Top News Stories
Schoolwide bonus program FAQ
Oct 31, 2007 2:29 PM
All you need to know about the new agreements
How does the new bonus plan work?
The UFT and DOE will work together to implement a voluntary schoolwide bonus program which rewards educators for student achievement gains in their school on a pilot basis. If students’ achievement in a participant school meets the established standard of improvement, the DOE will make a lump-sum payment to that school to be distributed among its staff.
How is it voluntary?
The UFT staff in eligible schools will decide each year whether or not to participate. In the first year (2007-08), the program will be offered to approximately 215 high-needs schools. In 2008-09, it will be offered to at least 30 percent of schools, or about 400. Each year the UFT-represented staff in those schools will vote on whether they want to participate in the bonus program through an election conducted by the union chapter. Participation requires a 55 percent vote and the assent of the principal.
How will schools qualify for an award?
Awards will be based on multiple factors, but mostly student academic improvement. In consultation with the UFT, the DOE will establish benchmarks, using objective criteria that are aligned with the School Progress Reports. Those criteria include, in addition to test scores, attendance and survey results on parent, teacher (and in the high schools student) satisfaction. Those discussions have now started. Participant schools that achieve the required improvement within the year will receive a cash award.
How much money will the educators in the school receive?
The school’s total award for 2007-08 will be calculated by multiplying the number of full-time UFT-represented educators on the school’s table of organization by $3,000. However, it will be up to each school to determine how that money is distributed among the staff.
Who decides how much money each person gets?
This must be done fairly and the agreement specifies several steps to achieve that. Two UFT staff members elected annually by their colleagues, and the principal and a designee, will constitute the “compensation committee.” They will decide by consensus how to divide the money. The committee may choose to give everyone the same amount or to give varying amounts to groups of people, such as by title. They may also choose to give a little extra to individuals who contributed something extraordinary to the school or took on a particularly difficult challenge. However, the agreement stipulates that “all UFT-represented staff … have contributed to the school’s achievement to some extent and therefore should share in the bonus.”
What if they can’t agree or I don’t agree with the distribution plan?
The committee must make its decision by consensus, which means that essentially all four members must agree with it (or not have objections so strong as to block it). If the committee cannot achieve consensus the money will be forfeited. In addition, the distribution plan may be submitted to the staff for ratification. If it is ratified, no appeal can be made. If it is not submitted for ratification or if it is submitted and not ratified, any UFT member in the school may appeal directly to an Oversight Committee comprised of the chancellor and the UFT president or their designees.
The only grounds for overturning the decision of the school’s compensation committee is that the award was “arbitrary, capricious or in clear violation of the law ...”
How do we know this will be done fairly?
The program has many safeguards against abuse. Most important is that it is voluntary each year. So if a school staff is not satisfied with how it works, it can choose not to participate again the next year. Or if the school doesn’t like how the compensation committee operated, in addition to appealing the committee’s decisions (if the distribution is not ratified) it can also vote for different representatives the following year.
Finally, keep in mind that this is an experimental two-year pilot program that will be subject to a comprehensive independent evaluation.
Where does the money come from? Will the bonuses reduce the amount of money available for across-the-board raises in future contracts?
In the first year the funds will be privately donated. Thereafter, the agreement specifies that “awards will be funded from public appropriations which supplement and do not supplant funds available for collective bargaining.” That means the city can never point to this program as a reason for resisting a UFT salary or economic demand.
Is this just the first step toward individual merit pay?
On the contrary, the union believes this shuts the door on any further pressure for individual merit pay, whether it comes from Washington, Albany or City Hall. More important, this is a positive program to strengthen schools. It focuses and provides a benefit to high-needs schools. It promotes teamwork rather than divisiveness, makes the voice of front-line educators equal to that of administrators, and is available to all. Currently, only the principal gets a bonus for work done mostly by the school staff.
Will this ratchet up the exclusive focus on test scores?
Remember, the allocation of funds among the staff within a school is totally up to the school. The agreement says the standard for a school’s receiving the award will be “aligned with Progress Report factors.” That means more than just test scores, although no doubt scores will play a major role. Remember, though, test scores now play a huge role, particularly in high-needs schools. The scores are pivotal in deciding when a school closes or must be redesigned or have other sanctions thrown at it.
The UFT has begun discussions with the DOE about the achievement benchmarks for receiving the award. We will seek over time to broaden these standards to all the factors we believe material. Since each school can choose each year whether to participate, and the DOE wants this program to succeed, the union believes the benchmarks must be such that schools believe they really are reflective of students’ true academic and social development.
