Search This Blog

Tuesday, June 12, 2012

CCS HR Director is getting a huge raise while freezing pay of other employees?


My comments at the 6/12/12 CCS School Board Meeting:

Regarding Action item 5.2, the 2012-13 Custodial Contract, the district did not update the BAR for the contract until 5:06 PM this afternoon and all that was updated was some comments on the BAR.  The contract is still not on the board packet.

Discussion Item 6.1, the "2011-12 Budget Amendment Q-3" shows:
  • There was a 21.1% overall increase ($1,756,242.00) in the budget of the cost of "Negotiated Benefits" from the estimates on the Q-2 budget amendment (from $8,326,353.00 to $10,082,595.00).  How could the district not know at the time of the Q-2 budget amendment that the costs of the benefits would be so much higher?
  • There is nothing to compare the budget to from previous years because the budget was not presented this way in previous years.  Please provide comparable final numbers from the same categories from previous years. 
Discussion Item 6.2, the "Projected 2012-13 Budget Report" shows:
  • The Retirement rate for all of the employee groups shows 24.46%, but the blended rate for the 12/13 fiscal year is actually 26.64% per the district budget information from the 11/14/11 Board meeting.
  • I noticed that although there is still a major clamp down on pay increases, it shows that the director of human resource's pay is being increased by 12.8%, from $91,125 to $102,792, an increase of $11,667.
  • The negotiated benefits amounts for employees for the initial 2012/13 budget reflect the same amounts used for the "2011/12 BAQ-3 final budget" numbers (as they should), but they are marked on the spreadsheets as "BAQ 2 Amended 2011/12 Budget" numbers (in error). 
  • Do the budgeted amounts for the employee salaries and other benefits reflect the expected costs from the currently in negotiation employee contracts, or do they reflect 2011/12 contract amounts?  None of this is reflected in the documentation in the Board Packet.
Discussion Item 6.3, the Board Monthly Financial Report shows:
       The fund balance graph shows the fund balance is around $4 million, but the Monthly Investment Report shows the total General Fund Balance is $7,786,301.  How can both of these charts be correct? 
For public comment, I wanted to say that I am still waiting on a response to why the last board meeting (May 21, 2012) is still not loaded to Comcast channel 22 and the district website.

9 comments:

  1. It is blatantly clear that they do not want anyone to be aware of what they doing. they have a common child mentality i.e... better to ask forgivness than to ask permission. What they want is to put the burden to get information or participate in any process on the taxpayer, parent and hourly employee. The thinking mite be if we pay attention to who requests the info, asks questions and raises awareness shall be categorized a troublemaker, malcontent problem. Not sure but, it seems like a bullying approach by using intimidation. I still don't understand why its acceptable for the technology dept. to air the poor quality audio, inaudible sound and justify being paid so much. Any child with an smartphone could produce and air an HD version on youtube. But I am sure it's some how not their fault. Funny though how it serves their purpose.

    ReplyDelete
  2. If I had to guess, I'd say they didn't know the cost due to the fact they are new and uninformed about being a self insuring district. Wonder if the person who made that estimate was the same HR director who just got a 12% raise? Who would reward that kind of incompetence? I bet that 12% would have been appreciated by the people who took pay cuts and freezes. It seems the general rule of thumb to make the taxpayer, parents, kids and hourly staff pay for the decisions and actions of the directors and managment. As for the projected increase in retirment costs, my guess is it's due to the plague of privatization. Eliminate all your hourly employees who pay into the pension fund and you still have to pay your retirees, until you find a way to screw them too!

    ReplyDelete
  3. I found out at the 6/11/12 meeting that the reason for the change in the retirement rate was due to proposed legislation Senate Bill 1040 (SB 1040) in Lansing that is expected to be signed into law soon. See here: http://www.legislature.mi.gov/documents/2011-2012/billanalysis/House/pdf/2011-HLA-1040-3.pdf for information on the proposed legislation.

    The 12% raise $

    ReplyDelete
  4. Please watch the 6/11/12 meeting on Comcast channel 22 in Clarkston/Independence Twp until the next open meeting on 6/25/12, or check out the USTREAM page off the district website here: http://www.ustream.tv/channel/clarkston-schools-board-of-ed for the videos of the meeting. It got pretty ugly in the last half of the meeting. It was a long one - 3 hours and 16 minutes.

    ReplyDelete
  5. The pay raise reflects the salaries of her counterparts and rather than lower their salaries she received this raise. Not based on merit, not based on the the financial status of the district, only on the perception that her counterparts were making more and that difference had to eliminated in one step not small multiple steps.

    This is an administration that is not in touch with the public. This is demonstrated at every board meeting. Look at the last meeting. Approving a budget when items in the budget have not been discussed or even brought up to several board members. It is apparent that these board members have been shut out of the normal administrative process.

    Remember these are the same board members who voted not to have the recent bond election because of a lack of information and planning. Dr. Rock is in over his head and is getting bad advice from his inexperienced administrative staff and his band of four board members.

    ReplyDelete
  6. Actually, Anita Banach was promoted to the Human Relations Director position with no official HR experience and no HR degree as her previous position as Communications Director was eliminated by the district. The previous HR director's official title was "Central Office Executive Director" and she was responsible for more than just HR, had a masters degree in HR, and was paid based on her advanced education, many years of HR experience, and expanded responsibilities. Dr. Rock apparently decided to give Anita Banach the title of "Executive Director, Human Resources" in the last year. Now he is using the "Central Office Executive Director" pay scale from the "Master Agreement for Administrators" to justify giving Mrs. Banach the huge pay raise. I believe that Mrs. Banach's pay should be from the "Master Agreement for Directors and Supervisors". Both contracts are available on the district's website by clicking on the transparency reports link on the district's home page.

    ReplyDelete
  7. Thats how the exec dir of facilities got his! All you have to do is change their title and hire them an asst. To do their job and then you give em a raise. For Anita it was easier no need to share services, just write an impossible job description, hire head hunters, scruitinze the candiates, disqualify them, then decide to make an exception for someone in house (that u were going to hire anyway), pay for their training/ credits, then when they complete the min requirments to get the job they have give them a new title and hefty raise. Opps only after they lie to every employee work group and say there is no money for raises be happy to have a job or we will outsource you!!!! Make sure they will mislead the board w/ words like salary realignment or restructuring so they can take from the hourly and give to the salary!!!!

    ReplyDelete
  8. You have that right. I have two official job requirements documents for the HR position from the time frame the position was open. One said the position required a masters in HR, many years of experience, etc. The other one doesn't ask for that experience or education and looks like it was created to match Anita Banach's resume (I have that also - another FOIA request)... Explain that one to me.

    ReplyDelete
  9. Until the Board dynamics are changed to eliminate the power grip that Dr. Rod Rock has on the Board, I can't see this type of behavior stopping.

    To stop things like this from happening, the board dynamics need to change to get rid of the 4/3 board split. Barry Bomier and Cheryl McGinnis are part of the "Rubber Stamp Rockettes" that are up for re-election this November. Steve Hyer and Elizabeth Egan round out the members of the "Rubber Stamp Rockettes" that should be gone, but they are not up for re-election in November.

    Joan Patterson and Susan Boatman are also up for re-election. They need to be re-elected.

    Barry and Cheryl need to be replaced by people who will do their due diligence and serve as the checks and balances to Dr. Rock.

    ReplyDelete