FEBRUARY 12, 2016 LAST UPDATED: FRIDAY, FEBRUARY 12, 2016, 12:31 AM
THE RIDGEWOOD NEWS
BOE highlights memorandum
Click here to read the Fact Finding Report between the Ridgewood Board of Education and the REA dated February 3, 2016.
To the Editor,
At our Feb. 8 Board of Education meeting, our teachers voiced concerns about the unsettled contract and the Board’s recent proposal. It was evident that the information they were given about the Board’s proposal was incorrect.
The Board and the Ridgewood Education Association Negotiations committees have met 12 times since February 2015. Unfortunately, we have failed to settle the contract. On Wednesday, Feb. 3, a hearing was held before the state-appointed Fact-finder. At the hearing, the Board summarized its position and the current proposal in a memorandum. The bullet points below highlight the key areas discussed in our memorandum. The full memorandum can be found on the District’s website at ridgewood.k12.nj.us.
Key areas in the Board’s Fact-finding memorandum:
The Board has based its negotiating position on the realities of a state law, Chapter 44, which limits local school boards to annual property tax increases of no more than two percent over the previous year’s dollar amounts, with some limited exceptions.
Ridgewood teacher salaries are at, or near the top of, salaries paid for similarly qualified staff in other Bergen County school districts.
The Board currently spends over $7 million per year, or approximately 74 percent of the premium bill, for REA health benefits. The Board has not proposed to increase the teachers’ share of the health benefit premiums.
Health benefit premiums have increased on average by 10 percent annually for the past 10 years.
The Board has proposed changing the health benefits plan within the current provider program (the School Employees Health Benefits Plan) to one with higher co-pays — $10 doctor visit co-pay in the current plan rising to $15 per primary care doctor visit and $25 for specialists — as a way to save both the District and teachers on premium costs.
Breakage, or any savings due to retirements, is not a reasonable way to fund a settlement. Historically, the Board has spent any such savings on new hires or on salary increases for existing teachers as they complete graduate courses and higher education degrees.
State aid for rapidly rising special education costs has decreased in the last three years.
The District’s architect and engineering firm completed a facility review and recommended facility upgrades/repairs of approximately $40 million. The capital reserve account balance as of June 30, 2015 was $1,018,989, far short of what is needed to update our 11 buildings constructed between 1894 and 1965.
Many of the comments from teachers were critical of the Board and mischaracterized us as uncaring and indifferent. The Board values our staff. We would never see our teachers as “numbers on a spreadsheet.” We are well aware of the work our staff does and that it is this work that makes Ridgewood the excellent district that it is. The Board is committed to negotiating a fair contract with the REA that can be funded within the District’s financial ability.
Sheila Brogan
Jim Morgan
Vince Loncto
Christina Krauss
Jennie Smith Wilson
Ridgewood Board of Education
Not wanting to increase co-pay from $10.00 to $15.00 is EXACTLY why the teacher contribution to the plan should continue. What is the current co-pay for Rx?
The REA doesn’t want a fair contract, they want a deal that only benefits them at the expense of all Village taxpayers. Let’s also not forget the 40% excise tax which kicks in on Platinum plans as defined by the ACA from 2018. Who will pay that extra tax given the teachers are unwilling to increase even their co-pays from $10 per doctor’s visit to $15 a visit?
Calling our board members “uncaring and indifferent” is nothing more than a smear tactic by the teachers’ union – they are trying to discredit our hardworking, elected board members just because they want lower contribution amounts for their health insurance premiums even while the rest of us pay increasing premiums every year under the ACA. It sounds like the REA is “uncaring and indifferent” towards Village taxpayers.
8:46;10:19 I am a Ridgewood teacher and I currently pay $15. copay (as do several of my colleagues) …… check your facts before accusing.
I think it’s about time you read a newspaper 10;19 am. The 40% excise tax on Platinum plans as defined by the ACA has been delayed……….try to keep up please and just state facts that are true and accurate.
`
Congress to delay ACA’s ‘Cadillac’ tax on pricey health plans until 2020
`
https://www.washingtonpost.com/national/health-science/cadillac-tax-and-two-other-aca-taxes-part-of-budget-deal-on-hill/2015/12/16/e2b01ff8-a365-11e5-ad3f-991ce3374e23_story.html
Who pays the 40% tax from 2020? That’s in four years. And why do teachers deserve a “pricey Cadillac plan” when private sector workers don’t get plans like that and yet contribute more towards our premiums?
11:32, won’t the new contract be in effect through 2020? So who pays the 40% excise tax if teachers get Platinum plans as defined by the ACA? Any reasonable taxpayer subsidizing the premiums of these plans would want to know that – it’s a fair question if we are really negotiating a fair contract. Are Village taxpayers going to get hit with an extra 40% tax on the health benefit plans of teachers? Will that be an additional cost to taxpayers of $10,000 per employee per year for health coverage? Is that within the 2%?
10:58, you only have $15 doctor’s visit co-pays? Wow. Why are Village taxpayers subsidizing such a good benefit?
10:58, Have you compared your health plan with a typical private sector plan? I bet you haven’t. According to the Report of the New Jersey Pension and Health Benefit Study Commission last February, the average NJ public employee is enrolled in a health plan with an “actuarial value” of 95%, meaning that the plan pays 95% of the cost of essential care, with an average employee contribution of 18% of premium costs. In contrast, plans offered by large private-sector employers typically fall within a range of 80~85% actuarial value, toward which employees typically contribute 24% of premium costs. So either the teachers pay higher co-pays and deductibles, or pay a higher percentage of plan premiums on equivalent plans available at large private sector employers so that the BoE isn’t forced to pay for an added 40% excise tax on Cadillac health plans from 2020.
Ummm my point was you don’t know what the hell your talking about 11:09 pm. Your statement “Let’s also not forget the 40% excise tax which kicks in on Platinum plans as defined by the ACA from 2018.” is FALSE, period. You just keep throwing out BS comments intentionally to mislead and whip up anger. STOP IT!
perhaps but there is an excise tax against “Cadillac health plans ” , which has been delayed, the union supported Obama and Obamacare ,so as they say elections have consequences
Teachers in Ridgewood provide services that are above and beyond their contracted responsibilities. They arrive earlier than required to run extra math and reading sessions, give up lunch to work with students in need, attend overnight field trips, chaperone class trips that extend beyond the scheduled school day just to mention a few of their many before/after hour “gratis” hours. As paychecks shrink, teachers need to take second jobs to cover their cost of living since taxes, mortgage, food, utilities increase. Their available hours will drastically change and they will no longer be able to arrive early/stay later. Lunch time will be needed to complete those administrative tasks that typically would be done when they are now working the second job. How do you propose to fund/fill the extra “gratis” duties that are now taken for granted?
How is that different from someone running a business 24/7/365 in the private sector 10:43? Oh, wait..,…
10:32, typical REA trick to avoid the question, which again is who pays the 40% excise tax from 2020~ if teachers continue to receive subsidized Platinum health benefit plans as defined by the ACA? That’s an extra $10,000 a year per teacher with a family plan. Who pays that?
10:32, that’s a legitimate question that any reasonable taxpayer subsidizing the premiums of these plans would want to know if we are really negotiating a fair contract. Who pays the 40% excise tax on Cadillac health plans – up to $10,000 per employee per year – from 2020 onwards?
I thought unions were exempted from Obama care
What is the Rx co-pay???????
11:00 am. Seriously? How is a specific, contracted position with ell defined expectations, hours and responsibilities different from a private sector business owner? You are comparing apples and oranges.
No answer to the legitimate question posed at 12:14pm on who pays the 40% excise tax on platinum health plans from 2020? Guess the REA hasn’t got an answer yet from the full time lawyers and lobbyists at the NJEA?
9:24, you don’t like your contract, you’re fee to walk. Good luck in another district.
9:24, you don’t like your contract, you’re free to walk. Good luck in another district.
What’s your Rx co-pay 9:24?
Interesting how the REA is completely avoiding the 40% ACA excise tax from 2020~ question
As suspected, the REA backs off when questions of $10-15 doctors visits and $5 Rx co-pays come up? Their health benefit deal is so much better than what the average Ridgewood resident has that they just avoid answering the question. They also refuse to answer who will pay the annual 40% excise tax on platinum health plans as defined by the ACA from 2020 onwards. Oh sorry, are taxpayers just to pick up that extra tab of up to $10,400 per employee per year? How is that a “fair contract”?
Answer my question and I will answer yours 3:27 pm