Lucia Mar teachers dissatisfied with 6 percent raise

April 17, 2015

teacher1The Lucia Mar teachers’ union has ratified its new pay agreement with the school district, but about 40 percent of union members voted against the new contract that awards teachers a 6 percent raise over the next year. [Tribune]

Last week, the Lucia Mar Teachers’ Association and district officials reached a tentative agreement that seemingly put an end to months of heated contract negotiations, as well as a looming strike. This week, the teachers’ union voted to ratify the agreement, which gives them an immediate 3 percent raise and a second 3 percent raise, effective Jan. 1, 2016.

Ninety-two percent of union members took part in the vote. Of those who voted, 59 percent supported ratifying the agreement, and 42 percent opposed it.

Union president Donna Kandel said the large minority who voted against the new contract was significant. Kandel also said the new pay agreement was less than what the district could or should afford.

For most of the negotiation process, union representatives demanded 10 percent pay increases for teachers. District officials initially offered 2 percent raises.

The average Lucia Mar teacher currently receives a salary of about $61,000 a year. Lucia Mar teachers received a 2 percent raise in 2012-2013 and 4.3 percent bump in pay in 2013-2014.

Had the two sides not reached an agreement, a strike was likely to begin in mid-April.

The pay agreement must now go to the Lucia Mar school board for final approval. The board is expected to approve the contract at one of its meetings in May.


Loading...

51 Comments

  1. NorthCountyGuy says:

    The teachers unions are a bunch of entitlement-mentality crybabies and whiners.

    The government schools will improve when and only when Tenure is abolished, incompetent Administrators are fired, and the Teachers Unions are fired.

    The teachers unions are a special kind of useless.

    Union shills aren’t just a hoot: They are a riot.

    (-1) 3 Total Votes - 1 up - 2 down
  2. Rich in MB says:

    The more you give these greedy teachers the more they want.
    Fire them all and the kids would be better off with the failure rate of the public schools these days.

    (-7) 19 Total Votes - 6 up - 13 down
    • hijinks says:

      Great, since you don’t even live in the district, what do you know about it?

      (6) 14 Total Votes - 10 up - 4 down
  3. grayotter says:

    How is it that we have the most expensive/least effective school system in the U.S.? Seems like we should cut their budgets until they show positive achievement…

    (4) 18 Total Votes - 11 up - 7 down
    • kayaknut says:

      You know why that will never happen…. The union

      (0) 20 Total Votes - 10 up - 10 down
    • Ana di Plosis says:

      So your view is just a variation on the old punchline:

      “The beatings will continue until morale improves.”

      By what measure are you claiming that “we” have the “least effective school system”? I know you can’t be referring to Lucia Mar specifically or SLO County schools generally because “we” produce many of the best students in the state, as evidenced by the # of students who matriculate into the top colleges/universities in the state and country. AGHS, the last time I checked, was ranked #535 among high schools in the US. That’s what this thread is supposed to be about: the dissatisfaction of Lucia Mar teachers with the “raise” they’ve been offered. It’s really just the COLA that the district should have given their teachers automatically, but, of course, districts NEVER see it that way. In short, the article above is NOT about CA schools in general. If you want to denigrate the effectiveness of schools in LA or Oakland or wherever else, that’s your prerogative; but their ineffectiveness (which is due to complex problems almost completely beyond the control of the teachers) has nothing to do with our effectiveness in this county. “To generalize is to be an idiot.” (William Blake)

      (2) 14 Total Votes - 8 up - 6 down
  4. ComeradJ says:

    I suspect that Structure is being sarcastic. Note how the “Lamestream Media” likes to call a 3 percent raise over two years a 6% raise. 3% a year is an ok raise, not a great one.

    (2) 8 Total Votes - 5 up - 3 down
    • kayaknut says:

      Also note, say 3% raise one year, is just that 3%, but when a second raise comes around say in year 2 or 3 and is called a 3% present raise it actually is more because the base salary is now higher from the first raise, and the cycle continues…..

      (-3) 15 Total Votes - 6 up - 9 down
    • kayaknut says:

      Also note, say 3% raise one year, is just that 3%, but when a second raise comes around say in year 2 or 3 and is called a 3% present raise it actually is more because the base salary is now higher from the first raise, and the cycle continues…..

      (-5) 15 Total Votes - 5 up - 10 down
    • hijinks says:

      It’s about in line with inflation — just a tad more.

      (0) 6 Total Votes - 3 up - 3 down
  5. Structure says:

    Fire them all and hire McDonalds and Walmart workers that understand the private sector. Pay them a nice raise so like $12 an hour for 6 hours a day (thus avoiding full-time). Problem solved! Society will clearly benefit from the arrangement. /s

    (-2) 30 Total Votes - 14 up - 16 down
    • Ana di Plosis says:

      You’re a few fries short of a happy meal.

      (7) 29 Total Votes - 18 up - 11 down

Comments are closed.