"Hundreds of Clark County School District employees will be notified of layoffs by the end of March, according to a memo obtained by the Las Vegas Review-Journal.
Clark County Superintendent Walt Rulffes plans to brief School Board members on the planned reduction in force at a March 26 meeting. The layoffs are needed to meet the district's funding shortfall of about $125 million, according to a memo Rulffes sent to School Board President Terri Janison."
http://www.lvrj.com/news/clark-county-school-layoffs-loom-87403672.html
As a CCSD teacher, it seems like the administration is looking for an all or nothing way to solve the budget problem in the CCSD.
The district is going to lose over $125 million dollars in the next school year in state funding, so they do have to find ways to cut costs. Since over 85% of the budget is salary and benefits, that is where the majority of cuts will have to be.
Apparently, Dr. Ruffles says he has to lay off hundreds if not over a thousand employees or reduce pay. The problem I have is that Dr. Ruffles sen out an e-mail to staff requesting input on how to cut the budget and he received over 500 suggestions. Did any of these ideas make sense to him and his administration? Are they going to implement any of them?
From what I have seen, there is still plenty of fat in the budget. For instance, people who go to trainings can take a day off and have a substitute cover their class. You are paying 2 people to cover a classroom for 1 day. A friend of mine, last week, went to a training for 3 days. Not only was her salary paid for, but so was the sub that covered her classes. This seems to be a waste of money.
As a teacher who has a job that not many people want and with my seniority, I am safe from any layoff. That being said, I would be willing to trade in staff development days for a reduced salary. Many teachers I have talked second this opinion. The CCEA, the teacher's union, has been very silent on these issues.
Our school is a Title 1 school. Because of this, we are mandated to bring in speakers on our staff development days to "train" our staff and each speaker costs a few thousand dollars. The last speaker was basically there to sell a book.
But to be honest, there are jobs in the district that are outdated or not needed. It really sucks to be those employees. But does the district really need to send all their U.S. mail to a central location? Can they privatise some services at a lower cost? Services like plumbers and electricians and painters? Can they reduce the number of bus routes? Can they hold off opening any new schools? Can they coordinate training sessions so they don't pay 2 salaries to cover 1 class? Do they have to pay teachers and other staff to go to training? Can the overtime budget be reduced, especially for the school police department?
I don't know what the outcome will be, but people will be hurt. It will include students, teachers and other staff. Hopefully the administration will make the right decisions and we will see what happens.
I agree, lets loose the four in-service days and make all schools 9 month schools!
ReplyDeleteAs a new teacher, I agree with what you said. AND, in many elementary schools they still have retired people who are working and getting their retirement AND current salary. You can hire at least 2, if not 3, newer teachers for that money! And at my school, last I heard, they are NOT being let go! Why?
ReplyDeleteAnon 2, I haven't seen that, but I suppose it can happen. Why do they do it? Probably seniority and they know a lot of people in administration.
ReplyDeleteI can see double dipping in hard to recruit jobs like math, science and special ed., not but there is an abundance of elementary teachers and you guys are going to be the hardest hit.
I too have seniority and am willing to get rid of the useless inservice days.
ReplyDeleteAnd, why do administrators have a union? We need leaders at our schools, not administrators harping about "the children" as an excuse for lousy decisions. So many principals are nothing but insecure micro-managing bullies.