Diversified Pay
THIS IS AN OLD POST (2006)
MNEA has entered into a new collective bargaining agreement with the Board of Education. That agreement includes a pilot diversified pay plan for teachers at two Metro elementary schools. There is a trend across the country to move toward diversified pay, which can be defined as any form of pay, whether a bonus or a supplement, that goes beyond the traditional single salary schedule. Diversified pay may be given for performing specific task, gaining certain skills, or achieve pre-defined performance targets. What do you think?
The plan discussed herein was not ratified.
MNEA has entered into a new collective bargaining agreement with the Board of Education. That agreement includes a pilot diversified pay plan for teachers at two Metro elementary schools. There is a trend across the country to move toward diversified pay, which can be defined as any form of pay, whether a bonus or a supplement, that goes beyond the traditional single salary schedule. Diversified pay may be given for performing specific task, gaining certain skills, or achieve pre-defined performance targets. What do you think?
The plan discussed herein was not ratified.
posted by MetroNEA at 6:50 AM
13 Comments:
I think diversified pay is a good idea. Personally
I think diversified pay is a good idea. Teachers who teach AP courses, for example, would agree with me that the workload is heavier and more demanding than for regular classes. Perhaps tying the diversified pay to students' performance on AP tests might also work. For example, Kentucky teachers I know receive a $100 bonus for each student who passes the AP Exam.
Teachers at lesser performing schools should also be paid more - depending on the performance of their students on certain tests (EOC tests, Gateway, etc). In my humble opinion, this would give teachers an incentive to push harder to help students achive more.
Metro already has a form of diversified since we supplement teachers who have proven their teaching skills by becoming Nationally Board Certified.
I don't think teachers who teach AP courses work any harder than I do. I teach reading, language arts, social studies, and math. I have a mostly self-contained classroom. I also work on the schedule, I go to IEP meetings, I meet with and call parents continuously...it goes on and on. I think that diversified pay based on test scores and achievement only causes resentment among those who we need to be joining with as one voice...professional educators.
Delegates to the May '06 TEA Representative Assembly adopted some criteria for locals to use in agreeing to diversified pay plans. Could those be posted here? We need to be careful in what we agree to, but at the same time we need to recognize the reality that the days of just the same old salary schedule are gone.
I'd rather have a voice in how this new animal is structured than to let it be done unto me.
Here is the TEA Resolution:
ADDITIONAL COMPENSATION BEYOND THE SINGLE SALARY SCHEDULE
The Tennessee Education Association believes that any compensation system that provides additional compensation to education employees beyond that provided by the single salary schedule should incorporate the following principles:
The design of the system must be accomplished through the bargaining process or in non-bargaining school systems through a meet-and-confer process involving the local association and the local board of education.
Any additional compensation beyond the single salary schedule must not be based upon individual evaluations, student standardized test scores or value-added gain scores.
Additional compensation may be based upon group performance incentive or building performance incentive plans if any agreement on the implementation of such plans is preceded by majority approval of the professional personnel of the building(s).
Additional compensation may be based upon knowledge or skill-based pay systems which support and reward the acquisition of critical skills that contribute to professional competency and the overall success of the school system. In addition, all of the recognized skill or knowledge components should be supported by professional development opportunities and an objective system for assessing skill accomplishment.
Additional compensation may include financial incentives to attract and retain teachers with special qualifications and financial incentives for teachers who are willing to work in high priority schools.
Additional compensation may be based upon the recognition or designation of teachers as “lead teachers,” “mentoring teachers,” and/or “accomplished teachers.”
The compensation system should not directly or indirectly limit the number of education employees who are eligible for additional compensation. All education employees should be afforded numerous and varied opportunities to meet the requisite standards and should receive the additional compensation if they do so.
Full funding should be available to sustain the compensation system. The allocation of funds to provide the additional compensation should not prevent increases in the basic compensation for all education employees.
Adopted by the Tennessee Education Association Representative Assembly as a resolution, May 6, 2006.
This is a member comment received after the negative vote
I'm sure the money would be approved for use if it were earmarked to be used in a rising tide to benefit "all ships". Many of us still dont understand the selection process that determined the target schools and employees. This years pay raise from Metro was a miniscule effort that was not lost on teachers in the system. Trust is an issue.
I am saddened at the mnea "vote" (or, rather, non-vote) on the proposal that was offered for Alex Green and Inglewood ~ a pilot program that had the potential to expand to additional/all schools. I say non-vote, as I never knew of the vote until the story made the news, and so didn't have the chance, myself, to vote. Ms. Merritt's subsequent comments on the mnea website (via the press release) and in media reports, not to mention at the board meeting, are disturbing, as they border on gloating. This, after union leaders were involved in the negotiations to craft an arrangement that would, presumably, be acceptable to union members and that the leadership would, at the very least, educate members about, if not promote. I am increasingly embarrassed and at times ashamed to be a member of this union, as I find its leaders to be disingenuous in its dealings with school board members. Too many times, I find our union leaders to be a part of the problem, rarely if ever making any effort to be a part of a solution.
All members WERE given an opportunity to vote. Ballots were distributed as in the past. Those who were against the plan were apparently more motivated to vote than those in favor.
MNEA has merely responded to the questions from the press. We had no control over the outcome. Such is the nature of a democracy.
The expansion of the pilot program has never been certain. It has only been used as a teaser by the Board in the last few weeks.
Here' an interesting blog:
http://www.turbomnea.com/Merit%20Pay%20Pilot.htm
I'm very dissapointed in the new diversified pay plan. It sounds too much like the one that teachers voted down not to long ago. The set up is almost fail proof. Why can't every school have a pupil-teacher ratio of 16:1? Is MNEA really working for me?
I'm very dissapointed in the diversified pay plan MNEA adopted. It sounds too much like the one not approved not to long ago. How in the world could any teacher fail with a 16:1 pupil to teacher ratio? Why can't we all have those kinds of numbers? Has MNEA become too weak to fight for what they believe in? What happened to their original plan?
Please note that this is an old posting about a plan that was not ratified.
Post a Comment
<< Home