- Pregnancy
- Baby & Toddler
- Parents
- Getting Pregnant
- Baby Names
- Product Reviews
-
Registry
- Community
-
More
Want a personalized experience?
Download the free app
Cincinnati Babies
S/O - SB5
Not to beat a dead horse, but it seems like the topic generated a significant amount of interest. [Selfishly] I'm glad to know that so many of you oppose the bill.
As a follow-up, I was wondering if anyone would be interested in reading the email that my husband sent to [our] State Representative Ueker (R). I could send it out as an email or (probably) just C&P it here.
This discussion has been closed.
Re: S/O - SB5
Emeline 5.28.13
My Blog
Post-Baby PRs
Esri 5K 7.16.2014 - 21:30
Heart Half Marathon 3.16.2014 - 1:43:30
Canton City Marathon 9.8.14 - 3:30:56
Tyler Anthony arrived on 9.21.09
The Chronicles of Justin and Tyler
Tyler Anthony arrived on 9.21.09
The Chronicles of Justin and Tyler
I thought about that, but he states it a few times (once as an equation/breakdown, to clarify a point). It'll make more sense when you see/read it.
From: BL______
Sent: Friday, March 04, 2011 10:41 AM
To: district66@ohr.state.oh.us
Subject: Opposition to SB5
Representative Uecker-
I wanted to take a moment and express my extreme displeasure with the Senate's actions in regards to SB5. I'm sure your office will be inundated with calls and emails in the coming weeks, so I wanted to make sure my voice was heard early. While I agree that reform for public employees is appropriate and necessary, I do not believe SB5 achieves the right reform. This legislation was pushed through the Senate without the time, attention, and debate it properly deserves. While I am fearful the bill will pass the House, I also take some solace in the fact that some Republican Senators broke rank and opposed the bill. I urge you to do the same. Collective bargaining is not the reason our State is in the financial disarray we are currently in. As of yet, no one has been able to explain to me specifically how collective bargaining has brought the State to its knees.
As a Republican educator, I find myself in an ideological fight; but at the same time, I believe my unique perspective brings some clarity to the issues raised in SB5. I agree that there needs to be reform in regards to public pensions and healthcare, however, I believe SB5 goes too far in achieving those means in a responsible manner. I am certain there are people who have been taking advantage of the system, however, I feel that number is very small. I do not believe the majority of public employees (teachers especially) are inherently responsible for bankrupting the State. I am sick and tired of hearing the "what's best for kids" rhetoric and want to focus on real arguments. Here is a prudent example of how SB5 will undermine a family like mine.
I have been teaching for ten years at _____ High School, and my current salary is $52,000. I have a Master's Degree in Education Administration and am licensed to be a principal (requires 15 additional credit hours and a passing score on a State mandated standardized test). Under the current system, I pay close to 10% of my salary directly into the State Teachers' Retirement System (STRS), right off the top, which brings my salary, before taxes, to $46,800. After paying my federal and state obligations, I bring home $41,756 to my wife and two children (ages 2 and 4mos). Currently, I opt out our district's insurance program and have coverage under my wife's plan (the district pays a $1,200 stipend to forego a family plan). However, if I were to take advantage of the District's insurance policy, I would spend about $1,200 per year which would further reduce my net income to 40,556, well below my $52,000 salary.
For the sake of argument, let's assume, under the "new" system, I would still earn $52,000 a year. (I am forced to make this assumption based on the fact that there is no set proposal attached to SB5 to restructure salaries. It would seem that such a "game-changing" bill would include this information which further solidifies this legislation is being rushed through the pipeline in an effort to quell Democratic campaign contributions for the 2012 election year. Prohibiting union dues from being automatically deducted from payroll blatantly points to this hidden agenda). If, the local school board is no longer contributing, I would then be forced to pay their (current) 12% into STRS. STRS would not be able to remain solvent for current retirees if the State slashed more than half of its current income. With a 22% STRS contribution, my salary is now down to $40,560. I have not seen any statistics about the savings of going to a state-wide insurance consortium, so I'll use a conservative estimate. The policy offered by our district currently is around $12,000 per year. To make the math easy, let's assume we'll realize a $2,000 savings per year. Now my insurance premiums would cost about $2,000 per year. After federal and state taxes my salary would be reduced to $33,560.
Here's the breakdown of the two systems:
Current Structure: $52,000 salary,
-$5,200 STRS contribution
-$1,200 health insurance premiums
-$5,044 federal, state, and local taxes
=$40,556 in take home pay
SB5 System: $52,000 salary (assumption)
-$11,440 STRS Contribution (22%)
-$2,000 insurance contribution (20% of a $10,000 annual premium)
-$5,000 federal, state, and local taxes
=$33,560 take home pay
Where, in the private sector, would someone with a Master's Degree +15 hours and ten years experience earn $34,000? Furthermore, how can such a drastic reduction in take home salaries for 300,000 people stimulate the Ohio economy? How does this reduction create jobs?
Proponents of the bill contend that my salary would increase based on my performance, however, I have not seen a proposed system. I agree that teachers need to be accountable for teaching and incompetence in the classroom cannot be tolerated. But, until I see a system that fairly grades a teachers' performance (that takes into account individual student achievement, student apathy, and student attendance), I will not support merit pay. Further, can you imagine the ramifications of such a system on low performing districts? Who in their right mind would want to teach in such a district knowing their pay is directly tied
to student performance? Who feels comfortable in placing their level of income in the hands of a 13-18 year old (think about that the next time you're in any business being waited on by a teenager)?
I consistently see people comparing education to the private sector, however, it is a comparison of apples and oranges. In the private sector, people exchange goods and services and there is a desire for consumers to attain the goods. Such is not always the case in education. For some students, just getting them to come to school two days in a row is a challenge. Unfortunately, the circumstances for such students' attitudes and beliefs are beyond the teachers' control. Additionally, in the public sector, employees who are not performing their job functions can be fired. We, obviously, cannot fire our students. If I were a plant manager and supervised a group of employees who did not work, I would have them fired as I would not want to look bad in front of my supervisors. This private sector mentality does not work in public education because our State Constitution provides (and requires)for a free and equal education for all people.
In email exchanges with other Senators, the proponents of SB5 often cite the tremendous savings in health insurance costs. I have no problem in looking into the creation of a statewide consortium. But the hidden message is that it's healthcare costs that are driving this current legislation. If such is the case, let's refocus our energy on reducing those expenses. Access to education is provided for in the State Constitution, is Medicaid? When Governor Kasich unveils his budget I would expect to see significant cuts from this area of significant state expenditures.
Lastly, I have one question that I don't believe has been addressed by any media outlets our congressional offices. How will SB5 impact you as a public official? Would you be required to contribute more to your retirement system? Would you be required to contribute more to your health insurance? If the answer is no (and I legitimately do not know the answer), then I contend that
SB5 is nothing more than union-busting.
It's necessary to be fiscally responsible. It's necessary to remove bad teachers (most seem to overlook that there is a structure in place to remove poor teachers even if they're tenured, but most administrators do not complete the necessary paperwork and observations to proceed with firing a teacher). But it's not necessary to vilify a group of people who by and large do outstanding work every day. If you have time, I would love for the opportunity to speak with you directly about the legislation and offer a perspective from an average constituent who is in the trenches every day.
Thank you for your time and attention,
Brian L_____
Emeline 5.28.13
My Blog
Post-Baby PRs
Esri 5K 7.16.2014 - 21:30
Heart Half Marathon 3.16.2014 - 1:43:30
Canton City Marathon 9.8.14 - 3:30:56
It's true. He's pretty dreamy.
Me, too.
Agreed.
I'd encourage him to follow up with a phone call to Ucker's office.
Also, my BFF is dancing with Rep. Ucker tomorrow night in the Clermont Co. Dancing with the Stars. I'll ask her if she has a sense of what the best way is to get his ear.
Very well written. I really enjoyed his calculated break down. Something that caught my eye and is making my head spin is his insurance stipend. At our state-funded institution, an employee that forgos medical insurance (for a family) is reimbursed $500 per pay period x 26 pay periods - do the math and prepare to pick your jaw off the floor. We have very strong unions who negotiated this. Many would consider me very lucky to work at a place like this but honestly I've always thought it was very off. Good thing we've never tried to go for a levy like another near-by College has. This information would have been spread like fire.
I do think he makes some excellent points. Certainly everything this bill is trying to enforce isn't going to make the big bang to the state's deficit that they are saying. I don't think it should be all-encompassing of all State workers.
Fantastic letter.
No wonder your tube tops are busting at the seams; your heart must be bursting with pride over being married to such a smart guy. When did he send that? Has he received any type of response?
I know nothing about Uecker, so I don't know what is expected or typical.
Tyler Anthony arrived on 9.21.09
The Chronicles of Justin and Tyler
You rock, KB.
I've never heard or seen anything like it.
He sent this particular email last Friday. Although he has received a response from (someone in the offices of) Gov Kasich and a few other state reps/senators, he has not received a response from Rep. Uecker.
Isn't that more than the insurance premium to begin with? (or close to it?) I've heard of incentives, but none that steep (usually in the $3K-$4K range.. still saving thousands)
I say "TTT's HUSBAND FOR STATE REP!!!'
He makes a lot of sense to me. Hopefully his was actually read as it is not the form letters circulating around.
Oh, and I know Uecker has been reminded of the number of Republican teachers in his district.
Step 1. HOA President.
It's close to it but I believe still a few k off. Yes, I believe it's pretty unheard of from what I understand.