SCUSD Observer

Sacramento, California

Why a “voluntary” contribution instead of furlough days?

I’m hearing some folks express concerns about the “voluntary” contribution being put in the contract concession, instead of furlough days. This idea was kicked around since about March or April, but hasn’t been clearly explained or articulated. Here is why I think it’s a better deal:

  1. Once days are given up on the calendar (especially around Thanksgiving) they are hard to bring back, even if the days you try to bring back are at the end or beginning of the year.
  2. Fewer days are bad for kids (less instruction), bad for teachers (less gross pay = less counting towards retirement, etc.)
  3. A contribution is easier to “sunset” or end in an agreement
  4. We can control where the money is allocated more specifically (only for bringing back certificated staff via CSR and returning counselor positions).
  5. It puts us in the position of putting kids, and their education first.

Whatever way it was done, this does involve money. As you can see from some of the comments on other posts on this subject, there will be pain, but I hope this gives a little more clarity about why this method was chosen over furloughs.


Written by alicemercer

June 16, 2010 at 5:03 pm

Posted in SCTA

Tagged with , ,

One Response

Subscribe to comments with RSS.

  1. You need to add to the list under retirement the fact that furlough days do not count as teaching days. Therefore, teachers would only receive a partial year’s credit with STRS and could mess up a person’s retirement planning. Other districts that took furlough days last year are dealing with this problem now


    June 22, 2010 at 7:34 am

Comments are closed.

%d bloggers like this: