Tag Archives: enrollment per 1000 people

Last week we released our most recent Benchmark City report updating data to reflect 2010 budgets. But the school district in one city in the Benchmark-Charlotte, NC-is showing signs that it is preparing for the economic hardships that are surely ahead in the coming years.

Just this week the district announced that it plans to layoff 600 teachers for the fall term and is cutting pay for 224 assistant principals. According to the Superintendent "performance" will be the guiding factor in determining who gets laid off.

Let’s put the 600 layoffs into perspective: Charlotte-Mecklenberg School District has 10,497 teachers and support staff employees listed in their most recent annual report. Letting 600 teachers go amounts to a 5% downsizing. If Pittsburgh Public Schools were to layoff 5% of the workforce classified as teachers/support staff, it would amount to 115 people (based on 2,303 teachers and academic coaches listed in the most recent school CAFR).

Consider too that enrollment in Pittsburgh is falling while enrollment in Charlotte-Mecklenberg has been on the upswing (since 2004, Pittsburgh is down 26%, Charlotte is up 15%) yet, on a per 1000 student basis, Charlotte has 79 teachers/support staff and Pittsburgh has 88 teachers/coaches, 14% higher in the Steel City (total overall staffing is even more disproportionate with Pittsburgh having 39% more employees per 1000 students).

Imagine what rancor 100 layoffs in the Pittsburgh Public Schools would cause. And if those layoffs were based on performance without regard to seniority the ire among teachers would be off of the charts. Ironically the teachers’ union in Pittsburgh would want to set aside performance for layoff decisions while it tries to define what constitutes good performance to satisfy the requirements of the Gates Foundation grant. Moreover, under the union contract and state law it is unlikely that either spending or layoffs will occur in Pittsburgh no matter how tough the economic environment. Indeed, raises for teachers will have to be paid according to contract terms no matter the hardship for taxpayers in Pittsburgh and across the state. Somehow the state and Federal government will be counted on to fill any gaps.

What a difference in approach in NC, a state that has no recognized public sector unions and where teacher and other public employee strikes are not allowed and would result in serious penalties if they occur.

Pittsburgh’s school board just voted to close two schools because of falling enrollment. Is there a chance a single teacher will be let go as a result of declining numbers of students? Not in Pittsburgh where public sector unions are in firm control.

And Pittsburgh taxpayers have not seen the worst yet. The school board requirement to boost funding sharply for teacher pensions in a couple of years will cause school tax rates to jump. Then too, the 2012 county wide reassessment will undoubtedly cause enormous heartburn for people whose properties are seriously undervalued currently. One must wonder how charitable toward teachers’ unions taxpayers will feel by then. But unless they are willing to vote differently they will just have to grin and bear the higher tax burdens.