Reader
Browse passages, annotate evidence, and export with full provenance for citation.
I 100% agree on that. But if every other district is offering 1% to 3% to 5% and we come out with a statement, Kraton is offering no raises across the board, that is going to impact our ability to recruit anybody, whether that's classified, certified, or admin. And if we want to recruit quality employees for our students and that's the bottom line to me that that goes to the SOFG goals is we cannot have good PD but empty vacant positions so that they're not getting the PD. So, no, no, no. I no, but the I'm I'm saying I think a 2% across the board is easier to sell to the board because the reality is we have to come to consensus and the board has to agree as well. And I just think it's easier to sell a 2% raise to the board for a variety of different reasons, the amount of support across the board, all of those lots of reasons than it is a tiered raise, which feels divisive or is interpreted as being divisive by some people.
⚗ AI-reconstructed · cite from original above
The book needs one because like you're saying like it's divisive if we do tier raises. How is tier raises? And I'm not I'm not against just 2% across the board. I'm just asking how is a tiered raise different from doing targeted raises or targeted stipens or targeted market demand for certain positions cuz we're saying okay we're going to increase bus drivers a dollar an hour that's only affecting one group of people how is that not divisive but a tiered raise is divisive which I'm not advocating for the one so are we saying then that no dollar an hour increase for bus drivers. We we voted for it. So I'm just saying no, I think that's a really good point. I mean, you might have food service workers who are Wait a minute. Why do bus drivers get a dollar more? Or facilities people, why do you know bus drivers get a dollar more?
⚗ AI-reconstructed · cite from original above
We're short in our area as well. Yeah. any of these targeted kinds of raises are going to potentially a potential harmful effect is that they divide employees. It's true. The the 2% um is just for existing employees, correct? It doesn't go to our sal like our table. It goes to the table. Yeah, it does go to this. Okay. Okay. I was just clarifying. Yep. Um uh just to kind of uh address a little bit of what RAL is getting at, um I would uh I would argue two things. One is the background of why those uh why those uh additional uh targeted uh stipens were delivered. They were targeted for specific reasons, right? The psychologist is a hard to fill position and the the uh overall so there was a whole background, there was a whole process, there was a whole committee that went through those things.
⚗ AI-reconstructed · cite from original above
Whereas with this, this is just regardless of what your position is, whether it's high needs or not, this is uh for everybody. So, it's just a general overall type of approach. Um, and then to Dorothy's point about uh these tiered things, I I would ask the question, what are you trying to accomplish with that? Because if you're if you're saying uh that administrators are at the top, so that is going to be a higher amount. Well, the bottom is actually classified. So, I would argue that you should reverse certified and classified and put classified at 2%, certified at one, and administration at.5 if that's the intention of what you're talking about to balance out those uh that type of thing. That's my opinion. Okay, Kelly. Um, I was just going to add that I feel of course the board is the ultimate say and we are our own independent body and I just worry about us bending to the will of another group instead of working within who we represent and putting all of our heads together.
⚗ AI-reconstructed · cite from original above
I agree that it's a weird year. everything is up in the air, you know, federally and there's a lot of other unknowns. And I appreciate a lot of what Jay had to say just about like the climate and what's going on. And I think that's a lot of what people are bringing to the table. To that end, I would support an across the board raise sideways because I have hesitations about it for a number of reasons, but I could live with it. Um I just don't want this body to turn into what does the board want to do? Like what are we even meeting for then? Like there's no purpose. we should just get a number from Vanessa and then say like, well, we everybody gets the same amount and that's it. And that just to me really takes the teeth out of everything that we do and everything that we've worked to establish in this board moving forward in this body moving forward.
⚗ AI-reconstructed · cite from original above
So, I just I am very hesitant to make that a practice that we continue to do. I of course we need to listen to the will of the board because they have the final say, but there's no point if we're not our own freethinking body. And I I think what would help that approach I agree with you completely. I think what would help that approach is having the information like Daniel requesting the salaries. Um because if we can make data informed decisions about stuff like that then if it comes back that you know this group of employees is here here and here then by all means you know go for the tiered make the tiered whatever you think it is. But it's it it would be uh it would be a an approach that is based on the data and the information that we have rather than guesses.
⚗ AI-reconstructed · cite from original above
Well, we have two things running pretty much against us, you know, for decision making in that contracts are due and we don't know the money. So, it's can I ask like we have to decide what's what's important here. Can I ask a question? Nobody has to answer this and I'm not putting anybody on the spot with this. Um I don't I'm not sure when he requested that information, but it sounds like it was requested a long time ago. What's why is that information not available? I am I'm not I don't know. There was some back and forth about whether nextgen was I have an answer but I mean see Dominic would be the first I was working on getting you getting you that information, but my link to the NextGen um website or whatever it is is uh broken. I can't get in. So, um you were you were going to answer that question.
⚗ AI-reconstructed · cite from original above
Oh, you Yeah, I was going to try the teacher, vice principal, principal. Yeah, got it. But I couldn't. Last thing I wanted to say is to Ariel's point about um why we're prioritizing certain positions. It's I'm not against prioritizing certain position. I was just saying don't say that tier raises is divisive but then targeted you know raises isn't divisive I was just saying true true but it's its intention was to address compression direct directly in those employee groups that were targeted okay okay I think Ariel's next oh I was just responding to James' question because yeah and then to answer your question James um last year we were provided a lot of nextgen data I think we're about 30 positions and I felt some hesitancy from some people that maybe felt like the number the data was actually not very favorable um to look at because you know it showed that our teachers are under I hate 10% compared to surrounding school districts and that's like a really hard number um and in my personal opinion it felt like a lot of cushioning was created over the past 6 months so that when we did eventually look at the numbers um you know they wouldn't necessarily feel as bad.
⚗ AI-reconstructed · cite from original above
Um, but I'm going to be honest. At any point in the last 6 months, all that had to happen was that someone from the finance department had to log into NextGen and run a report. And like Dominic is unable to do that right now, but um I can't ident but the re the stated reason that Vanessa gave to us was that well the compensation committee was going to meet and then be trained on NextGen so that they could run those reports. But I mean, I asked for these same reports like on our first meeting of the year, like in September. So, you know, I can really only cast dispersions, but it feels to me like we don't have, you know, teacher numbers because the teacher numbers aren't very good, and it's kind of embarrassing to look at. Ara, oh, no, she skipped over. Oh, I'm sorry.
⚗ AI-reconstructed · cite from original above
I'm sorry. We went off because James asked the question and we question. I disrupted the process. I'm sorry. Um I just there's a couple of things that are um I feel like hindering my ability to be able to have a productive conversation. One, um I'm asking that uh we all call the SOFG goals SOFG. I feel like when we add other things to be funny or whatever it it's disrespectful and I don't think that there is an issue with us having high expectations for our employees in the benefit of our students. So that's number one. Number two, I also have a problem with insinuating that people are trying to cushion numbers or not uphold their integrity by being uh forthcoming with information. If that is a concern, I think that we go directly to that person and ask them about that. But I think publicly saying that somebody has poor integrity or is intentionally not sharing things because they don't like the way that it looks, I think is damaging to somebody's reputation and it's also not assuming positive intent and it's not appropriate to do that in a public forum and it makes me really uncomfortable.
⚗ AI-reconstructed · cite from original above
Okay. Thank you. Uh Ariel. Oh, so like I said, I am not against a 2% across the board. I just from my perspective over education. Teachers always supposed to be the sacrificial, you know, sacrifice sacrificial lamb that sacrifice their needs and the needs of everybody else. And that's just my perspective, especially if you listen to like at the legislature when they're talking about Prop 12, 12, three, the Republicans are like, "Just give the money to the teachers." But then you have the Democrats and the the education association like, "No, give it to the district." And the district decide how they want to give the money because they want everyone to get a raise. And I totally support that. When we did the Doug Ducey did oh the 20% raises for teachers CA came out AEA came out we were all like no everyone deserves to get money so the teachers didn't actually get a 20% raise what I'm say so my whole big thing is just because we decide to give teachers a higher percentage raise everyone else doesn't mean that we're devaluing other positions.
⚗ AI-reconstructed · cite from original above
It doesn't mean that it is divisive to give teachers a higher percent raise to any another demographic. That's all I'm trying to say. And I'm fine with 2% across the board. I just don't want it to be seen as, oh, if we give teachers a higher percent raise, that's divisive. I don't think that's the case at all. If you look at teacher salary, teacher salary has not kept up with the private sector at all. Our level of education compared to people in the private sector has not kept up at all. We could all go work at Fries, probably make $200 less every two weeks, and not have to deal with everything else. That's all I'm saying. But I'm fine with 2% across the board. Thank you, Daniel. Um I support a 2% raise across the board. Um my issue um with I I think like I don't like calling targeted raises divisive.
⚗ AI-reconstructed · cite from original above
I mean I guess like you know by definition it is right you're dividing people into employee categories. Um but like my ideal for this committee and my ideal for you know like doing this work is that we are actually looking position by position. We're looking at data from surrounding school districts. We're identifying areas of need and targeting those areas of need. And over the last two or three years I felt a lot of resistance from people because it's more work. It's more meetings. It's more time. We're very lucky that we get to do this during the school day, but other districts do bargaining outside of the school day. Um, you know, and like to me, my issue with a blanket raise across the board is it just feels kind of lazy. Um, you have three giant groups of employees, admin, certified, classified that span multiple positions with multiple different payraises.
⚗ AI-reconstructed · cite from original above
I mean, we talked about separating out psychologists, and that's just one group where like they're lumped in with certified, but they are getting paid significantly more than a certified teacher who is, you know, well, not significant, sorry, they're getting paid more than a certified teacher who is, you know, what people think of when they think of like that label certified, right? Um, and so that's my issue. And, you know, I apologize for making insinuations. Um, but we've had like, how many meetings have we had? Is this five? This is five. We're on five meetings. No nextG data. You know, Vanessa is not here. for me to ask. Um I have asked for the data every single meeting. I have explicitly asked for it. In our thing, it says, "Oh, the committee is going to meet. All nextgen requests are passed to the compensation compression committee who meets on 219.
⚗ AI-reconstructed · cite from original above
NextG staff will be training the committee on the product." I don't I don't have it. I don't have the reports and so I don't you know, all I can do is insinuate because I have no I have nothing I can do to get an answer to that question. Like James said, I could ask the question, but the answer won't come to me unfortunately. So really it's our really biggest um funding item is 12 or 13. And so let's just go ahead and if someone would like to make a recommendation, it's either going to be 12 or 13. I would like to get consensus on 13. And would you read it so we can be official here? All district employees will receive a 2% increase. The cost being $656,489. Okay. So let's do a consensus vote. up, down, or I can't live with that at all.
⚗ AI-reconstructed · cite from original above
Ariel, we need your vote. Can we have what you call it? A caucus really quickly. Yeah. Caucus. Three minutes. Set a timer. Yeah. Three minute. Okay. And where are you going to go out? Chris have a quick like one minute wrap-up. No. Um I thought it was Yeah. Okay. Who's the leaders over? Who's each? Does someone want to have a leader from their caucus team? Unless you want to Ariel feels very passionately. Go ahead. It's already I know, but let's just do Well, let's do a quick share real quick. Okay, I do. I'll say it very quickly. I called the caucus because I wanted to make sure that teachers are okay with sacrificing their own financial well-being once again. And we all came to a conclusion we are. Okay. I'm ready to vote. Um who what other team would someone like to share what you discussed?
⚗ AI-reconstructed · cite from original above
We just discussed that the value that everybody brings. 2% is something that it was originally stated on the budget that Vanessa presented class size or 2% across the board. So it was already there since the beginning. And then we just talk about um how uh some statements show uh the lack of commitment to the SOFG goals or the vision for individuals in this room and that we would like to see a cohesive united front in that vision. Okay. Thank you. Okay. Well, would you read um which one? We were on number 13 and that was the one that was presented. So, would you want to read it again? All district uh all district employees will receive a 2% increase. Okay. So, the thumbs across. Can you live with that? Okay. So then that's what we will have and we will which means number 12 is a no.
⚗ AI-reconstructed · cite from original above
Okay. So now just so you know this we also have to align them to our standards. Okay. So this is not a formal recommendation until we align it to our standards which will be at our next meeting because we won't have time this meeting. Um well we're going to need to have another meeting. So can we have a running tally then? So this is voted on. So it's a subtraction from our amount so we have an idea of what it is. Can we have that? Yeah. Yes, I can do a running tile. Can Can you give us Eve? Maybe it could be colorcoded when it was thumbmed. Maybe the health healthcare one too. Thank you. Well, it's all we have we have $93,511 of non-compression related funds to spend. 93,000. Yeah. From the compression amount. This is linked in your resources. So you do have access to this.
⚗ AI-reconstructed · cite from original above
So this is the spreadsheet that we developed last year. So as we're building consensus, we're making sure we mark that including the language in there at the very end. I'm including the amount that you're looking for and I can add I can add Can we add Did you add where it comes from? like the compression one for the bus drivers doesn't come out of that comes out of that. This is just recommendation. Oh, okay. Okay. Okay. I can we can certainly I wonder if we should because this is the first year we have that. No, we should not. There's no reason. I think we should. So, I'd like for my for for me, I would like to add that um just for my knowledge, I want to add a fun a column that says compression or um that that 200,000 money from that committee. You can tell us not to say where the money is coming from.
⚗ AI-reconstructed · cite from original above
They do owe them the back end. Didn't we notice for er and all those other funds when we did it? Oh, because you don't want to publicize it because it's from a committee. Is that okay? Um, what I'm saying is that what MER has done in the past is make recommendations for the expense and then the district determines where that money is coming from. Yeah, that's kind of what Oh, okay. I just I just don't when people look at it and like the question was asked how much money do we have? Well, we're not including the compression money in that pot, right? And we no longer receive e correct. I mean the committee the committee funds the extra 200,000 which is a significant amount of money. Um, if that's not showing up or if someone were to look at that and they knew what we had not counting compre that compression committee money, they would deduct that from that amount and think we only have that amount.
⚗ AI-reconstructed · cite from original above