Senate Bill 5: Dollars and Cents
Photos
With only days to go before election day we are being bombarded with ads from both sides concerning Senate Bill 5. While the ads for both sides contain a lot of sound bites, they contain very little factual information. The bill itself is 304 pages long, and difficult to understand. I have been through it four times now and have dissected its parts and have seen its entrails spewed out upon my desk. Some things are clear, such as the powerful blow it will deliver to public employee unions in the state of Ohio. Other things are not so clear. The fuzziest picture of all is the monetary impact that Senate Bill 5 will have upon the state of Ohio, its local government entities and school districts.
The proponents of Issue 2 would have you believe that Senate Bill 5 will go a long way toward reducing this year’s $8 billion deficit in Ohio; but nothing could be further from the truth. The immediate impact of Senate Bill 5 upon the state’s budget will be minimal. Consider governor Kasich’s call for all public employees to pay 10 percent of their wages toward their retirement and 15 percent toward the cost of their health care. First of all, every single one of the employees of the state of Ohio currently pays 10 percent of their wages toward their retirement. According to the State Employment Relations Board, a state agency headed by an appointee of Kasich, all state employees actually pay more than 15 percent of their health care. According to the board’s report issued earlier this year, state of Ohio employees with single coverage pay 16.9 percent of their health care premium, while those state of Ohio employees receiving coverage under a family plan pay 17.8 percent of the premium.
The call for public employees to pay 10 percent toward their retirement actually only impacts a quite small number of our public employees. The vast majority of public employees (well over 90 percent) pay the full 10 percent contribution required by law toward their retirement. A small number in various communities have what is called a pension pickup. That is where the employer pays all or part of their pension contribution. The number of employees receiving a pickup has been steadily declining as new contracts come up for negotiation. So while this provision will have some impact on certain local governments, the fact remains that it will have no impact whatsoever on the budget of the state of Ohio. The focus on pensions in Senate Bill 5 is a bit of a misdirection as well because pension reform for Ohio’s five public employee retirement system is currently being addressed by the Ohio legislature in Senate Bill 3 and House Bill 69.
To be fair, there will be some savings to some local governments and school districts under the 10 percent retirement and 15 percent health care payment provisions, but it will be minimal in the case of the retirement provision. The requirement for public employees to pay 15 percent of their health care costs will have a more significant impact upon local governments and school districts than upon the state, because the state employees already pay more than 15 percent toward their health care. The State Employment Relations Board (SERB) states in its report that statewide, public employees pay an average of 9.5 percent for coverage under a single policy and 10.7 percent for coverage under a family policy, while all state of Ohio employees pay 16.9 percent of their health care premium for a single plan while those employees receiving coverage under a family plan pay 17.8 percent of the premium. The savings to any individual local government or school district will depend upon their current agreements with its employees and vary widely. And significant savings in health care costs will only be seen some time in the future if Senate Bill 5 goes into effect.
One of the provisions of Senate Bill 5 is that health care becomes an item that is not open for negotiation. Employees will have no say-so or input about the health care they will receive. Even though Senate Bill 5 says that employees must pay at least 15 percent of their health care costs, it is quite likely that they will pay significantly more. If not through a higher percentage of the premium cost, they more likely will be required to pay higher deductibles and co-pays and have to accept lesser coverage. Teachers and school employees could be hit the hardest with reduced health care benefits and out-of-pocket expenses. Section 9.901 (B) of Senate Bill 5 creates the School Employees Health Care Board, a new bureaucratic division of state government aimed at regulating and controlling the health care benefits of teachers and school employees. Further on in Senate Bill 5 there is a provision in section 9.901 (J) to create the School Employees Health Care Advisory Committee under the School Employees Health Care Board. Both aim to control the health care of our teachers and school employees without any input from them.
But all of the aforesaid savings are mostly future savings of an uncertain amount that will do little to offset this year’s $8 billion deficit.
If Issue 2 is approved, there will be some limited savings in the first year. Longevity pay for public employees will be a thing of the past. The projected savings from the elimination of longevity pay would be hard to estimate, especially since a lot of contracts are now calling for reductions in longevity pay and the elimination of longevity pay for newly hired employees. Another area of some savings would be in the elimination of what are called step increases within public employee classifications. These savings through elimination of step increases is problematical in that they could be offset by raises based upon “performance." The stipulation that raises and even employment by public agencies be based upon performance is found in many sections of Senate Bill 5. However, there is no definition or criteria for what constitutes “performance” in Senate Bill 5. The definition and criteria for performance-based raises in the public sector will only be known some time in the future because Senate Bill 5 gives the Ohio Director of Administrative Services the power to define “performance." While we are on the subject of performance in public service, section 124.94 (A) of Senate Bill 5 creates another level of bureaucracy titled the Ohio Commission for Excellence in Public Service with 11 members and additional committees as it deems necessary.
The performance of school teachers is a complicated matter that seems to have received special attention in Senate Bill 5. In a complicated performance evaluation process that includes peer review, teachers pretty much lose any consideration of their length of service under Senate Bill 5. For some reason, teachers and school employees seem to be singled out in Senate Bill 5 in that they will be hardest hit by the bill, in my opinion. Perhaps it is because teachers and school employees make up more than half of our public employees in Ohio. Or maybe it is because Gov. Kasich has a personal grudge against teachers. Of that I cannot be sure nor would I want to speculate on the matter.
Another area where there will be nebulous savings under Senate Bill 5 is in the changes in the payout of accumulated benefits upon retirement or lawful termination of public employment. The bill limits the payment for items such as accumulated sick leave and accumulated vacation. But these savings won’t materialize until some future unknown date as employees reach retirement age. In fact, there could be an increase of payouts in the near future to employees as they rush to retire in order to beat the decrease in payments for accumulated benefits when Senate Bill 5 takes effect.
Vacation time and sick leave time is somewhat limited by Senate Bill 5. The maximum amount of vacation will be five weeks for employees with 19 years of service and the sick leave is reduced from 15 days a year to 10 days a year. Both items will result in uncertain saving only at a future date. And you will most likely see an increase in the amount of sick days taken by public employees as the figure they might as well use the sick time rather than let it go to waste. Once again, the immediate impact of the reduction in vacation and sick leave will have a negligible effect on the $8 billion deficit.
The one area where significant savings will be seen if Senate Bill 5 becomes law is in the limitations that are placed on the bargaining rights of public employees.
First of all, employees will not be able to negotiate on “the continuation, modification or deletion of an existing provision of a collective bargaining agreement.” This limitation on the ability of public employees to bargain means they will be starting from scratch. The ability to negotiate on health care and other fringe benefits is prohibited by Senate Bill 5. Senate Bill 5 only allows the public employer and public employees to negotiate on “wages, hours, terms and conditions of employment.” All other subjects are reserved to the public employer and are nonnegotiable. Senate Bill 5 goes on to further limit the ability of public employees to negotiate in good faith in that the employer only need to make one offer, basically on a take-it-or-leave basis. If the two sides are then not able to reach an agreement within a specified time, the impasse is then submitted to the State Employment Relations Board, which will appoint a fact finder. If the two sides are not able to reach an agreement after the fact finder’s report, the proposals of each side are submitted to the legislative authority or school board in the case of schools, which would then select the proposal it deems best and that proposal would then become a binding agreement for three years. There is some additional language where the voters of the municipal entity or school district would actually vote on the proposals of the two sides. But I feel that is a very unlikely scenario that I very much doubt we will see take place. All in all, this process would only take place as contracts come up for negotiation and would take time to come to fruition. These processes, along with the elimination of the right to strike, severely limit the ability of public employees to bargain collectively. There are other facets of Senate Bill 5 such as privatization of services and the rights of public employers to void agreements when under a fiscal watch or fiscal warning that could result in cost savings but once again they would be problematical and only at a future date. All in all, the impact of Senate Bill 5 upon public employees will set back employer and employee relations 50 years realizing little immediate cost savings.
The impact of Senate Bill 5 upon police and fire personnel, along with school teachers, effectively takes away their basic rights. It eliminates binding arbitration for police and fire personnel; the only recourse to resolving differences with their employers that they had under current law. The police and fire personnel, the very people we depend upon to protect our property, ourselves and the rights that we cherish will be denied some of those same rights under Senate Bill 5. Our teachers, upon whom depends the future of our children and hence the future of our society, would be relegated to the status of second-class citizens. The very fabric of our society is dependent upon the police and fire personnel along with teachers and school employees.
While the immediate cost saving benefits of Senate Bill 5 are questionable, the long-term negative consequences of its taking effect are certain.
For those who are interested, I will once again provide a link to the entire bill as passed.
This link is for a summary of Senate Bill 5 prepared by the Ohio Legislative services commission.
I will gladly respond to any comments as long as they are civil, don’t involve name calling or inappropriate language.
Victor Mooney
10:39 am on Friday, October 28, 2011
Eloquent, detailed, well thought out, all those things----but the Union line just the same. Amazing how efficient our minds work when the result is decided before the facts are considered---I won`t even attempt to argue with all the missguided rhetoric---I just hope the eloquence is still prevalent in the articles explaining the consolidations, closings, layoffs, and job eliminations come January---they will come!
Ken Palosi
11:04 am on Friday, October 28, 2011
Victor, even if we don't agree your calm and civil remarks are appreciated.
Kristina Bunnell
12:13 pm on Friday, October 28, 2011
Thank you Ken!
Cynthea Sabolich
9:56 am on Sunday, October 30, 2011
My nephew is a firefighter in Yardley PA. A volunteer firefighter. They have no union. They have no collective bargaining. They pay some of the people but some, not so much. This is an upscale community which values their homes and have the money to protect them. I wonder if their services would be better or worse if they had union negotiators telling them how to allocate their resources. I wonder if the City Managers treat them like dirt and can't wait to dismiss one of them for some trumped up charge or get one of their children in the job instead of someone more qualified. From what I hear, not so much. It is a collaborative been the service providers and the community.
The majority of workers in Ohio don't have collective bargaining but even if they did, Issue 2 doesn't take that away from them. Most of Ohioans have to sit down with a financial planner and make a pathway to retirement. But even if they didn't, even if they got the same deal as the Ohio public service employee, the dirty little secret is these plans have massive shortages so in the end, those that put themselves on the line with their lives, might not see a dime when the time comes because promises were made that cannot be kept. That needs to be addressed.
A police/fire fighter retires after 30 years, pays in $150K but lives to 75 and collects $1 million+. Those are not numbers we can sustain.
We need reform and we need it now. Vote YES for fiscal sanity.
Cynthea Sabolich
10:23 am on Sunday, October 30, 2011
"If Issue 2 is approved, there will be some limited savings in the first year."
A former researcher for the PD used data from the US Labor department, and other original sources to evaluate the savings ratio. Cuyahoga county will save $150,000,000 through changes in pension pickups, healthcare savings, and other benefits. Not having to do this pay outs means they can keep more workers on the job.
Ken seems to think Gov. Kasich is the problem, not the $8 billion in debt. But he is right, we cannot and will not be balancing the $8 B with Issue 2. We will, however, go a long way towards restoring fiscal sanity. And we will do it without additional burdens to business and taxpayers. When we squeeze too tight, businesses leave and take their employees with them. In Kens perfect world, the police taxes will support the teachers, and the fire fighters will pay for the police. In his world, the economic reality that the non union, non government regular Joe has to deal with today shouldn't impact the public employee. No. That is just not logical or reality based thinking.
Why would a left leaning news organization support a YES vote on Issue 2? Because it must be done.
The Plain Dealer sees the writing on the wall, do you? http://www.cleveland.com/opinion/index.ssf/2011/10/the_law_will_need_adjustments.html
mike
11:40 am on Sunday, October 30, 2011
How can you compare a volunteer fire department that does 500 yes 500 calls per year to cities like Cleveland over 20,000 runs, Euclid 8000 runs , Mentor 7000, Parma 7000, East Cleveland 5000, and every larger city in the Northeast Ohio area. Yardley Pa is also an upscale community with a smaller population than any of the cities I have listed. I looked at their monthly run totals we have gone on more runs in one day then they go on in a month. To even try to compare that and use that to justify your opinion is ridiculous. We go on ambulance runs all day long they never stop this is not 1950 where the Fireman sit around the Firehouse make chili and wait for a fire like some of you still want to believe. I implore you to ride in any of these cities especially Cleveland and then you will understand what we deal with on a daily basis. I have stated this numerous times to people and we still have never had any one from the general public come and ride in our city.
Cynthea Sabolich
12:15 pm on Sunday, October 30, 2011
Mike, there is no comparison between a place like Yardley and a place like Cleveland or Cincinnati. I was down in Columbus for the hearings and heard how the city has their hands tied and the unions will actively encourage layoffs while keeping middle managers. Days earned at entry level get accumulated and then cashed out at the maximum highest pay rate.
My point isn't that every city is Yardley, nor can you compare Solon Ohio to Toledo Ohio. It would be, to borrow your words, ridiculous.
Cities do need the tools to be unique to solve THEIR problems, meet the needs of their citizens, and to figure out how to do it with the money they have. To say to inner city Cleveland, you guys have more fires, put our fire fighters at greater risk, ergo we are going to tax you like a rich guy, is insane. They don't have the money!
We are a unique and complex state, so rules which were put in 27 years ago are getting corrected now because they aren't working. Not just me saying it, all the major news papers are saying it too. The numbers are saying it.
mike
11:57 am on Sunday, October 30, 2011
Burton can't get volunteers any more which is why they are going to a paid Fire department. Who is going to go to school for 2 years and then volunteer for a city to go on 15 to 20 ambulance runs a day with 4 to 6 of those after midnight. You are you going to volunteer your time? I didn't think so. I work in a city where most of you are afraid to drive through let alone come for the day and see how a Fire Department operates. Most Fireman are cross- trained Firefighters and Paramedics and most have college degrees so what do you think is a fair salary for that the $22.00 to $25.00 an hour that I am getting rich on or minimum wage which you probably believe. So go ride in one of the cities above that I have mentioned and you will get a real eye opener into what our reality is, not the imagined and perceived one of 1950.
Cynthea Sabolich
12:25 pm on Sunday, October 30, 2011
Mike, have you ever worked in an Operating Room? Been on call for another 24 hour stretch after your 40+ hours? Worked rotating shifts and alternating weekends? The point is that there can be down sides to every job but we just get the violins and tears when it comes to police and fire and nurses and teachers. The hardest job in Ohio is being a small grocery clerk or owner in a bad neighborhood. Their risks are daily, every customer a potential robbery, and guess what, they don't get paid for days off, holidays, vacations, or have the 'right' to collective bargaining. Compare real life jobs. No firefighter has died in the line of duty (fire, smoke inhalation, collapsing structure, accident en route) in NE Ohio in over 25 years. But small corner store owners have, by the dozens. So let's stop pretending that every one else in Ohio is living in utopia while the poor public service employee is getting shafted - and if what I keep reading is correct - even with the unions. People live without bossing their bosses and telling them how many employees should be on each shift. The fact is that money flows directly from the unions to the campaigns of those who will "agree" to their demands, and that means that the tax payers don't get anyone to collectively bargain for them.
mike
2:17 pm on Sunday, October 30, 2011
I guess you can tell that to these guys.
Last Name First Name Date of Death Nature of Death Local Number Rank
Quinn Kevin 10/30/2010 Cardiac Arrest L0136 Lieutenant
Teare Edward 3/31/2010 Heart Attack L2375 Lieutenant
Moore John 3/29/2010 Heart Attack L0067 Fire Fighter/Paramedic
McCafferty Joseph 1/16/2010 Stroke - Cerebral Hemorrhage - CVA L0291 Lieutenant
Hall James M. 5/30/2009 Cardiac Arrest L0249 Captain
Darrington Michael 2/27/2009 Heart Attack L0092 Fire Fighter/Paramedic
Sparks Harold 1/17/2009 Cardiac Arrest F0088 Captain
Zang-Broxterman Robin 4/4/2008 Burn: Thermal L3915 Captain
Carver Keith 12/10/2006 Cancer: Other L0109 Lieutenant
Jenik Edward 9/27/2006 Cardiac Arrest L2380 Captain
Collier Jeffery 5/15/2006 Cancer: Other L3036 Lieutenant
mike
2:18 pm on Sunday, October 30, 2011
Not to mention the hundreds of others that have died of cancer but thats ok we don't work in the real world.
Condron James T. 10/16/1984 Infectious Disease L0445 Fire Fighter
Walsh John 5/1/1984 L0312 Fire Fighter
Shively Richard 4/26/1983 Cardiac Arrest L0381 Fire Fighter
Shelton Earl 1/1/1983 L0474 Fire Fighter
Kibler Philip 12/10/1982 Cardiac Arrest: On Duty - Non-Emergency (Physical Fitness) L1176 Fire Fighter
Gates Maurice 12/1/1982 Asphyxiation, Smoke Inhalation L0067 Fire Fighter
Cathcart Donnie "Gene" 5/19/1981 L0092 Fire Fighter
Eierdam Richard 5/1/1981 L0639 Fire Fighter
Jankowski Eugene 5/1/1981 L1690 Fire Fighter
Hauserman Lawrence 1/18/1981 Trauma, Blunt L0048 Fire Fighter
Plogman Robert 6/22/1980 Burn: Electric L0445 Fire Fighter
Meluch Paul 1/14/1980 Cardiac Arrest L0721 Fire Fighter
Dolak Michael 1/1/1980 L0312 Fire Fighter
mike
2:23 pm on Sunday, October 30, 2011
Can someone explain to me how I can get merit based pay since nobody knows not even our lawyers .One day I drive the engine another I am on the ambulance, one day I am in thee jump seat and another day I am acting lieutenant?
mike
2:36 pm on Sunday, October 30, 2011
"The fact is that money flows directly from the unions to the campaigns of those who will "agree" to their demands, and that means that the tax payers don't get anyone to collectively bargain for them." The fact is that money flows from rich corporations through their lobbyists to our politicians who agree to their bought and paid for demands. What power does a Fire department union have in our city it is none. If the city has no money thats it we understand that. We have given concessions numerous times to save our fellow Firefighters jobs a few of which still don't appreciate that fact. Also thats why we haven't had a raise in 6 years. I wish we had this so called magic power that everybody thinks. Just call the bill what it is a union busting bill plain and simple . Why does the bill remove all officers from the union? To reduce union members period. Why does it make it illegal to pay union dues from my paycheck? Police, Fire, and Teachers unions have predominantly backed the Democrats with teachers giving the most money. If you eliminate your competitions funding you can eliminate the competition plain and simple. I pay 18% to health care now since the bill says 15% do I get a 3% raise? I don't think so. All we ask for is a voice and thats what collective bargaining does.
Mary Jo Stack
10:41 am on Monday, October 31, 2011
Thank you Ken! Vote NO on Issue 2!
Cynthea Sabolich
8:51 am on Tuesday, November 1, 2011
The cost of Voting No on Issue 2 is real, it is personal and it is coming out of your wallet. Read about it here http://www.redstate.com/jasonahart/2011/10/31/cost-of-no-on-ohio-issue2/
Without Senate Bill 5, every resident of these Ohio school districts would have to pay between $1200 and $1500 in 2015 to cover the deficits forecast last fall:
Lakewood Local School District $1,498
Princeton City School District $1,383
Upper Scioto Valley Local School District $1,376
Hudson City School District $1,368
Avon Lake City School District $1,345
St. Marys City School District $1,333
Osnaburg Local School District $1,314
Maple Heights City School District $1,293
Berlin-Milan Local School District $1,292
Nordonia Hills City School District $1,283
Russia Local School District $1,276
Huber Heights City School District $1,273
Northmont City School District $1,273
Valley View Local School District $1,266
Bradford Exempted Village School District $1,262
Southwest Licking Local School District $1,260
Benton-Carroll-Salem Local School District $1,251
Oakwood City School District $1,249
North Olmsted City School District $1,242
Medina City School District $1,240
Beachwood City School District $1,213
In 2010, more than 450 Ohio school districts forecast deficits amounting to more than $100 per resident by 2015. These 21 districts aren’t even the worst examples! For more see http://thathero.com/sb5/deficits/
Crazy Tea Party Cynthea
3:17 pm on Tuesday, November 1, 2011
Wow Cindy! that's crazy - Just think how much we could save if we quit forfeiting our tax dollars by offering private sector companies (like yours) tax rebates, abatements, and other incentives to try to stop the blackmail threat of you leaving for another tax friendly state.
Instead of basing your posts on future projections and pure conjecture - you should go back and count all the tax breaks ALREADY given to little companies like yours and we could could see how that would impact education and taxes for all.
Or maybe it;s just time to realize we are all gonna have to fork over more taxes and give up any incentives we now have to fund our childrens education.
You know what's even more crazy? Subscribing to that brain washing tea party business you and your husband helped organize in your rich cozy little community.
Cynthea Sabolich
6:07 pm on Wednesday, November 2, 2011
Alinsky methods - attack the messenger. You can't even think up an original name so you can pretend to be a citizen.
Susan Ruiz Patton
4:21 pm on Wednesday, November 9, 2011
A user has been suspended for using an alias. Our terms of use prohibit that. http://avon-oh.patch.com/terms
Robert Arnold
6:09 pm on Tuesday, November 1, 2011
Thank you Ken for your post. Firefighters, policemen, teachers, and public workers are our neighbors. They work hard, protect our cities, and educate our children. It is not a glamorous job, and none of them enter their vocation to get rich. Please VOTE NO ON ISSUE 2!
Ken Palosi
7:41 pm on Tuesday, November 1, 2011
Thanks Robert.
Victor Mooney
7:16 pm on Tuesday, November 1, 2011
When this election is over next week, win or loose, I would like to invite all those who are advocating a "no" vote on Issue2[SB5]--to bring all your arguments to a seminar which I am sponsoring. We will have bridges in all of the major cities, terrific parcels of land in Louisana, Florida, and Arizona, and oceanfront property in Arizona, Montana, Wyoming, and other states, all at bargain sale prices---using the same math used here---you will be able to buy, invest, at pennies on the dollar, securing your future in LaLa land, for years to come.
Robin Anderson
4:14 pm on Wednesday, November 2, 2011
That's some bad hat, Harry.
The original Bill
11:17 am on Wednesday, November 2, 2011
Cindy you math is a little off. Just starting at the top with Lakewood. You say every resident will have to pay $1498 to cover the deficit. With just over 50,000 residents in Lakewood, using your logic the Lakewood Schools face a deficit of over $74 Million? You are way off base honey.
Cynthea Sabolich
6:14 pm on Wednesday, November 2, 2011
Bill, another person who doesn't want to man up and put his full name on this post, these are not my numbers. I put the link there. Maybe it isn't all citizens, maybe it is only the homeowners, which would make sense since it is only the homeowners who have to pay estate taxes and levys on their homes.
Frankly, all you guys/girls who like to critic my facts but have none of your own, amuse me when I see fake names, bogus names. Obviously I'm unabased and unashamed and have more class than all you fearful union thugs.
Victor Mooney
3:52 pm on Wednesday, November 2, 2011
Take heart Cindy--reasonable folks know your figure is accuarte---of course after taking out children, retirees, etc---the numbers come down drastically---Your point is well taken and much more reasonable than those who wish to pick you apart, call you names, etc, because all they have is the union line and facts are not part of their argument.
Cynthea Sabolich
6:15 pm on Wednesday, November 2, 2011
Thanks Vic, see above post. It is homeowners not citizens. People who are doing their part to get by, make their mortgage, and stay above water.
Harry H.
5:34 pm on Wednesday, November 2, 2011
yada yada the Koch brothers told me, yada yada job creators, yada yada can't tax the wealthy, yada yada mean union bosses, yada yada yada. Listen to yourselves! same old lame aurguments. The working class will never strive in a free-market society with no unions. keep spewing the same old stuff but nobody is buying it. Occupy WallStreet! Down with Issue 2!
Cynthea Sabolich
6:16 pm on Wednesday, November 2, 2011
Another one who is ashamed or afraid to put his full name. Vic, looks like you and me are the only ones with facts and deserve to stay here at the patch.
Neil Messinger
9:09 pm on Wednesday, November 2, 2011
Cynthea,
You seemed to overlook one major detail while you were ostracizing fire fighters. Most of them are also paramedics. In an ambulance, it requires 3 or more paramedics to be run effectively. Furthermore, if a patient is suffering from cardiac arrest, it requires 3 or more paramedics (including the driver) to stabilize the victim. Possibly more depending on the injury. I have been on many ambulance rides due to Asthma and i must say it is not a pleasant one. Life threatening injuries or conditions can occur without warning. Ultimately, I would prefer 3 paramedics. But if SB5 is passed, it could not only jeopardize peoples jobs, but my life as well as anyone else's.
Victor Mooney
10:07 pm on Wednesday, November 2, 2011
Mr Messinger: Next, you will be telling us that SB5 will have an effect on the price of eggs in China---Have you no shame?
Adam C. Miller
11:54 am on Thursday, November 3, 2011
Quality teachers have nothing to fear from a merit-pay system. Poorly performing teachers do not deserve a raise...
william
2:06 pm on Thursday, November 3, 2011
Adam, what is a poorly performing teacher ? I think we should give the teachers pay by how many A's their students get. Yeah that would work !!!!
Neil Messinger
3:19 pm on Thursday, November 3, 2011
Mr. Mooney,
...Good debate tactic.......... But wouldn't you want 3 riding with you?