The History Behind the Electives Committee -
Last Spring (2009)a group of electives teachers asked to meet with Chriss Golden after registration had been completed. They were alarmed by how the shift to the 6 hour day, in tandem with the increased and more stringent graduation requirements initiated by the State of Michigan, had caused a drop in the number of students registering for elective classes. Elective teachers were losing several sections of their offerings, and some had even been shifted to different schools. Because of the incremental increase of requirements over 2009-2009 and 2009-2010, they anticipated that even fewer students would be able to sign up for electives in the 2010-2011 school year. Chriss asked Daryl Szymanski and me to also attend this meeting as the vice-president and president elect of the WLEA.
The electives people, Daryl, myself, and Cyndi Austin (our uniserve director) met again in July and worked on the survey that was sent to all secondary staff (high school and middle school) of the WLEA. Our intent was to determine the membership's view of the effect of the 6 hour day. I sent the results of that survey to secondary teachers last week.
We also asked Dr. Hamilton to gather registration data for us comparing electives student numbers and teacher FTE from the 2008-2009 school year (a 7 period day schedule) and for this year (2009-2010). The data showed an average drop of over 13% for the combined electives FTE. Physical education classes dropped the most, and Foreign Language showed little, if any change. Other areas that showed a decrease in FTE included Business, Music/Performing Arts, Art, and Industrial Arts.
In discussing this information, the Electives group that was meeting together saw that a return to the 7 hour day would alleviate the registration problems for electives classes, but were mindful that the load of teaching 6 classes out of 7 the previous 2 years had been unpopular and problematic for many teachers, particularly the core teachers. So, the committee decided to ask to meet with Dr. Hamilton to talk about possible solutions.
The October 2nd Committee Report -
Daryl Szymanski, Mary Rashid, David Deluca, and I met with Dr. Hamilton. We briefly went over the survey and the numbers as he had those before our meeting. He knows the issue!
The first suggestion put on the table, was immediately pushed off the table. That being, a return to the 7 hour day, with core teachers teaching 5 out of 7, and electives teaching 6 out of 7. Dr. Hamilton told us that would cost 1 million to 2 million dollars and considering the state budget mess, couldn't be done.
We then talked about the possibility of core teachers teaching academic classes for 5 out of 7 hours, but perhaps there was a sixth hour assignment that would be beneficial to students, and yet not add any preparation to the academic day. We also talked about caps on class sizes, similar to the language previously in the contract that expired with the demise of the 7 hour day last spring. After lots of ideas being floated, the following actions were taken:
1) Dr. Hamilton is sending out a Metro Bureau Search to all districts in this area asking 5 questions regarding their experience with the increasing academic requirements from the state and maintaining student opportunity to take electives.
2) Mary said that Judy knows of a program being done in Grosse Pointe that may give us an idea. Judy, could you send a bit of this information to me and I will contact the EA president in Grosse Pointe.
3) I did not say this at the meeting, yesterday afternoon, Cyndi Austin sent out a questionnaire to all MEA Eastern Zone leaders, asking them questions similar to the inquiries in the Metro Bureau Search.
We also talked about deadlines looming for decision making, as scheduling will need to be set, probably in December. This is of grave concern to me.
How to proceed? I am going to talk with Cyndi regarding some issues, but I believe we need to look at
1) finding an acceptable use for a 6th hour for core teachers that does not require an additional prep
2) is there any other way of accomplishing this AND giving more time for students to take electives.
3) We need to bring high school core teachers into our group SOON and will be pursuing this later today and on Monday.
4) I will need to take this to the Bargaining Committee as well, probably as we add core teachers.
Friday, October 2, 2009
Wednesday, September 2, 2009
First Meeting of Health Care Reform Committee
The first meeting of the Public Employee Health Care Reform Committee has been scheduled for this Thursday, September 3rd, at 10:00 A.M. at the State Capitol Building. The single item on the agenda is a presentation by Speaker Dillon on his proposal.
At this time it appears there will be hearings of this committee scheduled once per week through September. There is no specific schedule at this time.
The members of the committee are:
Pam Byrnes (D) Chelsea (chairperson)
Harold Haugh (D) Roseville
Bert Johnson (D) Highland Park
Michael Lahti (D) Hancock
Tim Melton (D) Auburn Hills
Dan Scrips (D) Leland
Woodrow Stanley (D) Flint
Kate Segal (D) Battle Creek
Phillip Pavlov (R) St. Clair is the minority vice-chair
Robert Genetski (R) Saugatuck
Matthew Lori (R) Constantine
Bill Rogers (R) Brighton
James Bolger (R) Marshall
At this time it appears there will be hearings of this committee scheduled once per week through September. There is no specific schedule at this time.
The members of the committee are:
Pam Byrnes (D) Chelsea (chairperson)
Harold Haugh (D) Roseville
Bert Johnson (D) Highland Park
Michael Lahti (D) Hancock
Tim Melton (D) Auburn Hills
Dan Scrips (D) Leland
Woodrow Stanley (D) Flint
Kate Segal (D) Battle Creek
Phillip Pavlov (R) St. Clair is the minority vice-chair
Robert Genetski (R) Saugatuck
Matthew Lori (R) Constantine
Bill Rogers (R) Brighton
James Bolger (R) Marshall
DRAFT A - Dillon Health Plan
This is a “first look” at Speaker Dillon’s Draft Bill creating the “Michigan Health Benefits Program Act”. It came out late last week and the MEA has been evaluating it over the weekend. This is their first summary of it:
The Speaker's legislation (Michigan Health Benefits Program Act):
--creates a mandatory state government-run health plan housed in the Department of Management and Budget, governed by a state Health Benefits Board and administered by the Office of State Employer
--mandates participation of all state, local, city, college, township, and county governments, agencies, school districts, public school academies, ISDs, community colleges, and public universities as well as all public retirement systems, obtain employee health plans from the state benefits plan Sec. 21(2), page 13
--eliminates collective bargaining (public employers and employees would be limited in choosing from the menu of plans and plan designs approved by the Health Benefits Board) Sec. 7(a), Page 4 and Sec. 11(c), Page 6
--mandates that all local governments participate in the state government-run health plan
--requires that all local governments are also financially liable for any budget shortfalls in the state-run fund Sec. 20, Page 12
--creates a state health benefits fund in the Department of Treasury Sec. 18(1), Page 10
--creates a public health plan by allowing individuals and organizations in the private sector to purchase coverage from the state Health Benefits plan Sec. 7(h), Page 7
--creates a new level of bureaucracy in state government within the Office of State Employer. Sec 10, Page 5
--puts state government between doctors and their patients and gives government a major role in patient health care decisions by mandating "use of clinical advocates to review diagnoses and care for correct treatment." Sec. 12(e), Page 7
--gives the Office of State Employer authority to create a new bureaucracy, and hire an executive director and staff to administer the program Sec. 13(c), Page 8
--allows local governments to opt-out of the program if they pay for an actuarial study
The Speaker's legislation (Michigan Health Benefits Program Act):
--creates a mandatory state government-run health plan housed in the Department of Management and Budget, governed by a state Health Benefits Board and administered by the Office of State Employer
--mandates participation of all state, local, city, college, township, and county governments, agencies, school districts, public school academies, ISDs, community colleges, and public universities as well as all public retirement systems, obtain employee health plans from the state benefits plan Sec. 21(2), page 13
--eliminates collective bargaining (public employers and employees would be limited in choosing from the menu of plans and plan designs approved by the Health Benefits Board) Sec. 7(a), Page 4 and Sec. 11(c), Page 6
--mandates that all local governments participate in the state government-run health plan
--requires that all local governments are also financially liable for any budget shortfalls in the state-run fund Sec. 20, Page 12
--creates a state health benefits fund in the Department of Treasury Sec. 18(1), Page 10
--creates a public health plan by allowing individuals and organizations in the private sector to purchase coverage from the state Health Benefits plan Sec. 7(h), Page 7
--creates a new level of bureaucracy in state government within the Office of State Employer. Sec 10, Page 5
--puts state government between doctors and their patients and gives government a major role in patient health care decisions by mandating "use of clinical advocates to review diagnoses and care for correct treatment." Sec. 12(e), Page 7
--gives the Office of State Employer authority to create a new bureaucracy, and hire an executive director and staff to administer the program Sec. 13(c), Page 8
--allows local governments to opt-out of the program if they pay for an actuarial study
Thursday, August 13, 2009
MEA News Release - August 13th, 2009
Evidence shows schools pay less for health insurance
New analysis breaks myths of health care debate
EAST LANSING, Mich., August 13, 2009 – A new report dramatically changes the debate on public employee health care with this single fact: Michigan schools spend less per employee than private companies for health insurance. And unlike the private sector, public school health care costs are going down.
“Wrong Diagnosis-Wrong Cure” dispels many of the common myths about public school employee health insurance currently being presented as truth in the cost-cutting debate.
“This report shows that Speaker Dillon’s health care proposal is based on misinformation and faulty data,” said MEA President Iris K. Salters. “The real numbers reported to the Michigan Department of Education clearly indicate that the root of financial problems for public schools is not rising health care costs, as Dillon would have you believe.”
Speaker Dillon’s proposal is based on bringing health care spending for public employees in line with what private employers pay, but this report shows that if that were to happen, Michigan taxpayers would end up paying much more.
The evidence—gathered from actual costs, not projections—is startling:
Over the last three years, Michigan’s public schools have experienced an actual reduction of almost $350 per employee per year in the cost of health benefits paid by school employers.
· In that same three year period, overall expenditures for health benefits provided by public school employers declined more than $36 million—while health care costs for private employers have increased more than 29 percent.
· Health insurance benefit costs for Michigan’s teachers are 20 percent below private sector costs.
· In 2008, only about 1 in 4 school support employees had access to any employer-paid medical insurance.
“Speaker Dillon’s plan is flawed from the onset because it relies on projected numbers, rather than actual costs,” said the report’s author, financial analyst Arch Lewis, “In fact, the study shows that the Dillon analysis is based on projected public school health benefit costs that are $365 million to $645 million above the actual 2007-08 costs for school employee health benefits.”
“Wrong Diagnosis-Wrong Cure” uses actual costs from school district reports to the MDE to “shatter misguided illusions and present clear and comprehensive facts,” said Lewis.
“Michigan taxpayers cannot afford to gamble on a proposal built on faulty analysis and misinformation. This report shows why it could end up costing us all millions more,” said Salters.
To see the complete report, “Wrong Diagnosis-Wrong Cure,” go to www.mea.org.
New analysis breaks myths of health care debate
EAST LANSING, Mich., August 13, 2009 – A new report dramatically changes the debate on public employee health care with this single fact: Michigan schools spend less per employee than private companies for health insurance. And unlike the private sector, public school health care costs are going down.
“Wrong Diagnosis-Wrong Cure” dispels many of the common myths about public school employee health insurance currently being presented as truth in the cost-cutting debate.
“This report shows that Speaker Dillon’s health care proposal is based on misinformation and faulty data,” said MEA President Iris K. Salters. “The real numbers reported to the Michigan Department of Education clearly indicate that the root of financial problems for public schools is not rising health care costs, as Dillon would have you believe.”
Speaker Dillon’s proposal is based on bringing health care spending for public employees in line with what private employers pay, but this report shows that if that were to happen, Michigan taxpayers would end up paying much more.
The evidence—gathered from actual costs, not projections—is startling:
Over the last three years, Michigan’s public schools have experienced an actual reduction of almost $350 per employee per year in the cost of health benefits paid by school employers.
· In that same three year period, overall expenditures for health benefits provided by public school employers declined more than $36 million—while health care costs for private employers have increased more than 29 percent.
· Health insurance benefit costs for Michigan’s teachers are 20 percent below private sector costs.
· In 2008, only about 1 in 4 school support employees had access to any employer-paid medical insurance.
“Speaker Dillon’s plan is flawed from the onset because it relies on projected numbers, rather than actual costs,” said the report’s author, financial analyst Arch Lewis, “In fact, the study shows that the Dillon analysis is based on projected public school health benefit costs that are $365 million to $645 million above the actual 2007-08 costs for school employee health benefits.”
“Wrong Diagnosis-Wrong Cure” uses actual costs from school district reports to the MDE to “shatter misguided illusions and present clear and comprehensive facts,” said Lewis.
“Michigan taxpayers cannot afford to gamble on a proposal built on faulty analysis and misinformation. This report shows why it could end up costing us all millions more,” said Salters.
To see the complete report, “Wrong Diagnosis-Wrong Cure,” go to www.mea.org.
Monday, August 10, 2009
Rep. Lisa Brown at MEA Office Aug. 18, 2009 @ 6:30 PM
Dear WLEA Friends,
Lisa Brown, the legislator for the eastern portion of our school district, cancelled her previous meeting with us, but she will now be coming on Tuesday, August 18th, 2009, at 6:30.
Cyndi Austin, our Uniserve Director, has asked us to meet at 6:00 pm prior to Rep. Brown's arrival. If you can come, I would greatly appreciate it.
If you need directions or would like to talk to me or Cyndi, please call the Uniserve Office.
39300 West Twelve Mile Road, Suite 140
Farmington Hills, MI 48331
Ofc: 248-553-8198
Lisa Brown, the legislator for the eastern portion of our school district, cancelled her previous meeting with us, but she will now be coming on Tuesday, August 18th, 2009, at 6:30.
Cyndi Austin, our Uniserve Director, has asked us to meet at 6:00 pm prior to Rep. Brown's arrival. If you can come, I would greatly appreciate it.
If you need directions or would like to talk to me or Cyndi, please call the Uniserve Office.
39300 West Twelve Mile Road, Suite 140
Farmington Hills, MI 48331
Ofc: 248-553-8198
Tuesday, August 4, 2009
Dear Fellow WLEA Members,
First of all, THANK YOU, THANK YOU for all your efforts to communicate with our representatives in Lansing! Secondly, I feel I have asked you a million times to pass on information this summer, and I hate to intrude on your vacation again. I persist only because I know how important quality health care is to all of us, and our health care is now being seriously threatened. In this blog I have included information from Steve Cook, the Vice president of the MEA.
First a Labor Coalition was formed by the efforts of Lu Battaglieri, the Executive Director of the MEA. Members of the Labor Coalition include:
MEA
AFL-CIO
UAW
Michigan Association of Governmental Employees
IUOE – Local 547
Michigan Nurses Association
AFT
SEIU Michigan State Council
Teamsters Local 214
Amalgamated Transit Union, Michigan Legislative Council
Michigan AFSCME Council 25
Michigan State Employees Association
IBEW Michigan State Conference
The Labor Coalition met with Mr. Dillon and here is Steve Cook's (MEA Vice President) summary of the meeting:
Dillon is sticking to his “concept” and we, together with members of the Labor Coalition, are working overtime with legislators to defeat it. Dillon however offered to the Coalition the idea that we could develop our own plan. Here’s the problem, each day at bargaining tables across the state each member of the Labor Coalition has members that are doing just that – dealing first hand with the high cost of health insurance with their employers in negotiations and selecting that insurance that both employers and union members can best afford. Dillon’s offer to the Labor Coalition to bargain against ourselves was refused.
Dillon’s unacceptable premise is that in order for the Labor Coalition to offer a plan it has to begin with the foundation of a one size fits all, take it or leave it statewide health plan and then build from there. As reported in Gongwer News Service yesterday, the AFT said there needs to be a “do-over” of the Dillon plan. AFSCME Council 25 said his plan is “not salvageable.” MEA agrees.
PLEASE WRITE YOUR LEGISLATORS!!!! Use EMAIL!!! Use your home accounts! I have listed districts, names, and email addresses below!
District 37 – Farmington & Farmington Hills – Vicki Barnett VickiBarnett@house.mi.gov
District 38 – Novi, Walled Lake City, Wixom – Hugh Crawford HughCrawford@house.mi.gov
District 39 – West Bloomfield Twp., Commerce Twp.Lisa Brown LisaBrown@house.mi.gov
District 43 – West Bloomfield – Gail Haines GailHaines@house.mi.gov
District 44 – White Lake Township – Eileen Kowall EileenKowall@house.mi.gov
First of all, THANK YOU, THANK YOU for all your efforts to communicate with our representatives in Lansing! Secondly, I feel I have asked you a million times to pass on information this summer, and I hate to intrude on your vacation again. I persist only because I know how important quality health care is to all of us, and our health care is now being seriously threatened. In this blog I have included information from Steve Cook, the Vice president of the MEA.
First a Labor Coalition was formed by the efforts of Lu Battaglieri, the Executive Director of the MEA. Members of the Labor Coalition include:
MEA
AFL-CIO
UAW
Michigan Association of Governmental Employees
IUOE – Local 547
Michigan Nurses Association
AFT
SEIU Michigan State Council
Teamsters Local 214
Amalgamated Transit Union, Michigan Legislative Council
Michigan AFSCME Council 25
Michigan State Employees Association
IBEW Michigan State Conference
The Labor Coalition met with Mr. Dillon and here is Steve Cook's (MEA Vice President) summary of the meeting:
Dillon is sticking to his “concept” and we, together with members of the Labor Coalition, are working overtime with legislators to defeat it. Dillon however offered to the Coalition the idea that we could develop our own plan. Here’s the problem, each day at bargaining tables across the state each member of the Labor Coalition has members that are doing just that – dealing first hand with the high cost of health insurance with their employers in negotiations and selecting that insurance that both employers and union members can best afford. Dillon’s offer to the Labor Coalition to bargain against ourselves was refused.
Dillon’s unacceptable premise is that in order for the Labor Coalition to offer a plan it has to begin with the foundation of a one size fits all, take it or leave it statewide health plan and then build from there. As reported in Gongwer News Service yesterday, the AFT said there needs to be a “do-over” of the Dillon plan. AFSCME Council 25 said his plan is “not salvageable.” MEA agrees.
PLEASE WRITE YOUR LEGISLATORS!!!! Use EMAIL!!! Use your home accounts! I have listed districts, names, and email addresses below!
District 37 – Farmington & Farmington Hills – Vicki Barnett VickiBarnett@house.mi.gov
District 38 – Novi, Walled Lake City, Wixom – Hugh Crawford HughCrawford@house.mi.gov
District 39 – West Bloomfield Twp., Commerce Twp.Lisa Brown LisaBrown@house.mi.gov
District 43 – West Bloomfield – Gail Haines GailHaines@house.mi.gov
District 44 – White Lake Township – Eileen Kowall EileenKowall@house.mi.gov
Monday, August 3, 2009
A Letter From Representative Dillon Regarding His Health Care Proposal - What do you think?
Rep. Dillon's Letter:
Thank you for contacting me regarding your concerns with my recent proposal to reform health care for public sector employees. I appreciate your thoughtful suggestions and advocacy on this important matter.
Please know this is simply a proposal. At this time, no legislation has been agreed upon or introduced. To ensure all concerns are heard, I am continuing to meet with groups and organizations that would be affected by this proposal. With that said, as you know these are very tough economic times, and the effects resonate in the lives of all Michigan residents. I believe that with a budget deficit approaching $2 billion, state government must make some difficult cuts in spending and do its fair share to shoulder the burden - including legislators.
I have argued from the start that the state has been using one-time gimmicks for the past eight years to avoid addressing our structural deficit. We need to make tough cuts and implement serious reforms to reduce the cost of government.
The plan I am proposing will overhaul health care for Michigan's public sector employees and retirees, consolidating the hundreds of different health benefit plans under one roof. Creating this larger pool of customers will maximize efficiency and cost savings, while making health care more affordable and accessible. This move will save taxpayers almost $1 billion per year once fully implemented.
Please note that every public employee, including myself, my colleagues in the House and Senate, the Governor, all public school teachers and many others will be able to choose from the same health care plans. Finally, this is a pro-worker reform proposal. Current contracts in place will be honored, collective bargaining rights will be sustained and patient choice will be preserved.
It is necessary to assure the state is financially sound and can compete in the 21st Century. This reform will allow the state to continue to provide for access to affordable heath care, a quality educational system and adequately funded police and fire protection, all of which are critical ingredients to a healthy economy.
As I stated earlier, this is just a proposal. In the coming weeks I will continue to meet with many groups representing state and municipal workers throughout Michigan. It is my hope we can come together and work on a solution that works best for all parties, especially Michigan citizens.
Please rest assured that I will keep your views in mind as we work through this process.
For additional information, you may view my proposal at http://www.newideasformichigan.org/ .
Again, thank you for your correspondence. Please do not hesitate to contact me in the future regarding this or any other matter of concern.
Thank you for contacting me regarding your concerns with my recent proposal to reform health care for public sector employees. I appreciate your thoughtful suggestions and advocacy on this important matter.
Please know this is simply a proposal. At this time, no legislation has been agreed upon or introduced. To ensure all concerns are heard, I am continuing to meet with groups and organizations that would be affected by this proposal. With that said, as you know these are very tough economic times, and the effects resonate in the lives of all Michigan residents. I believe that with a budget deficit approaching $2 billion, state government must make some difficult cuts in spending and do its fair share to shoulder the burden - including legislators.
I have argued from the start that the state has been using one-time gimmicks for the past eight years to avoid addressing our structural deficit. We need to make tough cuts and implement serious reforms to reduce the cost of government.
The plan I am proposing will overhaul health care for Michigan's public sector employees and retirees, consolidating the hundreds of different health benefit plans under one roof. Creating this larger pool of customers will maximize efficiency and cost savings, while making health care more affordable and accessible. This move will save taxpayers almost $1 billion per year once fully implemented.
Please note that every public employee, including myself, my colleagues in the House and Senate, the Governor, all public school teachers and many others will be able to choose from the same health care plans. Finally, this is a pro-worker reform proposal. Current contracts in place will be honored, collective bargaining rights will be sustained and patient choice will be preserved.
It is necessary to assure the state is financially sound and can compete in the 21st Century. This reform will allow the state to continue to provide for access to affordable heath care, a quality educational system and adequately funded police and fire protection, all of which are critical ingredients to a healthy economy.
As I stated earlier, this is just a proposal. In the coming weeks I will continue to meet with many groups representing state and municipal workers throughout Michigan. It is my hope we can come together and work on a solution that works best for all parties, especially Michigan citizens.
Please rest assured that I will keep your views in mind as we work through this process.
For additional information, you may view my proposal at http://www.newideasformichigan.org/ .
Again, thank you for your correspondence. Please do not hesitate to contact me in the future regarding this or any other matter of concern.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
