Underpaying Is Underpaying; A Few thousand Reasons Why: Letter

For some reason, we are still asking the question, “Are our teachers really paid less?” Despite numerous data points that show that our teacher salaries are less than our directly bordering neighbors, our peers in the Middlesex league and communities with similar household income and home values, some residents still aren’t sure. Our superintendent has stated that teachers are leaving to make thousands of dollars more in other districts. Our school committee members have stated that they are embarrassed by the way we compensate our teachers. We’ve even heard that many Melrose teachers are paid “within a few thousand dollars” of peers. But yet there still seems to be confusion about whether they are paid less.

Union bargained contracts are complex, and we should take care when trying to paint simplistic examples. The Melrose Education Association contract has 100 different salary possibilities depending on level of education (lanes) and years of service (steps). Selecting two steps in the same lane and using them to create a picture of compensation is misleading and inaccurate. It is also misleading to avoid discussing how Melrose is the only community of our neighbors that only pays 10 step increases, while every other community has invested in at least 2 additional - and as many as 5 more - steps. Just like Melrose, virtually every community has some form of steps and lanes, longevity, additional assignment pay, but only Melrose ranks as the second lowest average pay in the Eastern part of Massachusetts and the bottom 12% of the entire state. This shows how other communities have valued experienced teachers, and it also shows how other cities and towns will be far more attractive for young teachers deciding on their career.

We have made some investments, but not nearly enough. There were strategic investments made in the early steps and lanes during the last contract negotiation. This made our novice teachers’ salaries more in line with our neighbors. When I say “in line”, I mean close to average. How about our seasoned teachers? Teachers with 10+ years of experience who have advanced their education? The answer is that their salaries aren’t even close to commensurate. Where can an experienced teacher go and make $20,000 more? Winchester or Belmont. Where can they make $18,000 more? Lexington. Where can they make $16,000 more? Watertown or Burlington. Where can they make $13,000 more? Two miles up the road in Wakefield. Even across the highway in Saugus, experienced teachers make $8,000 more than Melrose.* This is the future that our novice, paid just about average, teachers are faced with.

Health insurance is a major cost driver for any community, and, in fact, it is one of the chief reasons costs have been outpacing the Prop 2 ½ cap for years. Shifting this burden onto teachers would accelerate our drain of high quality staff. Melrose is within the range of payment for municipal share at paying 84%. Our neighbors pay 90% in Saugus, 80% in Stoneham and Malden, 85% in Arlington and Lynnfield, and Wakefield pays 75%. Also, Melrose leveraged a significant cost savings in 2009 when we joined the GIC. As a result, our 85% coverage is actually less dollars than many communities with lower % coverage but not on the GIC. Melrose reduced its payment share by 3% in its most recent health-care bargaining contract and by its terms we cannot re-negotiate this contract until 2021. This is not an issue on the ballot on April 2 and should not be confused with a deserved pay increase for teachers.

There is no community near us that pays their seasoned teachers less than we do. We spend hundreds of dollars less on materials, equipment and technology per pupil than surrounding communities. This is shameful. Melrose should be a community that values education and educators. We should not be content with last place. We should not be telling our teachers that they should be satisfied because their salaries are “within a few thousand dollars” of peer districts. We can debate the need for an override, but purporting that we pay our teachers market rate is not true. No matter how you slice and dice the data, you can look at almost any measure and we are in the bottom. We spend the least per pupil than anyone around. This fact alone sends a strong message to our educators about how Melrose values education. Our students and teachers deserve better. It’s time to stop justifying our inadequate per pupil spending and teacher compensation and do something about it. There is a solution before us. Vote yes on April 2.

Alison Sarnoski
360 Swains Pond Avenue

* all salary data obtained from the School Committee Agenda packet from January 28, page 111