Time to ask hard questions about role MEA plays in public education

Beverly -

Thank you, I look forward to listening to your informed questions and the answers that will be provided to them.
.
I hope every one of the 10 school districts in the county answers these questions in the comment section.

Beverly,

You ask excellent questions and bring up hard information that I was unaware of in regards to teachers retirement benefits. I find it incredulous that a teacher or public school employee can retire at the age of 55 with full benefits. That could well mean we have to pay their way for perhaps the next 40 years of their retirement. As you said, the full retirement age should have risen just as it has for social security.

As well, I liked your stating the facts that the MEA and teachers are trying to take over our school boards. The Saline School board now has two extremely liberal former lifetime teachers serving on it and we all know what their agenda is and has been. Having retired teachers on school boards is like having a hen house guarded by a fox.

The bottom line at this point is that the NEA and the MEA have been exposed for what they are. They are power groups not ultimately interested in what's best for our children but rather what is in the best interest's for themselves at the expense of the taxpayer. If reasonable changes to pay, funding of pensions and retirement do not take place, the public school systems of Michigan are going to end up just like "General Motors" and
"Chrysler". I for one will do what I can as one citizen to demand that change takes place. I believe very simply that as "public employees" school teachers should have benefits in line with the rest of us in the private sector. Why is it that the only folks left with the "gold plated benefits" are the state/public employees who salaries we pay as the taxpayers ?

As conspiracy theories go, the idea that the MEA is "taking over" school boards ranks somewhere between alien abductions and Jimmy-Hoffa-is-alive-and-living-with-Elvis. I can't speak for other communities, but in Ann Arbor, the problem is that very few qualified people are willing to take on this difficult and thankless job. Alan Hollier was elected with no MEA support, and he spent the last few weeks of his "campaign" trying to withdraw from the race. Hmm...if the MEA is that powerful, how come they couldn't find someone to run against him? And what's so bad about having a former teacher on the Board of Education anyway? Might they not have some first-hand insight into the problems our schools face?

An letter by someone who has lived through the ordeal of being forced to lay off dedicated, low-seniority teachers because of the greed of high-seniority teachers. All while the low-seniority teachers sat in board meetings wearing union buttons and the union leaders made speeches about how evil the district was to lay people off.

Overall, unions are a good thing. It's a bitter irony, though, that in tough times teacher's unions can end up protecting those who make $70+K/yr and outright forcing districts to get rid of the younger teachers who most need the protection. Now that things are really tough, will the union leadership represent their whole membership (not to mention the students) and agree to re-open the contracts, or will they selfishly protect the highest-paid and throw the rest overboard?

With real leadership and solidarity, nobody has to lose their job and no students have to lose favorite teachers and programs.

The MEA funding school board candidates is hardly a secret. It's definately not a conspiracy theory. At least one of our school board members (who is a good guy and a good board member) ran because the union approached him and offered to help fund a campaign.

I agree with most of what Beverly Geltner says but I don't see how district consolidation would produce the major savings we need. If district was merged, you could get rid of that district's board & superintendent, and probably curriculum director and business manager. Most of the rest of the work, though, will still have to be done by someone regardless of who signs the paycheck. Those savings might be enough when schools were facing stagnant funding. In today's world it's not going to be enough. And you run the risk of creating a larger bureaucracy as you move the leadership farther from the schools themselves.

Regarding the following comment, experienced teachers in Ann Arbor have been known in the past to agree to contractual concessions in order to keep the younger teachers within the district.
"It's a bitter irony, though, that in tough times teacher's unions can end up protecting those who make $70+K/yr and outright forcing districts to get rid of the younger teachers who most need the protection. Now that things are really tough, will the union leadership represent their whole membership (not to mention the students) and agree to re-open the contracts, or will they selfishly protect the highest-paid and throw the rest overboard?"

Beverly, Why didn't you get answers and fix these "problems" when you were in charge? What were your accomplishments? What happened when YOU zero budgeted? Luxury health insurance? You should have answered that one!
If we were a civilized country with national health insurance we wouldn't be speaking of this and our auto companies might be competitive!
You should know very well that the Insurance companies don't want to compete. They want to deny coverage to the premium payers so they can pay the billionaire CEO and the shareholders and Corporate bosses.
Because the Insurance Industry that rents our govt wouldn't have it any other way!

http://www.meaexposed.org/images/SaltersGranholm.jpg

I do think this picture says it all: MEA president Iris Salters and Governor Jennifer Granholm on the governor's plane, spring 2008

David,

"if we were a civilized country with national insurance, we wouldn't be speaking of this and our auto companies might be competive".

First off, having the government take over health insurance has nothing to do with being civilized !! Secondly, the auto companies went bankrupt because they were offering insurance and benefits that were far too expensive. Government health care though will make all other options look cheap. Look no further than Canada and across the pond.

The insurance companies want to compete David, it is state and federal laws passed by corrupt leaders that won't allow that to happen.

Is this the same Beverly Geltner that got ran out of Saline for being, well, flexible with the truth? If I remember, she lied about having conversations with a doctor and when she finally did have the conversation, she lied about what he said. It was all very reminiscent of, "It depends on what the definition of 'is' is."
---
She's a perfect example of why people knowledgeable about education should be on a school board. Those board members helped the rest of the board understand that it was bad when Bev purposely emailed the grades and details of IEPs to every employee in the district (from the teachers to the guy that changes the urinal cakes). The conspiracy-theory just doesn't hold water.
---
The MEA is not a threat to Michigan and it is not trying to take over the schools. It's a professional organization that protects worker rights. It's unfortunate that a successful union is an exception, not the rule. And the CEO's have won when they can cut wages, eliminate benefits, rob pension funds, buy an election, and get the common man to blame it on the union. Instead of attacking unions, you should be working to form one...unless you work at wal-mart, in which case, you shouldn't form a union because they'll just close down your store.
---
All this anger towards unions, health insurance, benefits, and teachers is so miss-placed.
http://blog.mlive.com/annarbornews/2007/10/medium_geltner_beverley.jpg

The fact that former state Supt. Tom Watkins was "forced out" after presenting this report:
http://www.michigan.gov/documents/michiganschoolfunding_110803_7.pdf
to the state board of education seems to clearly demonstrate how much power the MEA has over Gov. Granholm. Watkins gave this report 5 years ago... the Governor has had a LOT of time to change things... but she hasn't done anything to prevent this crisis. Nothing at all. Why?

Hmm. I seem to remember that there are three branches of government, two of which have to agree to make new law and to pass budgets. There is an honest disagreement in Lansing over what to do, because there is a fundamental disagreement over whether government is a tool in service of the people, or a "beast" that needs to be "starved." The standoff between the Governor and the Senate majority is a perfect example of this.

None of the changes outlined in that report could begin without real leadership in the Legislature, from both houses.

To be perfectly honest, the driving force behind school funding problems (and much of our economy's problems) is the breathtaking increase in the cost of health care. That's reflected in this report, and it is even more true five years later.

So, really want to fix school funding without new taxes? How about supporting real health care reform?

@Steve Norton, MIPFS : "None of the changes outlined in that report could begin without real leadership in the Legislature, from both houses."
--------
I agree, but Granholm quite essentially shut down the debate by "firing" the messenger (Watkins) and burying his message.

Incidentally, I DO support real health care reform, and I agree- it would help school funding a great deal. But I also believe uncontrolled pension costs are taking a huge chunk of money that should be going to the kids in the classroom, and full pension and health benefits for 55 yo retirees is more than our sour Michigan economy can bear.

Watkins wrote a recent article with updated recommendations:
http://www.freep.com/article/20091026/OPINION05/91026040/1068/opinion/A-foot-on-necks-of-our-kids

He calls for a tax increase as a bridge to help implement structural reform, and then to sunset the tax in 2-3 years. I would absolutely support a tax increase that would help re-align the costs of education to what the state can actually afford.

What is the big deal about retiring at 55? People in the private and public secotr alike are allowed to retire after 25-30 years of service. Plus, a lot of these people in charge of the budgets, both public and private sector offer early buy-outs, the equivalent of retirement, for a long term savings. i agree with some of the other comments, but putting a number on retirement is pretty crazy. Theoretically, someone could have close to 35 years, if not 30, in by the time they hit 55.

here is one kicker, a lot of governement employees, state local and federal, retire from one position, get that pension, and then get re-hired in another publicly funded position, earning a salary and getting more benefits than they would if retired, e.g. medicare. that type of double dipping needs to be looked into.

Regarding retirement, normal retirement age in the US is age 66. (See http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Retirement#cite_note-4 for more information.)

To give full retirement benefits at age 55 to teachers is quite spectacular, in my opinion. Especially since people are living so much longer- and the teacher's pension fund is so underfunded.

Many US "public servants" such as military, police, and fire do have special retirement systems that allow them to retire early- most also have reduced benefits based on length of service.

Just a few comments on pensions:

Public school teacher (and other employee) pensions are provided by a state system, the Michigan Public School Employee Retirement System. It is governed by the state legislature, and the terms of pensions are not subject to collective bargaining.

One problem the system has faced is that the investments it holds as reserve to pay future pension liabilities have tanked twice in the last ten years. This has forced them to increase the level of current contributions from school districts (which must pay a percentage of payroll into the system).

The other problem is that, while the retirement benefit ("pension") portion is fully funded by past contributions, the health care portion is "pay as you go," rather like Social Security. That is, contributions from current workers are paying the benefits for current retirees. And, like Social Security, the system faces a squeeze between a growing number of people collecting benefits and a shrinking number of current workers paying into the system. Add to that the truly shocking increase in the cost of health care for everyone, and you have a disaster slowly unfolding.

Everyone should know that rules on pension eligibility and vesting for teachers were tightened significantly by the Legislature in 2007. However, they cannot change the rules for people already in the system. It will take time before savings from these changes start to materialize.

Everyone should also know that changing from a defined benefit to a defined contribution system takes a huge amount of money when your current system is "pay as you go." Somehow, you need to cover the costs of current retirees while current employees' contributions go into their individual accounts. That is something best done when there is money to spare, not when the budget is in total disarray.

Here is the state's web page about the Michigan Public School Employee Retirement System that Steve Norton mentions:

http://www.michigan.gov/orsschools

and there are detailed financial reports through FY 2008 at

http://www.michigan.gov/orsschools/0,1607,7-206-36585-117850--,00.html

Oh, so first it was there were too many hanger onners in the school system that were not doing anything for the kids, they need to go, but they can't go before what wikipedia has identified the "normal' retirement age.

A move to defined contribution benefits for new employee would produce immediate savings. This year 17% of each teachers income is being put into the retirement fund. With a defined contribution 401K type plan that would typically be capped at 7%. The MEA is way too powerful. We need immediate reforms to modify tenure, arbitration and pension laws to reflect current conditions.

Replying to: "Oh, so first it was there were too many hanger onners in the school system that were not doing anything for the kids, they need to go, but they can't go before what wikipedia has identified the "normal' retirement age."

Things DO have to change. Retiring at age 55, given the weakened funding state of the pension plan, and the fact that 42% of all school fund increases went right into retirement costs over the past 5 years, simply doesn't work anymore. Of course, we could have just given senior teachers early-out buyouts to save salary expenses today. Never mind the funding fate of future students...(!) Perhaps a better way to get rid of "hanger-onners" would be to revise the teacher tenure laws.

I think the stimulus funding and/or a tax to transition to a 401(K) pension plan should be given great consideration. See HB 4527 http://www.michiganvotes.org/2009-HB-4527

People need to get over their partisan views to find solutions- for adequate and stable funding AND ALSO restructuring the costs of our schools.

Steve,
You stated, "Everyone should also know that changing from a defined benefit to a defined contribution system takes a huge amount of money when your current system is "pay as you go." Somehow, you need to cover the costs of current retirees while current employees' contributions go into their individual accounts."
..
How can this be true (unless you think the defined contribution plan would be much more generous than most 401K type plans)?

You also stated, "Everyone should know that rules on pension eligibility and vesting for teachers were tightened significantly by the Legislature in 2007." Can you please provide details? I haven't seen much "tightening." Also note that while retirement pensions can't be changed, retirement benefits can and must be changed.

If anyone needs a reminder about the teachers union protecting bad teachers, recall Ann Arbor Bd of Educ v Abrahams, 202 Mich App 121; 507 NW2d 802 (1993). It took 13 year and over $350,000.00 for AAPS to try and fire a teacher. The MEA continues to be too powerful.

@aataxpayer, the union was obligated to pursue that on behalf of the memeber under the Michigan Public employers labor Realtions Act, had they not, the plaintiff could have filed an unfair labor practice charge against the union with the Michigan Employment Relations commission and perhaps, a civil law suit. The benefit is that the issue is now settled law with an appellate opinon and today a union would not have to pursue such a frivolous matter.

Riddle me this though, Kwame, a convicted felon still has his state pension, which you and I are paying for. Another area of concern is State judges, all they have to do is serve one term as a judge and they get a State pension too. Again, your tax dollars at work. Personally, I think a teacher serving a community for 30 years is more deserving of a pension of some sort than a judge who sits one term on the bench.

If Michigan's economy ranks #50 in the country and we have the highest unemployment rate, then why are our teachers #16 in terms of compensation. Can we afford to pay the MEAs rates?

Treetowncartel,
I understand the union felt it had to defend the teacher, but it still illustrates that the system is broken and that legislative reforms at the state level are needed. Unfortunately, our legislators (Warren and Brater) don't want any reforms that aren't okayed by the MEA.

"Treetowncartel,

I understand the union felt it had to defend the teacher, but it still illustrates that the system is broken and that legislative reforms at the state level are needed. Unfortunately, our legislators (Warren and Brater) don't want any reforms that aren't okayed by the MEA."



AA,


"Felt it had to defend?"


Unless we voted while I was out, the presumption of innocence still trumps accusation, alone. Guilty or innocent, Union members are entitled to receive the representation they paid for as a part of their dues.


As to the notion that due process of law somehow demonstrates,"that the system is broken," we're forgetting our history. The contracts entered into are Federal labor contracts and are guaranteed by Federal Labor law, and most of the events that shaped this law occurred here in Michigan.


Like, or don't like the outcome, due process cannot reasonably be viewed as a problem. C'mon.

aataxpayer, just curious about your view on other publice employees, like the judges and perhaps U of M employees, gtting benefits and retirement packages on par or even better than those the public school employees recieve.

Longfellow,

You wrote, "due process cannot reasonably be viewed as a problem." Please keep in mind we're talking about employment, not criminal law. Most employment in Michigan is "at will." It's fine to have unions and "for cause" approaches, but something is clearly wrong when it takes $350,000 to try to fire a teacher in a case such as Alexander. I'm not suggesting throwing out the concept of "for cause" entirely, but rather statutory reforms so that truly bad teachers can be fired without so much expense. Do you really disagree with the idea that some reforms are needed?

Treetown,
You asked about my view "on other public employees, like the judges and perhaps U of M employees, getting benefits and retirement packages on par or even better than those the public school employees receive." That's a big topic! First we should note that the public sector is slowly moving to defined benefit (401k-like) pensions. For example, most state employees since 1998 have been on defined contribution rather than defined benefit pension plans. Defined contribution plan are desirable for taxpayers because they are "pay as you go" rather than leaving unknown costs to future taxpayers. Defined contribution plans also avoid the problem of taxpayers picking up the tab when a company goes bankrupt or a state fund loses huge sums in the stock market. Generally, I would like public sector employees to be on defined contribution plans to help control costs to taxpayers and also help public sector employees have greater empathy for people in the private sector. BTW, I think UM is totally defined contribution at this point.

aataxpayer, U of M matches 2 to 1,, where is that 2 coming from? And again, a judge sitting one term on the bench gets a vested pension. Call out teachers all you want, but they are not the only ones living off the dole. There is waste all over government with our money, that is more of the problem than labor costs which every industry incurs.

treetown,

Teacher pensions and retiree benefits are a bid deal because there are so many teachers! Judges and other classes of state employees should also be considered, but teacher pensions are way too generous. Note that newer teachers are paying more into the system, but it still is much more generous that the private sector receives. This could be okay if salaries were lower, but ....