Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Idea - cut the useless jobs in central office. That list is extensive. Have them replace teachers who are quitting and retiring.

Feel free to itemize that to show how you get to $59 million. Actually even if you can get to $10 million that would be amazing.

That would be easy to show if MCPS were transparent and itemized..

I wish they were more transparent and I am sure there are positions that could be cut, but it won't be $59 million in positions, not even close.

Lots more than positions in the operating budget.

Anonymous wrote:That the calendar is not subject to bargaining but they urge us to complete the survey.

So what does that mean exactly??

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Idea - cut the useless jobs in central office. That list is extensive. Have them replace teachers who are quitting and retiring.

Feel free to itemize that to show how you get to $59 million. Actually even if you can get to $10 million that would be amazing.

That would be easy to show if MCPS were transparent and itemized..

I wish they were more transparent and I am sure there are positions that could be cut, but it won't be $59 million in positions, not even close.

Anonymous wrote:I didn’t read her proposal that way. I read that she is only willing to give MCPs $90mill more than last year versus the $180mill Elrich proposed. Wouldn’t it be up to MCPS to decide where to make the cuts?

They don't need more money, they need a conservator to come in and help them manage the money they have.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Idea - cut the useless jobs in central office. That list is extensive. Have them replace teachers who are quitting and retiring.

Feel free to itemize that to show how you get to $59 million. Actually even if you can get to $10 million that would be amazing.

That would be easy to show if MCPS were transparent and itemized..

I didn’t read her proposal that way. I read that she is only willing to give MCPs $90mill more than last year versus the $180mill Elrich proposed. Wouldn’t it be up to MCPS to decide where to make the cuts?

MCEA got all of the increase it wanted in the last budget. It can’t expect to get that every time. Fani-Gonzalez’s proposal makes sense to me. But it begs the question of whether MCEA should be bargaining with MCPS or the County Council, since her proposal undoes the bargaining they did with MCPS.

There isn't money for the increase that MCPS wants. She is saying this is how much money there is (which is an increase from last year).

Anonymous wrote:Idea - cut the useless jobs in central office. That list is extensive. Have them replace teachers who are quitting and retiring.

Feel free to itemize that to show how you get to $59 million. Actually even if you can get to $10 million that would be amazing.

Idea - cut the useless jobs in central office. That list is extensive. Have them replace teachers who are quitting and retiring.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:That the calendar is not subject to bargaining but they urge us to complete the survey.

If the union was willing to allow the grading days to be designated as potential half-day makeup days, it would go a long way... part of me thinks that's kind of what the Board is going to push for.

As a parent, I hope the union doesn’t agree to that. Teachers are already so behind on grading and it really negatively impacts student learning when they can’t get timely feedback.

What is ESY?

2% cola stinks but I think it’s what other units in the state are seeing given the crapfest that is the state budget and all the admin impact on fed workforce.

Anonymous wrote:That the calendar is not subject to bargaining but they urge us to complete the survey.

If the union was willing to allow the grading days to be designated as potential half-day makeup days, it would go a long way... part of me thinks that's kind of what the Board is going to push for.

That the calendar is not subject to bargaining but they urge us to complete the survey.

For those of us non-teachers, what is MCEA saying about the calendar?

MCEA email says Fani-Gonzalez proposes lowering COLAs to 2% and cutting 59 million. Aren’t there other ways to do that? MCPS spends so much money on stipends and programs that really don’t add value imo -
$10-$17k raises for NBCT - can we afford that? When teachers earn a Masters degree, their salary goes up 2-3k
6k stipends for RJ coaches. I don’t see how the stipend = the work that they do

I’m sure there’s plenty more to add…

The email also mentions voting on the new calendar proposal.

They also increased ESY hours by 2 hours per day and one extra week but didn’t increase planning time.

I thought we were trying to attract more people to the profession, aren’t we?