Page 4 of 4
Re: School Levy
Posted: Mon Jan 18, 2010 8:33 pm
by Sean Wheeler
Bill Call,
Please stop with the repeated statements that Lakewood teachers have received double digit pay raises. This is a lie. Teacher salaries in this district are a matter of public record. . I challenge you to support your claims of double digit pay raises and to prove to me that I have somehow missed at least a 10% increase in my pay. If it helps your calculations, I hold a bachelor's degree and have been teaching in Lakewood for five years. That would put me on the far left side of the pay chart.
I do not wish to enter this debate, as I obviously have a vested interest in the outcome. However, it is important that the debate remain based in reality. I appreciate the words of support for our work and will continue to serve the students.
Re: School Levy
Posted: Mon Jan 18, 2010 8:51 pm
by Grace O'Malley
Sean
Don't worry too much, I think most people who read here know that Bill Call is obsessed with unions.
He has so much venom against them that he cannot see past his own nose when it comes to any FACTS regarding pay scales, raises, contracts, health benefits, etc. He frequently misrepresents the facts when the issue has anything to do with union members.
Re: School Levy
Posted: Mon Jan 18, 2010 9:21 pm
by Stephen Eisel
some people need to take a longer look in the mirror... just sayin...
Re: School Levy
Posted: Mon Jan 18, 2010 9:59 pm
by Gary Rice
Aw, Stephen....
(by the way, nice having you back with us)
OK, it may be hard to believe, but I'll take the OTHER side and defend Bill for a moment.
(Gary said... WHAT???)
To be perfectly fair, and comparing apples to apples, I think that Bill may be choosing to count longevity and salary steps for additional educational coursework taken, into his estimates for salary increases.
While those are certainly not "raises" in the classic sense of the word, they do technically represent monetary increases for certified staff in some districts.
Bill also seems to understand that salaries and benefits are indeed a lion's share of any school district's budget. Accordingly, he may think that the best chance of reducing school costs would be from unilateral union concessions, if only they could be made to do so. BUT, that's not the way our labor negotiation system works, and I believe that he also understands that too.
I've debated Bill many times on these sorts of educational matters here, I would hope that he really does not hate what he refers to as "government unions". I do think that he probably feels that unions have more power than they really do have.
Basically it all boils down to this:
It's all about negotiating fair deals for both district employees and the city school district.. That's what the collective bargaining process is all about. On their own, neither unions, nor the Board, can accomplish labor relations issues without the agreement of all parties involved. When they can work together and discover common interests, good things can happen in those win-win situations. That does not always happen.
Back to a conflict resolution class,
er, I mean the banjo...
Re: School Levy
Posted: Mon Jan 18, 2010 10:23 pm
by Stephen Eisel
OK, it may be hard to believe, but I'll take the OTHER side and defend Bill for a moment.
we are on the same side...

Re: School Levy
Posted: Mon Jan 18, 2010 10:29 pm
by Gary Rice
I just might have figured that one out
'Course, the only trouble with ALL of us gettin' on the same side of a boat, (were that unlikely metaphorical event to transpire) could be that the durn thing might roll over in the water and capsize...
Back to the canoe paddle,
er, the banjo...