Speed Gibson

The Minneapolis Star Tribune recently published an illuminating story on "Super-size severance payouts" to "retiring" public school superintendents. The argument goes that the old pre-1998 law capping salaries at 95% of the Governor forced districts to play games around the edges to get the top talent. As the article notes, however, these perks are now de rigeur in new contracts as well.

Yes, the old law was silly. A good superintendent is no doubt much harder to find than a Governor. They can demand and get more money, one way or another. Still, I think this illustrates just how far removed modern educators are from reality. Some questions:

1. Are contracts necessary or advisable? Apparently not. Incumbents leave or are fired during the school year with minimal disruption all the times, as with Harvey (St. Paul) and Peebles (Minneapolis). They are not unknown in the business world, but why should a school district tie itself down when the applicant does not?
   


2. Why accumulate sick days? People in salaried positions, especially management, don't get sick days. They are paid to do the job, not for however many hours it took them to do it. Even for hourly employees, unused sick days seldom are allowed to accumulate beyond a small limit, say one year's worth. That's assuming they get official sick days and that they can accumulate them.
   


3. Why accumulate unused vacation days? And "leave" days? Again, the private sector is much more strict about this. I suspect its the exception to be able to carry over vacation time at all at most private employers. Besides, vacation days are provided partially as a benefit to the employer. All work and no play makes Jack a poor employee. For management, it also shows how well your area runs in your absence.
   

All this might be worth it to get a truly good superintendent. But the same money is paid regardless of results. Dr. Pat Harvey was getting some results until forced out by the unions who want no changes. But relatively speaking, she got the same package as say, the Dr. Carol Johnson that oversaw a significant decline in her district.

I can't help but wonder if some very able people are out there that would jump at the chance to get a superintendent position for maybe $150,000 a year plus a car allowance. Licensing generally excludes such people, yet if government run public schools are going to survive, such hires seem essential.

IBM had always promoted from within, but when it's outdated, rigid business model hit the rocks in the early 1990's, the board finally went outside, hiring Lou Gerster from RJR Nabisco. Gerstner had no experience with either IBM or computer technology, but he soon turned IBM around.

If it's truly for the children, public school districts have to abandon their outdated, rigid ways as well.