School Board Proposes 77% Pay Increase for Themselves

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It won’t go into effect until the next school board is sworn in.

Personally, I’m in favor of it. It’s a thankless job that requires countless hours. Who would you expect to run? How could someone hold down a full-time job AND do this? If the salary isn’t raised, you’re only going to have candidates that are wealthy.

Well, they will still be making a lot more than me, a classroom teacher with 15 years experience, an Ivy League education, a masters, and a PhD.

What step are you on? Step 12 is $93k.

Yeah, not close to that. I think they must count all the insurance they include as part of the “salary.” I am asking HR.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It won’t go into effect until the next school board is sworn in.

Personally, I’m in favor of it. It’s a thankless job that requires countless hours. Who would you expect to run? How could someone hold down a full-time job AND do this? If the salary isn’t raised, you’re only going to have candidates that are wealthy.

Well, they will still be making a lot more than me, a classroom teacher with 15 years experience, an Ivy League education, a masters, and a PhD.

No they won't. A teacher with a PhD and 15 years experiences makes 93k. Do you work in FCPS?

DP. Why is this even relevant? School Board members spend next to no time in classrooms. They aren’t doing heavy lifting like teachers!

11:03 here (others posted about the salary after me). We are a two teacher household. It’s relevant because the pp stated that the school board would be making more than a teacher with 15 years and a doctorate degree, which is not accurate.

I agree that teachers do heavy lifting, but let’s be accurate in the points we try to make.

I am at step 8 because I was not fully credited for some of my teaching experience at the college level. I don’t want to be money grubbing, but I am finding life in FFX county very expensive!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It won’t go into effect until the next school board is sworn in.

Personally, I’m in favor of it. It’s a thankless job that requires countless hours. Who would you expect to run? How could someone hold down a full-time job AND do this? If the salary isn’t raised, you’re only going to have candidates that are wealthy.

Well, they will still be making a lot more than me, a classroom teacher with 15 years experience, an Ivy League education, a masters, and a PhD.

What step are you on? Step 12 is $93k.

Yeah, not close to that. I think they must count all the insurance they include as part of the “salary.” I am asking HR.

No, the salary listed doesn’t include benefits.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Serious question: is a school board necessary? Can it be disbanded? It just seems like a big political show and the schools would be better run by educational professionals.

That would be undemocratic.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Serious question: is a school board necessary? Can it be disbanded? It just seems like a big political show and the schools would be better run by educational professionals.

That would be undemocratic.

What do you mean? Is it part of democracy to have a school board? Does every single county in the USA have one?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:With next to no advance notice the School Board is proposing to award themselves 77% pay increases to over $60K at tomorrow night’s meeting.

They’ve clearly turned what was intended to be a part-time job into a full-time job by scheduling meetings at times that discourage people with real jobs from seeking office. But they haven’t done anything that warrants this type of pay increase. It seems obscene.

Is there any way we (the people) can stop them? I.e petition, etc?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:With next to no advance notice the School Board is proposing to award themselves 77% pay increases to over $60K at tomorrow night’s meeting.

They’ve clearly turned what was intended to be a part-time job into a full-time job by scheduling meetings at times that discourage people with real jobs from seeking office. But they haven’t done anything that warrants this type of pay increase. It seems obscene.

My understanding is it's more than full-time (40 hours) on average, including many evening/weekend hours. If they gave an additional 77% pay increase the following year to get the salary to over $100k maybe you'd start to see a more diverse set of candidates (including parents) who would love to serve but can't otherwise justify the massive pay cut they'd be taking in addition to the time away from their families in evening/weekend time slots.

I don't think a school board seat for a 180k student district should be a part-time role. Maybe that was a reality at some point in the past, but doesn't seem they could do the job responsibly today if they only worked 20-30 hours a week.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:With next to no advance notice the School Board is proposing to award themselves 77% pay increases to over $60K at tomorrow night’s meeting.

They’ve clearly turned what was intended to be a part-time job into a full-time job by scheduling meetings at times that discourage people with real jobs from seeking office. But they haven’t done anything that warrants this type of pay increase. It seems obscene.

My understanding is it's more than full-time (40 hours) on average, including many evening/weekend hours. If they gave an additional 77% pay increase the following year to get the salary to over $100k maybe you'd start to see a more diverse set of candidates (including parents) who would love to serve but can't otherwise justify the massive pay cut they'd be taking in addition to the time away from their families in evening/weekend time slots.

I don't think a school board seat for a 180k student district should be a part-time role. Maybe that was a reality at some point in the past, but doesn't seem they could do the job responsibly today if they only worked 20-30 hours a week.

They don’t do the job responsibly now. Throwing more money at them won’t change that.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:With next to no advance notice the School Board is proposing to award themselves 77% pay increases to over $60K at tomorrow night’s meeting.

They’ve clearly turned what was intended to be a part-time job into a full-time job by scheduling meetings at times that discourage people with real jobs from seeking office. But they haven’t done anything that warrants this type of pay increase. It seems obscene.

My understanding is it's more than full-time (40 hours) on average, including many evening/weekend hours. If they gave an additional 77% pay increase the following year to get the salary to over $100k maybe you'd start to see a more diverse set of candidates (including parents) who would love to serve but can't otherwise justify the massive pay cut they'd be taking in addition to the time away from their families in evening/weekend time slots.

I don't think a school board seat for a 180k student district should be a part-time role. Maybe that was a reality at some point in the past, but doesn't seem they could do the job responsibly today if they only worked 20-30 hours a week.

The current school board did less than 20-30 hrs over the past four years even discussing academics. The pay raise is not necessary. They spend most of their time congratulating themselves and giving recognition to others. The county does not need to provide 'Karen' pay.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:With next to no advance notice the School Board is proposing to award themselves 77% pay increases to over $60K at tomorrow night’s meeting.

They’ve clearly turned what was intended to be a part-time job into a full-time job by scheduling meetings at times that discourage people with real jobs from seeking office. But they haven’t done anything that warrants this type of pay increase. It seems obscene.

My understanding is it's more than full-time (40 hours) on average, including many evening/weekend hours. If they gave an additional 77% pay increase the following year to get the salary to over $100k maybe you'd start to see a more diverse set of candidates (including parents) who would love to serve but can't otherwise justify the massive pay cut they'd be taking in addition to the time away from their families in evening/weekend time slots.

I don't think a school board seat for a 180k student district should be a part-time role. Maybe that was a reality at some point in the past, but doesn't seem they could do the job responsibly today if they only worked 20-30 hours a week.

Funny--a step 5 teacher makes 60k and a step 15 teacher makes 80k. The same can be said about teachers and that's probably why so many of them are leaving.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:With next to no advance notice the School Board is proposing to award themselves 77% pay increases to over $60K at tomorrow night’s meeting.

They’ve clearly turned what was intended to be a part-time job into a full-time job by scheduling meetings at times that discourage people with real jobs from seeking office. But they haven’t done anything that warrants this type of pay increase. It seems obscene.

My understanding is it's more than full-time (40 hours) on average, including many evening/weekend hours. If they gave an additional 77% pay increase the following year to get the salary to over $100k maybe you'd start to see a more diverse set of candidates (including parents) who would love to serve but can't otherwise justify the massive pay cut they'd be taking in addition to the time away from their families in evening/weekend time slots.

I don't think a school board seat for a 180k student district should be a part-time role. Maybe that was a reality at some point in the past, but doesn't seem they could do the job responsibly today if they only worked 20-30 hours a week.

The current school board did less than 20-30 hrs over the past four years even discussing academics. The pay raise is not necessary. They spend most of their time congratulating themselves and giving recognition to others. The county does not need to provide 'Karen' pay.

The way these people think is that if you give them a 33% raise they will talk 133% as long when it comes to resolutions and open-ended discussions about equity policy. They will not spend one more minute on academics or operations.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:With next to no advance notice the School Board is proposing to award themselves 77% pay increases to over $60K at tomorrow night’s meeting.

They’ve clearly turned what was intended to be a part-time job into a full-time job by scheduling meetings at times that discourage people with real jobs from seeking office. But they haven’t done anything that warrants this type of pay increase. It seems obscene.

My understanding is it's more than full-time (40 hours) on average, including many evening/weekend hours. If they gave an additional 77% pay increase the following year to get the salary to over $100k maybe you'd start to see a more diverse set of candidates (including parents) who would love to serve but can't otherwise justify the massive pay cut they'd be taking in addition to the time away from their families in evening/weekend time slots.

I don't think a school board seat for a 180k student district should be a part-time role. Maybe that was a reality at some point in the past, but doesn't seem they could do the job responsibly today if they only worked 20-30 hours a week.

The current school board did less than 20-30 hrs over the past four years even discussing academics. The pay raise is not necessary. They spend most of their time congratulating themselves and giving recognition to others. The county does not need to provide 'Karen' pay.

The way these people think is that if you give them a 33% raise they will talk 133% as long when it comes to resolutions and open-ended discussions about equity policy. They will not spend one more minute on academics or operations.

They are not supposed to be involved in operations. That’s for the superintendent. They are policy and oversight.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:With next to no advance notice the School Board is proposing to award themselves 77% pay increases to over $60K at tomorrow night’s meeting.

They’ve clearly turned what was intended to be a part-time job into a full-time job by scheduling meetings at times that discourage people with real jobs from seeking office. But they haven’t done anything that warrants this type of pay increase. It seems obscene.

My understanding is it's more than full-time (40 hours) on average, including many evening/weekend hours. If they gave an additional 77% pay increase the following year to get the salary to over $100k maybe you'd start to see a more diverse set of candidates (including parents) who would love to serve but can't otherwise justify the massive pay cut they'd be taking in addition to the time away from their families in evening/weekend time slots.

I don't think a school board seat for a 180k student district should be a part-time role. Maybe that was a reality at some point in the past, but doesn't seem they could do the job responsibly today if they only worked 20-30 hours a week.

Funny--a step 5 teacher makes 60k and a step 15 teacher makes 80k. The same can be said about teachers and that's probably why so many of them are leaving.

+1. School board members should not be making more than a Step 5 teacher who works at a CSS site.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:It won’t go into effect until the next school board is sworn in.

Personally, I’m in favor of it. It’s a thankless job that requires countless hours. Who would you expect to run? How could someone hold down a full-time job AND do this? If the salary isn’t raised, you’re only going to have candidates that are wealthy.

It’s a stepping stone to higher office, and fairly high profile given the size of the student population and the county’s proximity to DC.

So no, not thankless.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:With next to no advance notice the School Board is proposing to award themselves 77% pay increases to over $60K at tomorrow night’s meeting.

They’ve clearly turned what was intended to be a part-time job into a full-time job by scheduling meetings at times that discourage people with real jobs from seeking office. But they haven’t done anything that warrants this type of pay increase. It seems obscene.

My understanding is it's more than full-time (40 hours) on average, including many evening/weekend hours. If they gave an additional 77% pay increase the following year to get the salary to over $100k maybe you'd start to see a more diverse set of candidates (including parents) who would love to serve but can't otherwise justify the massive pay cut they'd be taking in addition to the time away from their families in evening/weekend time slots.

I don't think a school board seat for a 180k student district should be a part-time role. Maybe that was a reality at some point in the past, but doesn't seem they could do the job responsibly today if they only worked 20-30 hours a week.

It’s only a full time job because they insist on micromanaging the people that they hire. Their job should be to pass budgets and set policy and nothing else