OCR Text |
Show Teachers Didn't Get Raises In Most School Districts Because of the financial problems prob-lems faced by state and local governments gov-ernments in Utah during recent years, most school districts failed to raise basic salary levels for the third consecutive year. This was reported by Utah Foundation, the private research re-search organization, in its regular annual survey of teacher salaries in Utah. Of the 40 Utah school districts, only seven provided for small increases, in-creases, while 33 made no change at all for the year. The largest raise anywhere in Utah during 1988-89 was an average increase of $800, or 4.2 percent in the Millard County School District. Foundation analysts point out, however, that while general salary increases were scarce in Utah this year, most teachers who are not at the top of the salary scale did receive re-ceive a normal experience increment. incre-ment. As a result, the average salary increase for these teachers during 1988-89 amounted to $745 or 4.2 percent. Teachers who currently cur-rently are at the top of the salary scale, on the other hand, received little or no salary adjustment this year. The starting salary for a teacher with a bachelor's degree in the Garfield School District this year is $15,057. The salary schedules provide pro-vide for regular increases based on experience and academic training. Thus, an experienced teacher with a master's degree in the Garfield School District would receive a maximum salary of $26,350, or 175 percent of the amount paid to a beginning teacher with only a bachelor's degree. According to the foundation study, the 1987 Utah Legislature also appropriated $34.3 million for a career-ladder program which could supplement the basic salaries for many of the teachers. Furthermore, those teachers who are employed on a year-round basis would receive proportionately higher salaries. The basic schedules in most cases are based on approximately 184 working days or about nine months of service. Data assembled by the National Education Association show that the average salary paid to classroom teachers in Utah during 1987-88 was $23,882, or about 10 percent below the Mountain States average of $26,526 and 14.8 percent under the U.S. average of $28,031. When a comparison iSnm salary levels for all inslrucf ' personnel (teachers, princiJr pervisors, librarians, guidaV psychological staff member?1 other related instructional wort Utah is much closer to regioJr! national averages. The NEa sis shows that the average sal?' all instructional personnel in v last year was $27,557, an L B that was only 2.4 percent unfe! i Mountain States avera? ' $28,224 and 5.6 percent bel " U.S. average of $29,203. 1 The Foundation observes h, ever, these salary comparison! tween Utah and other states J somewhat misleading f0r 1" lowing reasons: ' 1. Utah pays most of the ployees' share of the state itl ment costs, a fringe benefit ik' not generally available in m0s. the other states. 2. Because of enrolls growth, Utah hires more t' teachers each year than most J' states. These new teachers ten; I be at the lower end of the ss i scale, which lowers the ove" average salary paid to classy teachers. 3. Under the early-reti plan, nearly 1 ,800 of the tf-' public school employees left 1 1 school system last year. For : ! ' most part, these long-te" I employees were replaced by it ! employees at entry-level salaries I 4. All salaries in Utah tend t' I below national and regional f, ' ages. According to the U.S. t ! partment of Labor, the average ; ' nual pay for all workers in during 1987 was $18,303,"! ' amount that was 12.2 per. ' below the U.S. average war a $20,855. r 5. Living costs in Utah g: 1 ally are slightly lower than in 1 o other parts of the nation. Acce: I C to aa analysis prepared b; . ' a American Chamber of Com:.. f Researchers Association, the a- tr ... the Salt Lake City was 1.7 percent below the na: tf average and living costs in fi Provo area were 9.2 percent : a the U.S. average.. Ci |