[sfordnews] SF pay cut
- From: "John S. Grispon" <discog@xxxxxxxxxxx>
- To: "Limerick Spring-Ford list list <LIM-SF@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>" <LIM-SF@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>, New List <sfordnews@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Fri, 29 Apr 2011 10:12:18 -0400
Board member asks for cut in pay for Spring-Ford principals
Friday, April 29, 2011
By Laura Catalano, Special to The Mercury
ROYERSFORD — Spring-Ford Area School District principals have agreed to a pay
freeze, but some school board members believe administrators should go one step
further and take a pay cut.
The board voted 5-3 Tuesday to table a motion to approve a plan between the
board and the Spring-Ford Principals and Administrators Association that would
have kept the administrators’ salaries unchanged through June 2012.
Board President Joseph Ciresi made the motion to table.
He said administrators had met with the board and agreed to remain “status quo.”
“I would like administrators to relook at this and take a five percent cut in
pay,” he said. “I think each of us sitting at this table has taken a pay cut.”
Ciresi added that he had received a wage reduction in the past year himself, as
a result of the economy.
“This has nothing to do with anyone’s job performance. If we’re all taking less
I would like to see the administrators taking less. It starts at the top,” he
said.
The board split 5-3 in approving the motion to table the agreement with Act 93
administrators, so that building principals could consider a proposal to reduce
their salaries. Voting in favor along with Ciresi were board members Edward
Dressler, Thomas DiBello, Bernard F. Pettit and Julie Mullin. Opposed were
Donna Williams, Mark Denhert and David Shafer. Board member Clara M. Gudolonis
was absent from the meeting.
Denhart raised concerns about the impact a salary reduction might have on the
pay scale.
“I think we have to be careful that none of their salaries get reduced below
the top of the teachers’ pay scale,” he said.
Williams objected to the fact that the proposal to seek administrative pay cuts
was made with no prior discussion of the board.
“I think if we had an issue it could have been shared at an executive session.
This is not our best effort. We can do better and I’m disappointed,” she said.
Seeking to trim administrative salaries is one of many steps the board has
taken in order to slash a nearly $12 million budget shortfall in the tentative
2011-12 budget. At Tuesday’s meeting, the board also approved three resolutions
that would allow for larger class sizes in grades K-8.
That decision, which paves the way for classes as large as 25 students in
grades K-4 and up to 28 in grades 5-8, could save the district $580,000 in
salaries and benefits next year, according to Superintendent Marsha Hurda. It
must now be approved by the Pennsylvania Department of Education.
Last month, the board also approved cutting 55 support staff, including 24
custodians, 30 instructional assistants and one technology support assistant.
To replace the lost custodians, the board had proposed contracting with the
firm Jani-King, of Philadelphia to clean district buildings in the afterschool
hours. A motion to approve the two-year $795,212 contract was also tabled
Tuesday because some board members felt they needed more information.
Upper Providence resident Kathleen Bryant brought up safety concerns, wondering
how the district could insure that the people who are cleaning for Jani-King
would have the security clearances the district requires of all its employees.
District Director of Human Services Elizabeth A. Leiss said anyone working in
the buildings would be required to have clearances on file with the district.
She also noted that Jani-King could hire back some of the custodians being let
go by the district.
“Hopefully, those employees being furloughed will be hired by Jani-King,” she
said.
Hurda also pointed out that the district would be retaining all first shift
custodians, who have the most contact with children.
The board voted 8-1 to table the decision on the custodial contract with
Jani-King, with Dehnert casting the negative vote.
“There’s still questions about the avenues we can take internally before we
make a final decision,” DiBello observed. “It’s a big decision.”
John S. Grispon
discog@xxxxxxxxxxx
610-948-7655
Other related posts:
- » [sfordnews] SF pay cut - John S. Grispon
