Springfield teachers have recently expressed their concerns over the stagnation of their extracurricular stipend payments for the upcoming year. This issue arose when Springfield Public Schools released its 2024-25 employee salary schedule, which outlined the stipend amounts for coaching sports, sponsoring clubs, and directing activities such as choir or theater. What caught the attention of teachers was the discrepancy in stipend amounts between employees represented by unions and those who were not.
The salary schedule revealed that employees belonging to a bargaining unit would receive lower stipend amounts compared to those not represented by a union. For example, the stipend for coaching football, debate, or marching band started at $9,200 for bargaining unit employees, while it started at $9,775 for non-union employees. This discrepancy led to questions and confusion among teachers, with Laura Mullins, president of the Springfield National Education Association, stating that it sends a negative message about the treatment of staff.
Stephen Hall, the chief communications officer for the district, explained that the intention was to make extracurricular stipends more competitive with other districts by proposing an across-the-board increase. However, this proposal was not agreed upon during the collective bargaining process. The issue of stipend pay has been a recurring topic over the years, with incremental changes but no significant improvements in recent times.
The Springfield NEA represents nine bargaining units in contract negotiations with the district, covering nearly 87% of full-time employees. The district also engages in collective bargaining with the Teamsters Local No. 245, representing bus drivers. The confusion arose when the new stipend schedules were labeled „SNEA“ for bargaining unit employees and „non-SNEA“ for others, leading to uncertainty among employees about which schedule applied to them.
Jeffrey Pettibone, president of Springfield MSTA, sought clarification on the rationale behind the separate stipend amounts and filed a Sunshine Law request for more information. Mullins confirmed that stipends were part of collective bargaining, with the union agreeing to certain improvements but not an increase in the base amount. The district wanted to base stipend amounts on a percentage of $42,500 instead of the existing $40,000, which the union opposed.
Despite efforts to secure cost-of-living increases through collective bargaining, there was not enough money left for an across-the-board increase in stipends. Mullins emphasized the need for equal treatment and fair pay for all employees performing the same work. The district has been urged to reconsider the separate stipend schedules and ensure parity among employees.
In conclusion, the issue of extracurricular stipend payments in Springfield has raised concerns among teachers and union representatives. The discrepancy in stipend amounts between bargaining unit employees and non-union employees has sparked discussions about fair treatment and equitable pay. Moving forward, there is a call for transparency, clarity, and a reevaluation of the stipend schedules to ensure that all employees are valued and compensated fairly for their work.