Upper Moreland School Board approves three-year teachers contract

Upper Moreland >> The school board has unanimously approved a three-year contract with the Upper Moreland Education Association, under which district spending on net wages and benefits, excluding contributions for retirement and Social Security, will increase by $1.36 million over the current year.

The UMEA represents 227 professional staff members, such as teachers, counselors and psychologists. Its current contract with the district was due to expire on June 30, and the new agreement would be in effect from July 1, 2015, through June 30, 2018. The union voted to approve the contract on Jan. 27.

The board’s vote on the contract took place at a Feb. 3 special meeting, with Vice President Brian Davis making the motion for approval, and Mark Wenik seconding it. All nine board members participated in the meeting, with Shone Fix and David Hakes using a remote connection.

In making his motion, Davis laid out a number of provisions in the agreement, including yearly step increases, adjustment of compensation to reflect the completion of coursework, a 1.5 percent pay increase for those at the top of the salary schedule in 2015-16, a 1 percent stipend in 2016-17 and a 1 percent pay increase in 2017-18.

A “step increase” is an adjustment to compensation according to the length of an individual’s employment, while a “stipend” would be a payment that would not be considered part of an employee’s salary and would not be subject to a pension contribution by the district.

Davis’ motion also alluded to the fact that the district and the UMEA would address so-called “Cadillac Tax” penalties projected for 2017. This would refer to a mandate under the Affordable Care Act by which a 40 percent levy would be imposed on any employer when health care premiums exceed specified levels for individuals or families.

Additionally, Davis noted that the meeting agenda contained a “pretty detailed economic analysis” of the impact of the agreement on district spending.

Among other things, a chart included as part of the agenda showed that wages under the current agreement totaled $17.23 million and would rise to just under $17.8 million in 2015-16, reaching $18.59 million in 2017-18. The district’s costs for health care benefits would remain flat, at approximately $3.28 million, in each of the three years of the agreement.

Davis acknowledged that, in the third year of the contract, district spending on wages would be 7.9 percent higher than at present, assuming there are no staff changes. But, he added, teachers will retire, and new ones will be hired.

Under the agreement, Davis added, spending on net wages and benefits, including contributions to the Public School Employees’ Retirement System (PSERS) and Social Security, would increase by 4.65 percent in the first year, 2.75 percent in 2016-17, and 2.8 percent in the final year.

Davis also pointed out that the board had committed to keeping the increase in the 2015-16 district budget at no more than the 1.9 percent index under Act 1, which is the state law restricting school districts’ ability to raise real estate taxes.

On Jan. 27, the board voted on a resolution to limit the increase in the coming year’s budget increase. Davis added that the board would be working with the administration in carrying out that goal.

He also said the district had been committed to managing the growing costs of PSERS with minimal impact on taxpayers, and it would continue to do so under the contract.

While “collective bargaining can be adversarial,” Davis added, the two sides in the negotiations in Upper Moreland had “a shared understanding” of their interests.

“We are a community together,” he said.

“Thank you, one and all,” said board President Lisa Berlin, following the roll call vote.

Superintendent Robert Milrod said approval of the agreement was “cause to celebrate,” adding that it had been “achieved well ahead of time.” It was a pleasure, he said, to work in a district where respect and cooperation were the norm.

Milrod said salaries and benefits needed to be fair to both sides. He added that the board had done its job in developing a contract that was beneficial to taxpayers.