.
Feedback

RTM Approves Teachers' Contract

District Leaders Make Persuasive Argument As Contract Becomes Official

Going into Monday’s meeting, several Representative Town Meeting members said they were “guns blazing, ready to shoot this .” But after a 35-minute presentation by Superintendent Jerome Belair, Board of Education Chairman Donald Blevins and School Buisness Manager Ron Melnik, those minds were changed.

“This was the single best presentation of a contract I’ve seen in Waterford in the time I’ve been here,” said RTM member John Foley, who has been critical of other union contracts in the past. “I came in ready to shoot this down, and I’m ready to turn the plane around.”

The RTM passed a new three-year contract with the teachers union, with salary increases averaging 1.92 percent per year and cuts to the teacher's health insurance, by an 15 to 1 vote. The only member to vote against the contract was Republican Richard Muckle. The deal will take effect on July 1, 2012.

The Presentation

Belair, Blevins and Melnik went into detail about how the contract was settled, using statistics and examples from other districts. The key issues were to get rid of long-term retirement benefits, and address skyrocketing health insurance costs, Belair said.

“We realized our number one priority in this negotiation was health insurance costs,” he said. “Our goal was to take the big-picture approach in this contract.”

Waterford teachers will pay 18 percent, 18.5 percent and 19 percent of their health care costs over the three years of the contract, much higher than any other town union and the highest in southeastern Connecticut for teachers, Belair said. Co-pays were increased from $20 to eventually $30 by the end of the contract, much higher than all other town employees, according to district documents.

There were also cuts to retirement benefits to new employees, such as eliminating sick leave buyouts and retirement health insurance coverage for employees hired after July 1, according to the contract. Language was changed to allow the town to go out to bid to get a new insurance company, Belair said.

Belair said the 1.75 percent raise in the first year in the contract was higher than other districts. But overall for the length of the contract, the salary increases are less than the state average, he said.

More importantly, when other districts got a zero percent salary increase for teachers in the first year, there were no health care cuts in that year, Belair said. By allowing a small increase, it allowed the District to get cuts in the teacher's health insurance plan, he said.

Overall, the new contract will cost taxpayers $130,321 more in 2012-13, $170,531 more in 2013-14 and $138,918 more in 2014-15, according to District documents. Teachers with at least a bachelor’s degree and 30 hours toward their masters degree at the highest step (77 percent of all Waterford teachers) will receive a $415 pay raise, increasing their pay from $85,072 to $85,487, according to budget documents and Melnik.

RTM's Take

Several RTM members said they went into the meeting planning to vote against the contract, but decided to vote for it. And while many were pleased with the work of the administration, there were still things they would like to see changed.

RTM members Andrea Kanfer and Rodney Pinkham both argued that salary increases should not be guaranteed just for longevity. Instead, it should be performance-based, they said.

“Some of those step progressions from one year to the next are nice increases,” Pinkham said. “I’ve never seen increases like that without a pretty solid performance.”

Overall though, the group agreed the contract was “a good step forward,” as RTM member Michael Hannan said. But again, it might be just the beginning to get public sector employees to feel private sector pain, Foley said.

“In looking at the benefits, the teachers are paying more, and we need to respect that, and we certainly do,” he said. “But it seems to me that they are now paying what the real world has been paying for a long period of time.”

Union Response

"We are relieved," teachers union President Martha Shoemaker said after the meeting. "It is a good contract for the times."

Newsletter & Alerts

Get the best stories each day and important breaking news

Subscribe

Not from Waterford Patch? Find your Local Patch »

Loading comments ...
Note Article
Just a short thought to get the word out quickly about anything in your neighborhood.
Share something with your neighbors. Write a new post... What's up? Make an announcement, speak your mind, or sell something
Richard Waselik May 19, 2013 at 05:57 am
There is no "suckles away". The money is deposited by those that use it. The rest isRead More relentless retoric...
Daniella Ruiz May 19, 2013 at 05:44 am
another 'not for profit' that suckles away at the very core of peoples generosity?? better toRead More 'retire' the banking/WS thieves that casually gore the system with relentless greed, schemes and secrecy.
Ivy's Simply Homemade
nascarblue May 17, 2013 at 08:05 am
happy happy anniversary, i love your food, you can tell when a business takes pride in what they do.Read More wishing you many many more years, i will definatly be back, along with my friends, we love your food.
Kate May 22, 2013 at 06:57 pm
That's wonderful Naty! If we can get enough people like yourself, who care, we really might be ableRead More to save Cohanzie!
Naty Bush May 22, 2013 at 05:12 pm
I'll try my best to get others to go!
Kate May 19, 2013 at 02:05 pm
Oh, and please spread the word, and bring a friend to the meeting! :)
Liz May 12, 2013 at 09:06 pm
Mr. Steiner wants to build 72 three story homes on 32 acres in addition to the 60 condos in the twoRead More large buildings. That is more than two individual units per acre or if you include the 60 condos - that is MORE than 4 units per acre! The area around the property for new building is zoned 3 acres per unit. The average of currently built housing abutting the property is about one acre per unit. That is not in keeping with the neighborhood character.
Daniella Ruiz May 12, 2013 at 05:36 pm
Mr Steiner may be the last hope for this decrepit place. The neighbors need to move along, or buyRead More the place themselves. Change might help the stonewalling attitude that has become evident in nearly the entire town, revolving around exclusive entitled old farts with nothing better to do than remember their glory days of Seaside. Its gone, & it's not going to revert back to a pasture either. (too many complaints about that cow smell and so forth). My advice is to listen carefully and try to work something out, get over your own selfish grandious dreams of Pelham Manor style estates and do SOMETHING before it simply falls apart like Norwich Hospital, the countless thread/manufacturing mills, and every other historic building that has been left to rot.
Daniella Ruiz May 14, 2013 at 08:53 am
mary m>> common sense? heee hee. in this day and age? lawyers have made every attempt toRead More eradicate that concept from our every life activity. write it into some law, that can be thence used as future gurantee of use of, by and for their own existence? it's like job security for that entire group, keep the general public at a disadvantage, unable to apply common sense (whats left of it they havent entombed in laws) and uneasy about acting on their own. John Y has the right attitude, heave the cra.pp on the peoples lawn, and hope it doesn't lay there for days as well!
John Yannacci, Sr. May 13, 2013 at 10:09 am
Mary May, I don't know the legality of posting signs on telephone poles. But, take a ride aroundRead More Waterford on Saturday mornings and you'll see signs on anything that is verticle. Take a ride around the same neighborhoods on Wednesday and half the signs will still be there. I wonder if the folks who have had the same yard sale sign at the corner of Great Neck and Rope Ferry Rds. for two and a half weeks wonder why cars are still stopping at their house every Saturday morning.
Mary May May 13, 2013 at 09:53 am
Um I believe it is ILLEGAl to post ANY sign on a telephone pole ANYWAY but free standing signsRead More should be removed after sale is over ! Really a state law just COMMON SENSE we have lost along the way !