EA

Saint Louis, MO

#24 Jun 22, 2013
I'm a little pissed. We (NEA) got two people elected in the last election and we got Laughlin elected before that. We have three of seven votes on the BOE right now. Are the four others trying to send a message?
Addit

Saint Louis, MO

#25 Jun 22, 2013
Wow wrote:
<quoted text>
Wow. I don't know what kind of teacher you are but you certainly do not respect your co-workers or your profession by implying that we are all " just sitting around" doing nothing all summer and should be thankful for any morsel thrown our way by CO and the BOE. WE WORK OUR ASSES OFF ALL SCHOOL YEAR! I know I put in at least 60+ hours a week during the school year. I will not feel guilty about this much earned time off. Your attitude, implying that we should be grateful just to have a job and a meager pay increase yearly, is what is holding our profession back from getting the pay and respect it deserves. If the administrators on the top level can bring home salaries of over $240k per year then I think our district can afford to pay its teachers a decent salary. If I had chosen to go into the world of business, with my degrees and years on the job, I would be making double what I do as a teacher. Value your teachers by paying them well. You get what you pay for.
Judged:111
Quote[Even a board member's daughter-in-law who has only a high school degree can earn almost $70,000 a year in her first year. Oh she doesn't get summers off but the district can hire two new underlings to help he do her job and get supervisor's pay.

I am supposed to be grateful? I am supposed to be grateful that the administration negotiated and agreed to a pay scale and then reneged unilaterally? Without going back to the bargaining table? Also the BOE and administration says their reserves are getting low and thus had to change the salary scale. Does almost 20% in reserves seem low when the state only requires 3%. These are DESE numbers.

Does it seems low that Fox is increasing salaries by $1.17 million next year? That seems like a lot but I have 2 questions. First, do the teachers deserve less than the $3 million spent on 2 football fields? Second, how much of that $1.17 million is on administration raises?

And my job is only secure if the administration does not find out who is posting this.]Quote=affected teacher

Agree with both of these points. And it shouldn't take 20 years to make the salary of new college graduates in other fields. We have the future in our hands every day- the future teachers, the future CEO's, the future bank presidents, the future doctors, the future nurses, the future community tax payers, etc. The C6 family deserves the best staff, but you have to pay us good, competitive salaries. BTW, we are not sitting on our duffs all summer; we are working summer school to keep minds sharp, running camps to keep skills up, taking kids to foreign countries to put in practice their newly acquired foreign language skills, running band/cheer practice, going to seminars to stay current on education trends, taking additional college classes, participating in professional development, planning our preps for August, hunting for great classroom educational aides/toys/games/puzzles/books /etc at yard sales, checking store sales to stock up on classroom educational supplies like pencils/erasers/markers/crayon s/paper/etc because believe it or not most kids do not attend school prepared to learn, voraciously reading up on info to help us bring out the best in our students, worrying about our students and hoping they are getting enough to eat and enough parental attention, etc, etc, etc. And yes, when we have time we also spend it with our own children and spouses/significant other, garden, take a much needed vacation (because teaching duties don't stop when the last bell rings), and maybe kick our feet up and smell the roses.

“Funny lady”

Since: Sep 11

Location hidden

#26 Jun 22, 2013
Can't be any worse than any other workplace. I've been treated like dirt in my current job for years but make too much money to quit
Steve

United States

#27 Jun 22, 2013
Puleeze wrote:
Oh, take your "Teachers should be grateful," and stick it where the sun don't shine. Yes suh, massa, I's be grateful to ya....
Why don't some of those highly paid administrators, like the superintendent take a cut in pay? Or her highly paid ex-husband? Or her highly paid current husband? Or any other relative of the super or the board that is collecting a salary beyond that of many who are more qualified than they?
Are we just a little jealous??? Not to worry every person in every company feels the same way. Those at the top are there for some reason they do not deserve. It is human nature.

But teachers are some of the ONLY people in the work force getting continual raises. So, yes, they should be grateful. Not to the administration, but to those tax payers who continue to believe they are worth it.
affected teacher

Festus, MO

#28 Jun 22, 2013
I am writing here not to complain but to let people know what is going on. As someone previously stated, this is our only recourse.

As to the new food service person, I bring that up merely to point out that she is making as much as many teachers with much higher qualifications (MA+ multiple extra hours) and many years of experience. So yes I want to let the public know of salary inequities.

I realize facilities monies are separate, but again it is just an illustration of how the administration and BOE "value" the teaching staff. BTW that $1.17 million came directly from an internal email to teachers.

My dissappointment in the administration and the board is not the size of the raise. It is the fact that the adminstration negotiated with the staff "in good faith," only to renege on this agreement unilaterally. If we had come out with this amount of money in the negotiation process, I would have been perfectly happy. I am upset at the way we were treated.

This will be my last post. Just wanted to bring the issue to light. You may contact the administration, DESE, the BOE or any people you know who work at Fox for more info.
Steve

United States

#29 Jun 23, 2013
EA wrote:
I'm a little pissed. We (NEA) got two people elected in the last election and we got Laughlin elected before that. We have three of seven votes on the BOE right now. Are the four others trying to send a message?
No message sent from "4" still on the board. I hear the vote was 6-1 with the "ONLY" vote against coming from 1 of the "4"(all three NEA members "in favor"). This is a good raise in this economy and I say again, teachers should be happy to be getting ANY raise at all in this environment.
deal with it

Cape Girardeau, MO

#30 Jun 23, 2013
To those of you mentioning the food director position--that has nothing to do with this issue. There will always be bosses and directors out in the world who make more than you with less schooling—that is a moot point.

The point of this complaint board is to say that Fox doesn’t care about its teachers, and that is a hyperbolic statement that simply looks unprofessional and whiny. Is there a message board created by local librarians complaining about their raises? How about Public Water Workers? If the Street Department created this thread after employees received 15-20 years of straight raises (but then got smaller ones at the last minute), some of you would be upset at the audacity of those workers, but because we are “teachers”, you think we have the right to extra complaining. Do any of you complaining truly believe that after YEARS of flawless raises, the BOE and Mr. Scott got together to create a salary schedule just to change it at the last minute and then laugh maniacally behind closed doors saying “Ha! We really screwed those teachers over! Yes!”

No…this didn’t happen. Now I wasn’t in the room nor were any of you, but I am trusting them enough to assume that they did this because it needed to be done. As far as those of you quoting the percentage in reserves are already higher than the state, GOOD! Bash Fox’s nepotism all you want, but one thing the district does a stellar job at is financing.

Now, to those of you saying that this change is costing you thousands of dollars, that is only a half-truth. If I am reading the salary schedules correctly, most of us are all still getting raises! They just aren’t as much as you thought they would be. Look at how much you made last year and compare it to next. Aren’t you making more next year? I teach in the district and am getting a $1300 raise next year.

And finally, to those who may be making less next year, I get it—it’s frustrating. But a community forum bitchfest about the district isn’t helping matters. And, the salary schedule that we have had for years has been completely unfair and benefiting a small majority of our teachers. It needed to be fixed. My guess is that those who are really ticked and complaining are the ones who were going to benefit the most from the unfair schedule. For example: last year a new teacher with a bachelor’s degree made $37,265 his/her first year. For the second year, that teacher would make $38,197—getting a raise of $932. Well, on the same salary schedule a teacher of 16 years with a Master’s Degree +15 would be making $66,798, and for the next year would make $71,500--getting a raise of $4702! Almost a FIVE THOUSAND DOLLAR raise in one year!!! Should this veteran teacher should receive a raise over 5 times the raise of the younger teacher?

We are probably in the wrong polarizing climate to bring up a government analogy, but let’s say that the IRS had certain deductions for years, and each and every year, your family received a little bit more of a return because of this deduction. This happened for decades. Well, all of a sudden, the IRS realized that these monies were needed in other areas and it turns out that the system set in place tended to favor individuals in their 40’s and 50’s. So, they created a new fair system for the deduction.

Now you have two options:

One, get really pissed at the government and say that they do a bad job, and they don’t care about middle-aged people. The government has plenty of money. They could easily continue doing it the way they have; they are going to just waste the money in other areas.

Option two: complain to your husband or wife and then move on and be happy that, although the IRS and government have problems, overall, it is much better here than in other countries. You have a job you love where you work 180 days, have plenty of family time, paid health insurance, almost two weeks of sick days, and hopefully you and your family’s health. Deal with it.
Not Getting Over It

Arnold, MO

#31 Jun 23, 2013
deal with it wrote:
To those of you mentioning the food director position--that has nothing to do with this issue. There will always be bosses and directors out in the world who make more than you with less schooling—that is a moot point.
saying “Ha! We really screwed those teachers over! Yes!”
No…this didn’t happen. Now I wasn’t in the room nor were any of making $66,798, and for the next year would make $71,500--getting a raise of $4702! Almost a FIVE THOUSAND DOLLAR raise in one year!!! Should this veteran teacher should receive a raise over 5 times the raise of the younger teacher?
We are probably in the wrong polarizing climate to bring up a much better here than in other countries. You have a job you love where you work 180 days, have plenty of family time, paid health insurance, almost two weeks of sick days, and hopefully you and your family’s health. Deal with it.
So when did you become the head sheep, disseminating the way everyone else should interpret board actions? This is not "out in the world." or the private sector, this is in our tax supported school district, so the point is not moot. The cuts in other areas, in this case, should have been to the salaries of the highly paid superintendent (how much will her raise be?)and her ever growing pool of relatives and cronies, like you. Don't minimize the large starting salary for the Burger flipping, unqualified, relative of then BOE president, it was wrong, you know it, the board knows it, the super knows it and the people know it. To compensate for her lack of qualifications, two assistants must be hired to do the actual work involved to make sure the job is done properly. That will be two people doing the job that the one was hired to do, but can't, and she will continue to collect a large salary along with the two salaries being paid out to them.
Hello

Imperial, MO

#32 Jun 24, 2013
All the talk about the board being "fiscally responsible" can be thrown out if one realizes that the same board that changed the way teachers move to the salary schedule (resulting in less of a raise for teachers) is the same board that voted yes for a $287,000 score board for the FHS field.
I know the these categories of money are "separate and non-transferrable" BUT $287,000 of the "no-tax-increase" bond issue spent on a score board.....that's unacceptable!
EA

United States

#33 Jun 24, 2013
Hello wrote:
All the talk about the board being "fiscally responsible" can be thrown out if one realizes that the same board that changed the way teachers move to the salary schedule (resulting in less of a raise for teachers) is the same board that voted yes for a $287,000 score board for the FHS field.
I know the these categories of money are "separate and non-transferrable" BUT $287,000 of the "no-tax-increase" bond issue spent on a score board.....that's unacceptable!
I don't think the school will be paying for the scoreboard. At the board meeting they talked about Daktroniks owning the advertising rights for the back of the scoreboard (it is essentially a billboard on highway 55) for a certain amount of time and that would pay for it.
Not So Fast

Arnold, MO

#34 Jun 24, 2013
Not thinking seems to be your specialty. Back your statement up with some kind of documentation, a contract, meeting minutes, something with substance other than just your thoughts on here. No advertising has been secured nor has Daktroniks agreed to absorb the cost of the sign. They are in business to sell signs, not advertising.
Sam Ferry

Saint Louis, MO

#35 Jun 24, 2013
Not So Fast wrote:
Not thinking seems to be your specialty. Back your statement up with some kind of documentation, a contract, meeting minutes, something with substance other than just your thoughts on here. No advertising has been secured nor has Daktroniks agreed to absorb the cost of the sign. They are in business to sell signs, not advertising.
Go to the Fox website and look up the meeting minutes for both March and April. What he claims is true.
parental involvement

Saint Louis, MO

#36 Jun 24, 2013
Not So Fast wrote:
Not thinking seems to be your specialty. Back your statement up with some kind of documentation, a contract, meeting minutes, something with substance other than just your thoughts on here. No advertising has been secured nor has Daktroniks agreed to absorb the cost of the sign. They are in business to sell signs, not advertising.
Pgs 183-195 of the April board packet directly contradict you. I'm awaiting your apology.
parental involvement

Saint Louis, MO

#38 Jun 25, 2013
Not So Fast wrote:
Not thinking seems to be your specialty. Back your statement up with some kind of documentation, a contract, meeting minutes, something with substance other than just your thoughts on here. No advertising has been secured nor has Daktroniks agreed to absorb the cost of the sign. They are in business to sell signs, not advertising.
You are suddenly so very quiet.
Not So Fast

Arnold, MO

#39 Jun 25, 2013
My mistake, but why is the school district providing an advertising venue that will benefit someone other than the school district? Is there something in the contract that once paid for, reverts profits back to the district? By the way, monitoring this site all day is not on my day planner.
Tired of it All

United States

#40 Jun 25, 2013
Hello wrote:
All the talk about the board being "fiscally responsible" can be thrown out if one realizes that the same board that changed the way teachers move to the salary schedule (resulting in less of a raise for teachers) is the same board that voted yes for a $287,000 score board for the FHS field.
I know the these categories of money are "separate and non-transferrable" BUT $287,000 of the "no-tax-increase" bond issue spent on a score board.....that's unacceptable!
Check your facts before you speak. The scoreboard is no cost to the District!!! Talk to Nick Gianino before you complain.
Tired of it All

United States

#41 Jun 25, 2013
Not So Fast wrote:
Not thinking seems to be your specialty. Back your statement up with some kind of documentation, a contract, meeting minutes, something with substance other than just your thoughts on here. No advertising has been secured nor has Daktroniks agreed to absorb the cost of the sign. They are in business to sell signs, not advertising.
Again, call Nick Gianino at Fox HS.
Sam Ferry

Saint Louis, MO

#42 Jun 25, 2013
Not So Fast wrote:
My mistake, but why is the school district providing an advertising venue that will benefit someone other than the school district? Is there something in the contract that once paid for, reverts profits back to the district? By the way, monitoring this site all day is not on my day planner.
The answer to your second question is yes. After the sign is fully paid for all of the advertising dollars go to Fox. At that point though the district itself will have to actually procure the advertising. Seems like a really good deal to me. It is a win win.
Out of Dimes

Arnold, MO

#43 Jun 25, 2013
You know what? People shouldn't have to call anyone! Not Nick Gianino, not the central office, not the board, everything that is happening in this district should be readily available for all to see, right on the front page of the website. Everything. If someone even thinks the public might want to know about something, it should be there for them to look at.
parental involvement

Saint Louis, MO

#44 Jun 25, 2013
Out of Dimes wrote:
You know what? People shouldn't have to call anyone! Not Nick Gianino, not the central office, not the board, everything that is happening in this district should be readily available for all to see, right on the front page of the website. Everything. If someone even thinks the public might want to know about something, it should be there for them to look at.
It's right there in the minutes of the board meeting.

Tell me when this thread is updated:

Subscribe Now Add to my Tracker

Add your comments below

Characters left: 4000

Please note by submitting this form you acknowledge that you have read the Terms of Service and the comment you are posting is in compliance with such terms. Be polite. Inappropriate posts may be removed by the moderator. Send us your feedback.

Arnold Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
Fox C6 Board of Education : Discussion (Jun '14) 7 min Eileen 1,030
Fox Audit 23 min Eileen 13
Sherry Poppen for BOE 27 min Eileen 20
Fox nutrition director leaves with $20,000 sett... 21 hr what's up with that 6
Arnold City Council Fri ArnoldCC 3
Arnold Talk (Nov '07) Thu Sauls1 100
Who is your preferred candidate for Fox C-6 Sch... Feb 26 Senator Bettencourt 18

Winter Storm Warning for Jefferson County was issued at March 01 at 4:25AM CST

Arnold Dating
Find my Match
More from around the web

Arnold People Search

Addresses and phone numbers for FREE

Personal Finance

Mortgages [ See current mortgage rates ]

NFL Latest News

Updated 5:36 pm PST

Yahoo! Sports 5:36PM
Falcons release veteran running back Steven Jackson
Bleacher Report 8:55 PM
St. Louis Rams: 5 Best Options to Replace Joe Barksdale This Offseason
Bleacher Report 4:00 AM
Why the Browns Need to Stay Far Away from Bradford
NFL 7:00 AM
Weinke makes a Luck-Bradford collegiate comparison
Bleacher Report 9:14 PM
Is Kelce Destined for Stardom in 2015?