Why Over Working Teachers is Cheaper: A Shortsighted Tactic With Far-Reaching Consequences

Most citizens are unaware of the additional division costs that come on top of the salary expense for every full-time teacher.  Things like FICA (7.65%), VRS retirement (16.62%), retiree health credit (1.21%), group life (1.34%), and workers comp (.20%) add an extra 27.02% per teacher to the salary cost.  On top of that, add health insurance benefit costs to the division, which for the upcoming year will increase by $600k.

When classes are covered by long term subs (who are not full-time division employees) there is no added 27% expense, nor is there a cost for health insurance to the division.  The same is true when existing teachers sacrifice their planning periods or lunch breaks to cover for these vacant positions; the division has already paid that teacher’s benefit costs, so there is a significant savings when a teacher does double duty.

But what is the true cost of the monetary savings created by overworking our teachers?

Burnout.  44% of K-12 teachers report feeling burnout.  30% of K-12 teachers are choosing early retirement.  Up to 30% of new teachers are quitting within their first 5 years of teaching.  (https://www.thinkimpact.com/teacher-burnout-statistics/)  While there are many contributing factors, being over worked to cover vacancies is a cause of burnout.

Learning Loss.  Reduced instructional effectiveness is the result of teacher vacancies.  Lower test scores and increased disciplinary issues are two known outcomes when classes must be covered in whatever manner possible due to an unfilled position.

The issue currently being raised by county supervisors is that full funding has already been allocated for positions to be filled by full-time employees with benefits; but the school division is not filling them as planned.  This leaves a significant amount of money unaccounted for.

The board of supervisors has asked questions about vacancy numbers this budget season.  Their concern is money appropriated for teaching positions is not being spent in the manner in which it was intended.  By keeping positions vacant (or filling them in non-traditional ways), the division is able to realize significant cost savings, and in turn spend that money elsewhere—and the supervisors are questioning where exactly it is being spent.  The BOS wants accurate and adequate tracking of these vacancies, the amount of cost savings from unfilled positions, and where specifically that money was spent.  They want to ensure tax dollars are making it into the classrooms as intended, and not being used as a slush fund to cover areas of overspending (such as legal fees).

Accountability, transparency, and fiscal responsibility are what the supervisors are requesting from the school division this budget season.  Their aim being to protect the teachers and students by ensuring the dollars make it to where they were intended to be used.

Melanie Salins
Warren County, VA

Disclaimer: The opinions expressed in the letters published on this page are solely those of the respective authors and do not necessarily reflect the views or opinions of the Royal Examiner’s editorial team, its affiliates, or advertisers. The Royal Examiner does not endorse or take responsibility for the accuracy, completeness, or validity of any statements made by the authors. The Royal Examiner has not independently verified the statements and claims presented in the letters. Readers are encouraged to exercise their judgment and critical thinking skills when evaluating the content. Any reliance on the information in the letters is at the reader’s own risk.

While the Royal Examiner makes every effort to publish diverse opinions, it does not guarantee the publication of all received letters. The Royal Examiner reserves the right to edit letters for clarity, length, and adherence to editorial guidelines. Moreover, the Royal Examiner does not assume any liability for any loss or damage incurred by readers due to the content of the letters or any subsequent actions based on these opinions.

In submitting a letter to the editor, authors grant the newspaper the right to publish, edit, reproduce, or distribute the content in print, online, or any other form.

We value our readers’ engagement and encourage open and constructive discussions on various topics. However, the Royal Examiner retains the right to reject any letter that contains offensive language, personal attacks, or violations of any legal regulations. Thank you for being a part of our vibrant community of readers and contributors, and we look forward to receiving your diverse perspectives on matters of interest and importance.