Here’s a story you don’t see very often: a school board salary offer of a starting salary that’s larger than what its union is asking. That’s the story out of the Loyalsock Township SD (Lycoming County).

So why isn’t there a settlement after almost a year of negotiations? The disputed point is the salary schedule. According to the article, the union wants each step increase (seniority-based pay raises) to be a flat $1,000. The board says this would be too expensive.

Unfortunately the news story doesn’t make clear why this is important. Suppose (as is probable) that step increases occur annually. Assuming a $1,000/year seniority-based increase, how much additional money will a teacher have received over a five-year period, relative to his base salary at the start of the period? Answer: $15,000 ($1,000 in the first year, $2,000 in the second year, etc. — i.e., 1+2+3+4+5 = 15). Multiply that by the number of teachers, and you’ll get a big percentage jump in the district budget after 3-5 years.

None of this speaks to the merits of either side’s position in the Loyalsock dispute. The board is almost certainly right in claiming that the union proposal would be expensive. Whether or not it’s “too expensive” is impossible to judge without more information. It’s probably not reasonable to expect a news article to do much of this analysis. That’s why a board needs to put out helpful information on the district website (which Loyalsock doesn’t do).

It is reasonable, however, to expect reporters to stop parroting the union phrase “working without a contract,” as this article does. Teachers are working under a real, enforceable contract — just not the one they want. But everyone is getting paid. No one’s benefits have been limited. If teachers’ rights are alleged to be violated, they can sue for breach of contract. A few retired teachers now in their ’80s or ’90s may actually have worked without contracts back in the 1960s or maybe even in the 1970s. But it’s doubtful that even one Pennsylvania teacher still in active service has every spent even one day in a classroom without a contract. Reporters should retire that phrase “without a contract” to the scrap heap.

http://www.sungazette.com/page/content.detail/id/536415.html?nav=5011