numbers, once again has offered us nothing. They learn that a teacher with a Master’s degree makes less in Carson City than any other district in the state. Why would anyone with a Master’s choose to teach in Carson?
Those recent UNR graduates and those gaining teaching experience tend to do what any sensible person would do: they tend to shy away from our District. It is a seller’s market, and they can get more for their abilities elsewhere.
It is up to the Legislature to fix the first factor effecting the District’s recruiting and retention. Our responsibility, all of us, is to lobby them to make real and lasting positive changes in the next session.
It is up to this School Board to fix the second. Until this Board begins making its teachers its first priority, it will continue to fall behind other districts in the areas of recruiting and retention. This Board seems to want it both ways. It wants a ‘world class’ school district, but it wants it at bargain basement prices. Well, the blue light specials seem to be running out. You get what you pay for. Unfortunately, it is the children of this community who may ultimately pay the biggest price."
Some academic research by Dr. Richard M. Ingersoll of the University of Pennsylvania’s Graduate School of Education that supports teacher retention problems nationally are due in part to poor salary can be found online at: http://www.aera.net/communications/news/011210.htm.
An article regarding our contract negotiation appeared in the Reno Gazette-Journal on Saturday, April 29. You can access it online at: http://www.rgj.com/news/stories/html/2002/04/26/13076.php.
OCEA leadership encourages you to get involved by letting the School Board know how you feel about this issue, either in person or by mail or by phone. Your Building Rep will pick up some guidelines for contacting the Board at the next OCEA Executive Board Meeting on May 9.
Insurance
Remember, the defined contribution for insurance proposed by the District (where individuals select various levels of coverage, spending a specified allocation for that purpose) is dead. The defined contribution would have capped our insurance benefit at FY 03 levels, placing teachers at risk for out of pocket insurance premiums as early as July 2003. To ask teachers to assume this risk while offering no salary increase for this year was not acceptable to our bargaining team.
The District’s presentation of their defined contribution proposal confused many members. Quite a few were under the impression that this was a "done deal" and going into effect. Further adding to the confusion is the fact that there will be additional choices regarding insurance during the open enrollment period beginning May 1. Teachers need to be aware, however, selecting a lower level of benefits during the open enrollment will not give them extra money to place into other choices available under IRS Schedule 125. The only benefit to teachers in selecting lesser coverage will come in the form of lowering the out of pocket premium for dependent coverage. Of course, the District will benefit if teachers select a lower level of coverage by not having to pay as much for the basic premium.
Be very careful selecting your benefits! Make sure you understand all of the ramifications and select wisely. If you have questions regarding benefits or the process, please contact Gaylea Manning (1505) or Jeffery Greb (1662).
Contact Quest at:
JGREB@carson.k12.nv.us Back Penalties for Public ServiceAre you aware that retirement benefits you may have earned won’t be given to you upon retirement? Two current laws, the Government Pension Offset (GPO) and the Windfall Elimination Provision (WEP), take away Social Security benefits earned by teachers and their spouses here in Nevada. These laws prevent people from collecting their full Social Security benefit because they were public employees and collect a public pension.
The original intent of these laws was to prevent public employees from "double dipping," from collecting two pensions from the government. In practice, however, these laws unfairly target those who give their professional lives to public service. These laws affect you if you, or your spouse, will collect Social Security benefits. Among the effects of these laws are:
Nine out of ten public employees affected by the GPO lose their entire spousal benefit, even though their deceased spouse paid Social Security taxes for many years.
The WEP causes low-paid public employees outside the Social Security system to lose up to sixty percent of their Social Security benefits.
While retired public employees have their Social Security or survivor benefits reduced, non-public employees with private pensions get to keep their entire pension and receive their full Social Security or survivor benefits.
Many workers rely on statements from the Social Security Administration that fail to take into account the GPO and WEP when projecting benefits. The statements from the SSA are inaccurate! The NEA is actively lobbying on behalf of Nevada and those other states affected by these laws. In fact the NEA Directors from Nevada, Sandy Curtis (WCTA) and Reuben Murillo (CCEA), are addressing this very issue when they meet with the Nevada congressional delegation on May 1. They will be asking them to support HR 2638 and S 1523, bills introduced in the House and Senate, respectively, that repeal the GPO and WEP. Please help Sandy and Rueben in this task by contacting our representatives in Washington. Although hearing from you before May 1 is most beneficial, contacting them after May 1 would also be helpful. Identify whom you are, your work site, and that you urge them to support HR 2638 and S 1523. If you email, do not use your school computer to do so during your contract day.Senator Harry Reid: http://reid.senate.gov/email_form.cfm
Senator John Ensign: http
://ensign.senate.gov/contact_john/contactjohn_email.htmlRepresentative Jim Gibbons: Congressman Jim Gibbons - Representing Nevada's 2nd District
Representative Shelley Berkley: Congresswoman Shelley Berkley - Your 1st District of Nevada Representative
Contact Quest at:
JGREB@carson.k12.nv.us NSEA Endorses GuinnAs you may have heard, NSEA has recently endorsed Governor Kenny Guinn in his bid for re-election. As can be imagined, this is quite a controversial decision, especially in Clark County, given our adversarial relationship with the Governor in the past. It should be noted that the Governor approached NSEA for our endorsement, and that the NSEA Board of Directors debated for months on what the best course of action for our state, schools, children, and membership should be. In the end the NSEA Board voted to endorse Guinn for the following reasons:
Silent AuctionOnly candidates who have committed to NSEA’s legislative priorities will receive our endorsement. Those two priorities are: raising the per pupil expenditure to the national average and broadening and stabilizing the tax base to produce the revenue necessary to accomplish this. Governor Guinn has made that commitment.
Governor Guinn has committed to increasing funding for K-12 education. He says he will present a budget to the Legislature that calls for increased education funding.
- As the state faces budget cuts and a current shortfall, Governor Guinn continues to protect education and the 2% raise for next year.
- Governor Guinn is committed to raising the salaries of teachers and education support professionals. In addition, Guinn is committed to providing money for health insurance benefits.
- We believe Governor Guinn will be re-elected. He has asked for our support, not because he needs it to win the campaign, but because he is looking ahead to the effort that will be needed in the 2003 legislative session to raise revenue and allocate money for K-12.
- We need bipartisan support to stabilize the tax structure since the Nevada Constitution requires a two-thirds majority in both the Assembly and Senate to make changes to tax law. As leader of the Republican Party in the state, Governor Guinn’s support is vital to achieving that two-thirds majority.
Contact Quest at:
JGREB@carson.k12.nv.usThere will be a silent auction held at the Light of Education Awards Banquet May 7th. The auction is to raise money for OCEA-TIP, our political action fund. Bob Pollock, Katie’s husband, has donated a vintage Janice Joplin poster advertising a concert in San Francisco. If you would like to contribute an item, please bring it to the Carson Nugget on the seventh.
Contact Quest at: JGREB@carson.k12.nv.us
Testing ParodyMy dentist is great! He sends me reminders, so I don’t forget checkups. He uses the latest techniques based on research. He never hurts me, and I’ve got all my teeth, so when I saw him the other day, I was eager to know if he’d heard about the new state program. I knew he’d think it was great.
"Did you hear about the new state program to measure the effectiveness of dentists with their young patients?" I asked.
"No," he said. He didn’t seem too thrilled. "How will they do that?"
"It’s quite simple," I said. "They will just count the number of cavities each patient has at age 10, 14, and 18 and average that to determine a dentist’s rating. Dentists will be rated as Excellent, Good, Average, Below Average, and Unsatisfactory. That way parents will know which are the best dentists. It will also encourage the less effective dentists to get better," I said. "Poor dentists who don’t improve could lose their licenses to practice in our state."
"That’s terrible," he said.
"What? That’s not a good attitude," I said. "Don’t you think we should try to improve children’s dental health in this state?"
"Sure I do," he said, "but that’s not a fair way to determine who is practicing good dentistry."
"Why not?" I asked. "It makes perfect sense to me."
"Well, it’s so obvious," he said. "Don’t you see that dentists don’t all work with the same clientele; so much depends on things we can’t control? For example, I work in a rural area with a high percentage of patients from deprived homes, while some of my colleagues work in upper-middle-class neighborhoods. Many of the parents I work with don’t bring their children to see me until there is some kind of problem and I don’t get to do much preventative work.
"Also," he said, "many of the parents I serve let their kids eat way too much candy from a young age, unlike more educated parents who understand the relationship between sugar and decay.
"To top it all off," he added, "many of my clients have well water, which is untreated and has no fluoride in it. Do you have any idea how much difference early use of fluoride can make?"
"It sounds like you’re making excuses," I said. I couldn’t believe my dentist would be so defensive. He does a great job.
"I am not!" he said. "My best patients are as good as anyone’s, but my average cavity count is going to be higher than a lot of other dentists because I chose to work where I am needed most."
"Don’t get touchy," I said.
"Touchy?" he said. His face had turned red, and from the way he was clenching and unclenching his jaws, I was afraid he was going to damage his teeth. "Try furious. In a system like this, I will end up being rated average, below average, or worse.
"My more educated patients who see these ratings may believe this so-called rating actually is a measure of my ability and proficiency as a dentist. They may leave me, and I’ll be left with only the neediest patients. And my cavity average score will get even worse.
"On top of that, how will I attract good dental hygienists and other excellent dentists to my practice if it is labeled below average?"
"I think you’re overreacting," I said. "‘Complaining, excuse making, and stonewalling won’t improve dental health.’ I am quoting that from a leading member of the DOC," I noted.
"What’s the DOC?" he asked.
"It’s the Dental Oversight Committee," I said, "a group made up of mostly lay persons to make sure dentistry in this state gets improved."
"Spare me," he said. "I can’t believe this. Reasonable people won’t buy it."
The program sounded reasonable to me, so I asked, "How else would you measure good dentistry?"
"Come watch me work," he said. "Observe my processes."
"That’s too complicated and time-consuming," I said. "Cavities are the bottom line and you can’t argue with the bottom line. It’s an absolute measure."
"That’s what I’m afraid my patients and prospective patients will think. This can’t be happening," he said despairingly.
"Now, now," I said, "don’t despair. The state will help you some."
"How?" he asked.
"If you’re rated poorly, they’ll send a dentist who is rated excellent to help straighten you out," I said brightly.
"You mean," he said, "they will send a dentist with a wealthy clientele to show me how to work on severe juvenile dental problems with which I have probably had much more experience? Big help."
"There you go again," I said. "You aren’t acting professionally at all."
"You don’t get it," he said. "Doing this would be like grading schools and teachers on an average score on a test of children’s progress without regard to influences outside the school, the home, the community served, and stuff like that. Why would they do something so unfair to dentists? No one would ever think of doing that to schools."
I just shook my head sadly, but he had brightened.
"I’m going to write my representatives and senators," he said. "I’ll use the school analogy; surely they’ll see my point."
He walked off with that look of hope mixed with fear and suppressed anger that I see in the mirror so often lately.
Contact Quest at:
JGREB@carson.k12.nv.us Web LinksBack
- OCEA – local information; e-mail officers; education links http://home.pyramid.net/ocea/index.html
NSEA – statewide information; legislative updates http://www.nsea-nv.org NEA – national information; numerous links to many education sites http://www.nea.org NEA Member Benefits – lots of connections and free stuff http://www.neamb.com
