At a time when Lincolnites' income growth rates are among the lowest in the country and teachers are set to receive a 1.75 percent pay raise, the Lincoln Board of Education wants to give Superintendent Steve Joel an extra five-and-a-quarter percent. The question we voters have to answer is: is that fair?
If you're looking for a definitive answer, don't look at me. I'm terrible about salary decisions. For example I would do Joel's job with a grin on my face and a bounce in my step for a heck of a lot less than a quarter million bucks annually. But I'm not qualified for the gig so that's somewhat of a moot point. Besides, the Board has more to think about than how much the lowest bidder would be willing to receive for the work.
The timing of the proposal could have been better. The economy stinks; property taxes are about to go up on the City side; schools face ridiculous expectations with inadequate funding; and so on. Deserving or not, giving Joel a raise that substantial just doesn't look good. Why don't the best teachers see a raise of that magnitude? (Oh right, merit pay is widely shot down by teachers unions. sigh)
In the end, I find myself fence-sitting, a position I don't find particularly comfortable. Perhaps some of you can pull me one way or the other. Should the Board's proposal pass?
Comments
See what your friends and neighbors have to say about this.
I agree that it is awful timing for the board to even bring this up, and it seems a little irresponsible as well. He has only been on the job for one year, that’s not enough time to adequately evaluate his performance (especially to the tune of 5.25%). That said, it would be awfully nice to see Mr. Joel respond to the board with a statement such as, “A 5.25% increase at this time would not be in the best interest of the school system or the community.” And then accept either no increase or the same increase that the teachers are receiving. I know it’s probably not going to happen that way, but it’s nice to dream.
I’m with BigMike in that I’m not sure a year is enough to say, “Wow! This guy’s the ducks nuts!” But, if he’s doing an exemplary job and they want to keep him around and they fear a better opportunity may come along soon, it might be worth it to keep him happy—especially when you consider the cost of the hiring process and what you may lose talentwise.
My question: If Joel’s first year warrants a 5.25% increase, is it because he’s really that good or because he looks really good relative to his predecessor?
I think he deserves his increase. You forget that when he was hired, part of the press was about how he was not making nearly as much as his predassessor when you looked at his entire package- kind of a “we’ll pay you more if you earn it” situation. At the time that was applauded. Let’s not forget this now that he has finished one of the most difficult years a Superintendent is likely to encounter in their career.
I think he alse deserves it because “The economy stinks; property taxes are about to go up on the City side; schools face ridiculous expectations with inadequate funding; and so on. ” He has a tough row to hoe, and to date I’m pretty pleased with his work. Although - as meaball asks, is that just because the his predecessor was that awful? *cough* Yes *cough*
Whether it is the Superintendant, an EMT, bread baker or candlestick maker I want to encounter the best person for that position. Pay them accordingly. So long as there is no sort of corruption at hand, I’ve got no beef with another person’s salary. Let each person earn what they are able to earn for themselves.
Carry on, do good work Dr. Joel.
Share your thoughts with the community.
Commenting is no longer permitted on this post.