Lackawanna School Board Shenanigans

[Same Old, Same Old]

But even bigger savings can be realized by eliminating the veteran (highly paid) staff. Since all it takes is two years, we could start this process now and begin to significantly reduce pension costs and salary costs. The homeowners have had enough and the highly paid teachers have to go, I am sorry but that is reality.

Seriously??? So you work at a local factory and after being there 10 years you finally make $20 an hour when they tell you hey sorry but your fired because we can hire someone for $10 an hour and start the process all over again? Last time I looked out my window I saw an American flag not the hammer and sickle.

[Same Old, Same Old]

And yo probably agree with Bethlehem Steel and others taking away our grandparents health benefits after they were promised them when they put in their 30 years. Hey, got to cut costs.

[shortstuff]

That wasn't what I was saying. Cutting experienced teachers is the wrong thing to do. No one has to be laid off. You can solve budget gaps and eliminate layoffs by:
1) asking teachers to pay more towards healthcare
2) asking teachers for salary and pension concessions
3) eliminate administration first

No need to water down education by getting rid of good, experienced teachers to save pennies when the big savings are in benefit and pension costs

I like what you posted here. Last night on the Channel 7 news it indicated top paid teachers/district. I was surprised that Lackawanna came in second as the highest paid teachers. Sweet Home district came in first. I always thought Maryvale was number one. My question to you is, since Lackawanna is the second highest paid teachers/district in the area, how is the education and is your school taxes high?

[highestpropertytaxes]

And yo probably agree with Bethlehem Steel and others taking away our grandparents health benefits after they were promised them when they put in their 30 years. Hey, got to cut costs.

Same Old, Same Old, I agree that Genoobie's recommendation is not the intelligent way to balance a budget. Across the board salary and benefit concessions, which would prevent good, experienced teachers from being laid off, would be the smarter way to balance a budget.
But just to comment on your point, Bethlehem Steel did not take away people's health benefits, they went bankrupt and no longer exist, therefor there are no health benefits. Many governments and companies promised benefits that were not able to be paid for over time because the math did not work.

[highestpropertytaxes]

and GO NY Yankees! Way to defy the odds and still be near the top of the division despite all the injuries! Sorry, had to break from the serious for a minute

[andreahaxton]

All great probing......I wonder how much the LSD School Board/Administration et. al, really cares about " The People's " insight-suggestions into OUR LARGE school budget VS. OUR LOW education rankings, etc.........???????!!!

" Things " should have turned around 20+ years ago.......BUT, as usual, the " family and friends club " lays the law of the land. ALL have relatives on the payroll, a few with merit............................................. ..................others pure-pure cronyism!
And lots of shucking and jiving!

I do have hope in the new majority .............Congrats to new members, upward and onward toward progress and prosperity of OUR students and the morale of OUR staff, Let's aim for getting LA out of the nineties!


No offense meant to anyone.......it is what it is........

A State Law should be made ....." NO major decisions on hiring, spending, etc. (except emergency of course) allowed by out-going BOE members. "
Maybe we need a Control Board somewhere along the way........

[Genoobie]

Seriously??? So you work at a local factory and after being there 10 years you finally make $20 an hour when they tell you hey sorry but your fired because we can hire someone for $10 an hour and start the process all over again? Last time I looked out my window I saw an American flag not the hammer and sickle.

This is AMERICA and nobody guarantees anyone, anything. If you don't like that model, don't work there. You people are ridiculous.

"Boo hoo can't balance the budget blah blah blah..."

Here's a solution, eliminate highly paid teachers.

Nobody has said WHY that's a BAD solution. Simply that it WAS a bad solution. That's not reasoning or debate. That's nonsense.

Fire the highest paid teachers and your budget problem, pension costs and a variety of other problems disappear.

And yo probably agree with Bethlehem Steel and others taking away our grandparents health benefits after they were promised them when they put in their 30 years. Hey, got to cut costs.

This is a NEW WORLD. Those benefits are not supportable. Sorry, got to cut costs.

And if highestpropertytaxes thinks the unions will concede when we all know they don't care about the kids, just themselves, he / she's nuts. By using state law 3012-c you can eliminate highly paid teachers in just two years, no negotiations, no concessions. Simple pencil and paper solution that costs NOTHING.

[Genoobie]

Same Old, Same Old, I agree that Genoobie's recommendation is not the intelligent way to balance a budget. Across the board salary and benefit concessions, which would prevent good, experienced teachers from being laid off, would be the smarter way to balance a budget.

Why? Shortstuff will attest to the fact that the newer teachers are better. Fire the highly paid ones.

[Same Old, Same Old]

Lets see...highest paid usually means most senior. Probably get a lot of quality applicants considering when you get in top 10 in seniority you get fired. Your thinking is assanine.

These problems were caused when the union just gets what it wants. Tops 5 in pay but bottom 5 in ranking. Definitely skewed but cutting the most senior is ridiculous.

[WNYresident]

This is AMERICA and nobody guarantees anyone, anything. If you don't like that model, don't work there. You people are ridiculous.

"Boo hoo can't balance the budget blah blah blah..."

Here's a solution, eliminate highly paid teachers.

Nobody has said WHY that's a BAD solution. Simply that it WAS a bad solution. That's not reasoning or debate. That's nonsense.





This is a NEW WORLD. Those benefits are not supportable. Sorry, got to cut costs.

And if highestpropertytaxes thinks the unions will concede when we all know they don't care about the kids, just themselves, he / she's nuts. By using state law 3012-c you can eliminate highly paid teachers in just two years, no negotiations, no concessions. Simple pencil and paper solution that costs NOTHING.

No, Is is a bad solution because not all of the higher paid teachers are bad. Out of the group you know there are bad and good.

I've been telling you the solution. Just less compensation on the benefit side. This goes for all government employees not just teachers.

For starters tell your representatives no more money goes over seas we need it at home first.

[Genoobie]

No, Is is a bad solution because not all of the higher paid teachers are bad. Out of the group you know there are bad and good.

I've been telling you the solution. Just less compensation on the benefit side. This goes for all government employees not just teachers.

For starters tell your representatives no more money goes over seas we need it at home first.

Wealthy districts do better on tests, poorer districts, worse. The teachers have little to no impact on these results so why not just eliminate highly paid teachers. Since we are evaluating success and failure based on these standardized tests (i.e. good schools have good scores and bad schools have bad scores), then the "bad" teacher is the teacher that is highly paid.

No. Less compensation on the benefit side requires a negotiation and the unions will strong arm their solution because the unions (especially teachers unions) control the government. So what we NEED to do to solve this problem is to eliminate the highly paid teachers. Even the "best" teachers could be given a group of students that would yield poor evaluation results in accordance with the law (3012-c). So the SOLUTION is to structure classes (i.e. more difficult students) where the highest paid teachers will achieve an ineffective rating. That will solve your budget problem and pension cost as well. You are looking for out the box thinking. Contract negotations and asking for concessions is not going to get anywhere with these UNIONS. They control the elections and government. The only way we can take back our control is through these means.

[andreahaxton]

Home
Our District
Board of Education Meeting Info
Overview
Lackawanna City School District
Board of Education
Board of Education Meeting Info
Board of Education Schedule 2012-2013
* Meeting dates are subject to change. Check this page for the most current information.
* Work sessions are held at 7 p.m. on the Second Monday of each month, unless otherwise specified in the Superintendent's Conference Room 202, 245 South Shore Blvd.
* Regular Meetings are held at 7 p.m. on the Thursday immediately following the Second Monday Work Session in the Martin Road Elementary Auditorium, 135 Martin Road, Lackawanna.
* Designation for Special Meeting: Any member of the Board may call a Special Meeting of the Board of Education. The Board Clerk will give written notice 24 hours in advance of the meeting and shall ensure that such notice is given to the Superintendent of Schools, School Attorney and School Business Official within the same time frame. In the absence of the Board Clerk, the Office of the Superintendent of Schools will give such notice. Public notice shall be given via newspaper publication. Special meetings will be held at a time designated by the Board’s President or Board’s Vice President, unless a District Emergency warrants otherwise.
The Board of Education invites and welcomes all to attend the monthly meetings. For any comments or information you would like the Board of Education to hear, you can email aiafallo@lackawanna.wnyric.org. Board members will receive all information and comments received. Thank you in advance for your input.


Special Meeting
Thursday, May 30, 2013 at 5:00 p.m., Room 202, McKinley Admin. Bldg.

Purpose of this Meeting: Appoint Superintendent of Schools and Approve Contract for Superintendent of Schools

June Work Session

Monday, June 10, 2013 at 7:00 p.m.


Regular Board Meeting

Thursday, June 13, 2013 at 7:00 p.m.

[CarinaDavide]

You could just lower salaries, pensions, and medical coverage by a small percentage and it would barely make a noticeable difference and it would add up to a lot. No need to fire people who have worked hard their whole lives to end up on unemployment.

[WNYresident]

You could just lower salaries, pensions, and medical coverage by a small percentage and it would barely make a noticeable difference and it would add up to a lot. No need to fire people who have worked hard their whole lives to end up on unemployment.

Seems you understand.

Take this concept across the 10000's of government employees in New York State.

[Genoobie]

You could just lower salaries, pensions, and medical coverage by a small percentage and it would barely make a noticeable difference and it would add up to a lot. No need to fire people who have worked hard their whole lives to end up on unemployment.

Boo hoo, I am crying, working hard your whole life and then end up on unemployment. People in the private sector have to deal with this all the time. Everybody should be treated this way. In the PRIVATE SECTOR, if you are highly paid and the company cannot afford you, they fire you.

To lower salaries, pensions and medical coverage would require negotation with UNIONS. UNIONS run the government. You won't be able to get anywhere with negotiations with the UNIONS. However with the new legislation of 3012-c, we can eliminate teachers in two years. I suggest we start with the most highly paid teachers.

Let's look at the numbers. A district has 100 teachers, we'll say starting pay is 40K and ending pay is 80K (like it is in Buffalo for example). That would put the average salary at 60K. That would make 100*60K or $6M. Suppose you needed a 5% cut in budget. That's about 300K. Just laying off 4 highly paid teachers (less than 4% of your staff) would permit you to make budget. "Well," you say, "some of them might be good." To which I reply, so what?

According to the posters on the MB, the benefits and pay are SOOO generous, that people are literally crawling over each other to get a piece of this pie. They can easily be replaced by 8 new teachers if you need (at the same budget level) or lay off 8 highly paid teachers, replace them with 8 new teachers and then make your budget.

Wealthy districts do well on tests, poorer districts not as well. Seeing as how teachers only have a small impact on these scores, the district will not see a change in quality of instruction if this scenario occurs.

Spare me the everyone takes a 5% cut versus less than 5% being laid off.

Spare me the tears for the unemployment lines. Have you checked recently, many people are standing there because of the greedy UNIONS and TEACHERS.