jackiedoherty.org

There are currently 19 responses to “Assistant supt. great career choice/not so good song”

Why not let us know what you think by adding your own comment! Your opinion is as valid as anyone elses, so come on... let us know what you think.

1. 1 On July 21st, 2008, Bull said:

   Jackie if you don’t think Paul Georges and the teachers union is going to hang this over your head in the next round of negotiations you are crazy.
   Throwing money at a problem never solves it.
   You said now was not the time for raises yet you gave them anyhow, you did the city taxpayers a disservice with this one.

2. 2 On July 21st, 2008, Jackie said:

   There’s never a good time to give raises, and we need these four more than ever now. You wrote: “Throwing money at a problem never solves it.” It does if the problem is you’ve got people underpaid and it causes inequity within your own system and in comparison with the rest of the world. I agree that Mr. Georges will attempt to use this during negotiations, that’s his job. But even he recognizes the inequity and parity issues here. My decision was based on fairness to these four and the need for their continued commitment to our vision of excellent schools, as well as concern about what’s ahead in terms of education challenges. As a taxpayer myself earning $6K to do this job,there was no painless way out of this dilemma.

3. 3 On July 21st, 2008, Bull said:

   I appreciate the response I don’t agree with it, but still I appreciate it.

4. 4 On July 21st, 2008, Fred said:

   You can explain yourself anyway you want but you did do the city a huge disservice. This was the easy way out and no one is not wondering what the real motive for these raises were. I know its an old argument but you truly do work for the taxpayers and this taxpayer felt this was a shakedown and you caved. People are hanging on to their jobs for dear life hoping to get a chance to go to work on Monday morning and these four feel they deserve a raise and extra perks. What exactly are their duties, qualifications and why have these chosen four risen to a point that they can demand these raises in todays times. Of course, timing for this was perfect. Summer, nobody paying attention, and the wool again was pulled over everyone’s eyes. As a great song lyric goes Some people rob you with a six gun and some people rob with a fountain pen. This pen had a big feather on it. Shame, shame, shame. They’re are still a few watching.

5. 5 On July 21st, 2008, Jackie said:

   The easy way out is to make four people feel valued by increasing their compensation to a fair market rate while you enrage the local paper and others? I don’t think so. I’m not sure what you mean by real motive, but from where I sit, the motive is to continue to improve the schools, which benefits our entire community and is what I’m elected to do. My children attend these schools, do you think I don’t feel each position we’ve cut and each dime we spend personally? We knew supporting these contracts wasn’t going to be popular. Due to the leak during negotiations, we understood in advance the extent of attack from the local media…Why was there no outcry when we had to increase the supt salary by $20K to replace Dr. Baehr, arguably the best supt in the state? She was driven out, in part, by those most loudly attacking us now. How is it a disservice to taxpayers that we had to address salary inconsistencies to keep an exceptional team committed to our vision, especially under new leadership and yes, perhaps even because of it. (Maybe they got sick of working for less than their colleagues when they saw a newcomer make $20K more than the proven, successful Baehr.) Uncomfortable as it is sometimes, my job is to work for excellent schools and that is what I’m trying to do.

6. 6 On July 21st, 2008, Fred said:

   Since I haven’t been living under a rock for the time you’ve been so diligently doing your job, your response doesn’t surprise me. What does surprise me is how blatantly unresponsive to a taxpayers concern your reply is. Perhaps looking at other points of view and trying to understand issues from another perspective would help you to make some decisions differently. I gather by your response having children in the school system gives you some greater knowledge of the situation than those of us who did but don’t now? As far as what I meant by your motives, every decision anyone makes is made because of an end result. That is your motive and only you know what that is. As far as you being concerned about if your decision would enrage the local paper or others, you know by the time it matters it will all be forgotten because as I said before nobody is listening and all politicians know memories are short. Meanwhile, we’re stuck with classrooms being deprived of teachers with talks of layoffs. a school system in turmoil, while four administrators reap the benefits. If this exceptional team, so committed to your vision, really were exceptional, they would have realized they were being compensated quite nicely and were lucky to have their jobs in these economic times. But I guess we don’t care much what’s happening to everyone else if we are being well taken care of. Pure Greed. I don’t blame them. They asked it was the committees job to have the information at hand and explain the situation to them. The whole issue here is payback for Dr. Baehr being driven out of office as you said. You can hold a grudge against whoever you wish but bankrupting the city and depleting the school department of everyday needed resources to favor a few and settle a score is just wrong. Of course, that’s just a mere taxpayers opinion.

7. 7 On July 21st, 2008, John Zagarella said:

   Some people feel that it is never a good time to give a pay raise to a public employee.I disagree.Most public employees are hardworking and deserve a raise based on performance or years of service.When the economy takes a turn for the worse these individuals are scrutinized and unfairly criticized.I have no problem with a raise for the Asst.Supt. they probably deserve it.The individuals involved are educated and experienced.My problem with this issue is the negotiation of a contract that had two years remaining on it.Who crafted this motion? As far as I’m concerned this was not a disservice.I would call it a breach of the public trust.I understand and appreciate the time and energy a committee person spends but in my eyes this vote can not be justified.A big No-No. Thank you.

8. 8 On July 22nd, 2008, Jackie said:

   My comment about my children being in the schools was not meant to imply that I know more than others but to illustrate what’s at stake for me personally. Given that, it offends me that you think I would “hold a grudge” or “bankrupt the city and deplete the schools to settle a score.” That is not what I’m about at all, and if you haven’t been under a rock as you said, you should know that. We might not agree on how to get there or on how much to spend on what, but my motive has always been to improve the schools. As I’ve said, we need consistent, effective leadership in the district now more than ever. Greedy or not for these four, we’re talking a total of about $27,000, which will help keep us on track during this transition. The reason all four contracts were done now (only three expired July 1)is because none of them had the indemnification language.

9. 9 On July 22nd, 2008, Short Sighted said:

   When push came to shove, and you were considering an interim superintendent, none of these four were interested. None of them are going anywhere. It may be true the assistants were underpaid compared to counterparts in smaller towns, but the real selling point for raises and professional education is to have people in the wings in the event the superintendent (principal, etc.) leaves.

   Good baseball teams spend money to support their farm teams, and don’t trade away their prospects. Spend the money on the next leaders.

10. 10 On July 23rd, 2008, Bull said:

    Jackie you don’t mention the reclassification of the positions that occurred last fall that actually added more than 80k, so now we are over 100k in pay increases. But hey it’s just a drop in the bucket. They get another week of vacation, 5k each in bonuses (which is another 20k), they can bank another 20 vacation days (which will cost us down the road), an increase in their travel allowance (which in itself is funny, I mean I don’t know too many people getting paid to drive to work).
    Basically we took it on the chin and we are suppose to smile and say thanks. And like you said Paul Georges will be sure to bring these things up down the line in negotiations, and it seems like he has down a pretty good job of getting what he wants too. So there is another thing the tax payers can look forward to.
    Again you say “Uncomfortable as it is sometimes, my job is to work for excellent schools and that is what I’m trying to do.” Let me give you my opinion, a salary of over 100k is nothing to sneeze at, giving them more perks than the average taxpayer is nothing to sneeze at. If all these people were in it for is the money than maybe we should find people that have the same goal, better the schools the best they can be. Because I am sure that the well over 100k we just handed out in pay could have been used for something the children actually can make use of!

11. 11 On July 23rd, 2008, Jackie said:

    Leadership is important. These folks are as much an integral part of the success of our new supt as they were to the progress we made w/Dr. Baehr. We have no time to tread water and especially not lose ground in the progress we’ve made; there’s too much more to be done! And I agree with Bull completely that a salary of $100k is “nothing to sneeze at” as are the generous benefits…(more than I’d ever make for sure). I don’t set the market rate anymore than you do, and even though I don’t like paying huge hourly fees for lawyers, I do when I need one and I try to get the best I can afford. I want excellent schools, I’ve seen the progress we’ve made in that direction, and I know it won’t come cheaply. The reality is all four probably would not have left, but even if one had, we would have had to increase the salary (just like we did to replace the supt) and we would have gotten someone untried in addition to transition time lost as they get up to speed. NOT ONE PERSON on the committee had issues with the competency, work ethic, or commitment of these four. The question then was, do we pay them a fair wage or not? It was better (and less expensive in the long run) to keep them focused on improving the schools.

12. 12 On July 23rd, 2008, Bull said:

    This is the logic that gets to me:
    “The reality is all four probably would not have left, but even if one had, we would have had to increase the salary”

    So increase the salary and benefits for 4 people because there was a remote chance 1 may or may not have left?
    If one left you may have replaced them with someone better, who knows.

    “NOT ONE PERSON on the committee had issues with the competency, work ethic, or commitment of these four.”

    Nor does anyone else have a problem with their competency, it’s their salary. And you keep saying “fair wage” 100k + is very fair. Not to mention 5 weeks vacation, travel, etc.

13. 13 On July 23rd, 2008, kpem said:

    “Most public employees are hardworking and deserve a raise based on performance or years of service”

    I agree they deserve pay raises, but not for items that the private sector are not receiving. When did a public servants become the upper class? Where else can you get excellent health ins. with no or little copays, sick time buy back, massive amounts of vacation, good pay, and early retirement with health insurance?

    Jackie,
    Can you make any comparisons to the pay scale and benefits that other citys are paying their Asst. Supers? I find it very relative.

14. 14 On July 23rd, 2008, kpem said:

    Just to clarify my last comment Jackie:
    I disagree with the fact that “most” public employees deserve what they get. I do not disagree with the fact that highly educated employees such as teachers, School Supers, psychologists, etc.. deserve whatever the market will allow. Many of these people could be doctors, attorneys, CFO’S, COO’S. and be making much more then a 6-7% pay raise per year.

15. 15 On July 24th, 2008, Jackie said:

    Look, I’m beginning to sound as repetitive as the local paper… We have evidence that comparable jobs paid more in similar-size districts and even area towns (ie Billerica and Chelmsford pay their school finance person $125K; we were at $111K and are now at $118K. It’s not a perfect match obviously but we were clearly on the low end. Also, our asst supt salaries did not have parity within our own district with subordinates making more etc. For me, the major point is consistency and exellence in leadership; these four were proven, and with the challenges ahead, we need that stability going forward.

16. 16 On July 24th, 2008, kpem said:

    I do not understand why when it comes to the school departments everyone considers these individuals overpaid. The same thing was done in the police budget to bring some captains pays up to their peers and no one says boo. I know it just kills some people that anyone makes over $100,000.

17. 17 On July 24th, 2008, JR said:

    How can Mr. Campanini claim that the LSC members who voted for the rate increases for four high-level administrators (see Lowell Sun editorial 7/24/08, pg 12) don’t respect the people who put them in office? It seems to me they acted with courage, knowing the public lambasting they would ultimately receive and acting on their conscience with little regard for the political fallout that would surely follow. I believe that Doherty, Faticanti, Leahy and Martin made a difficult and decidedly unpopular motion because they believe that the highest educational benefit to the school children can happen only when the schools attract and maintain quality staff to run the program. It goes without saying that the Lowell schools are far larger and more difficult to manage than Billerica or Chelmsford, yet our administrators, even with these raises are still paid less than their counterparts in those other towns. [see your comment- above $118 vs. $125, ok?] How dare the Lowell Sun make claim after claim that the SC is not listening to the voters. The committee’s first allegience is to the children. I trust their decision and I congratulate them on their grit and courage to keep the children first in their minds despite the flak from those who would sell our kids down the river to save a few bucks. It is Mr. Campanini whose respect for fairness and truth has been sacrificed and sullied by his insatiable thirst for substituting personal attacks for real, community-serving journalism.

18. 18 On July 25th, 2008, Bull said:

    Keep using the pay scale Chelmsford Schools use and we’ll be in the same financial mess that they are in. Makes sense. Maybe Tyngsboro could give us some pointers too.

19. 19 On August 7th, 2008, Bull said:

    Lost the minutes now, this is just getting better.