[quote=CA renter]
So, even if you do see an increase in benefit costs, that is far more likely the result of:
1. new teachers, and
2. increased contribution amounts that have been offset, to one extent or another, by wage cuts and benefit reductions/increased contributions on the part of the employees.[/quote]
Just look at the budget that I linked CAR. It’s not because of new teachers. Look at page 36 of the budget. Right there it tells you that there were 5589 teaching staff in 2007-2008 and now there’s 5020.
If I do the math it looks like this.
2007/2008 Total money in compensation 579 million certified + 244.5 classified + 276 million benefits for a total of 1.1 billion / 15,042 total staff = 73140 average salary and benefits.
2011/2012 Total money in compensation 516 + 218 + 311 = 1.05 billion / 12848 total staff = 81474 average salary and benefits. That is an increase of 11.4% over 4 years or just about 2.8% compounded.
So individually SD Unified staff that has managed to keep their jobs have been getting average increases of 2.8% per year in total compensation with a flat budget.
The benefits are unseen compensation but it’s real money for the taxpayers funding education.
Also just suppose for a minute that they froze avg salary and benefits at the 73400 2007/2008 level. How many employees could they have saved with the smaller budget. 1.05 / 73400 = 14312 – 12848 = 1463 employees and at a minimum the 500+ teachers they decided to layoff. They didn’t so it sort of proves to me that the bias is to ensure total compensation continues to go up at a rate greater than inflation and GDP.
