We already voted to authorize the executive board to call a 1-day strike, and the board has called it: Thursday, April 29th, unless we have a settlement by April 27th. It’s a done deal unless OUSD comes back to the table.

And keeping the current salary is deceptive maneuvering on OUSD’s part; they want reopeners for the next two years. If they wanted to leave salaries the same, they’d leave them the same through the contract to avoid the risk of owing us a raise after next year’s negotiations. Clearly they plan to come back for the cuts once OEA organization and momentum have died down.

A second-year teacher made a very eloquent statement at the board meeting on Saturday. She said she was returning to OUSD only because she loved her students, but asked the district not to use her love for her students to manipulate her into accepting the lowest pay in the county.

Call me stupid, it’s just a thought.

While Title 1 monies are not supposed to “supplant” salary funding the district is obligated to provide, this provides a lot of gray area. In fact, many OUSD schools use Title 1 and other special federal funding to support class-size reduction and pay teachers who teach courses focused on below basic and far below basic students — remedial math and English classes, for example.

Personally, I think this is unethical cooking of the books — the district needs to provide the necessary number of teachers, and Title 1 money should be for special programs and interventions.

Since you have “spent a long time closely understanding and analyzing the financial situation in the district,” I wonder if you might enlighten those of us who believe there is not a human on this planet that understands OUSD’s finances — considering we have never seen anybody able to break it down transparently for the media, the teachers or taxpayers.

All I see are giant funding “buckets” (and site-based budgets) which are not descriptive or organized in a way that would increase understanding.

Hell, we are still arguing about what FCMAT did or didn’t find eight years ago!

If you really want to stop a strike, start a blog and break it all down in a way that shows the district’s use of the money is valid — I know as a parent, teacher and taxpayer, I would love to be reassured.

I’ll get you started with some questions:

1. How much money is to be spent on textbooks and related materials last year, this year and next year?
2. What is the ratio of administrative costs at a school of 300 vs. a school of 900 — is this why we are so top-heavy in salary structure, as district, that we are out of compliance on state rules on classroom funding (45% instead of 55% minimum)?
3. What does theft and embezzlement cost the district each year? How much is spent on pursuit of these crimes, especially those done by employees?
4. What does the district currently pay for “consultants”? How many of those consultants work primarily at school sites vs at HQ?

I agree, at least re: the money. And, I tend to doubt that teachers will vote to strike. The District is essentially offering to keep the current salary and benefits in place for a year, which is much better than most districts. It certainly isn’t ideal, but hardly worth striking over.

Re: #8, I’d bet that the $50,000.00 math consultant is paid from your school’s Title I funds, which is a site decision. That money cannot be used to increase salaries, but can be used to decrease class sizes (though $50K will pay for less than one teacher, once the price of benefits are figured in, so how much could that possibly reduce class sizes? And, would reducing class sizes by 1 or 2 or even 5 students really improve learning more than having a math coach? Probably not, since the research is mixed, at best, re: the effect of class size reduction).

http://www.edjoin.org/

good luck!

We are paying two superintendents: 1 local and the other from the state. Our new one received a 6% pay increase for the position. OUSD somehow came up with that. If we have the money to pay $265,000 for one person, we should not be offering 0% for teachers, the people who really count. How is it right that our administrators are among the highest paid in the county and the teachers are the lowest paid?

We have a 30% teacher turnover rate: We can’t afford NOT to pay our teachers more so that they don’t leave for greener and better paid districts.

BTW – We are not just striking over salary. We are striking over class size, along with a long list of other things (including adult ed).

I can’t speak for every school, but my school has a math consultant (along with math in-services) that amounts to about 50K yearly. Giving that up could reduce the class sizes and raise salaries, no problem.