Siding with the Peters Township teachers
The current dispute between the Peters Township teachers union and school board involves salaries and health insurance premiums. Regarding salaries, the union’s offer has gone from a $2,500 to a $1,900 yearly increase. The most recent offer is slightly less than that provided in the current, 2010 expired contract. The board’s offer has remained unchanged at $500 yearly increase. That is 75 percent less than that provided in the 2010 contract.
Regarding health insurance, the union’s offer requires teachers increase their contributions by 50 percent; the board’s offer requires a 100 percent increase. Added together, the board’s final offer to teachers is a $500 yearly salary increase offset eventually by more than $500 yearly in increased contributions. This offer nets less money in each paycheck for most of our teachers during the life of the contract.
Compare this to six similar districts in Southwestern Pennsylvania, which within the last three years approved contracts providing net raises: Upper St. Clair, Bethel Park, Mt. Lebanon, Canon-McMillan, North Allegheny and Quaker Valley. These unions and districts agreed to modest salary increases and modest insurance contributions, which netted a slight increase in teacher paychecks. PTSD stands alone, stubbornly and without precedent, in offering a net decrease.
Further, the PTSD budget has a fund reserve balance of $9.23 million: $3.5 million for debt service, $4.5 million for retirement costs, and a $1.9 million surplus. A surplus of almost $2 million, and the board’s best offer to teachers is a net pay cut?
We enjoy an excellent school district with a lower tax rate and higher average family income than these districts. School success depends on three factors: relative wealth, family involvement and school quality. A strand of three is not easily broken.
Comparing teacher salaries and benefits to other professions is pointless. Compare apples to apples. Compare the board’s offer to these districts. The board’s current best offer is unreasonable.
I stand with PT teachers and the union’s offer. I do not expect more for less, I benefit from the quality of our district, and I am willing to pay to sustain it.
Suzanne Kennedy
Venetia