Do LA teacher pay raises right or not at all

If fiscal conservatives in the Louisiana Legislature bind themselves to using state dollars to boost educator salaries, they need to do it the right way.

As the 2023 Regular Session hurtles to a close next week, finally a majority consensus has appeared around this pay hike of $2,000 per teacher and $1,000 per staff included in the Minimum Foundation Program formula. The Board of Elementary and Secondary Education must initiate the formula that goes into effect only if the Legislature ratifies it; if not ratified unchanged, the current formula is used.

BESE sent such a formula that has started its journey with Senate Education Committee approval. At present, the general appropriations bill HB 1 doesn’t contain a line item for this, but instead allocates the $197.7 million total to paying down unfunded accrued liabilities which would free up money for local districts that could be used for raises. The increased flexibility is desirable not only because it allows districts to set their own levels of raises but also relieves state taxpayers of a one-size-fits-all obligation that may not be sustainable with a deteriorating revenue picture forecast for at least the next three fiscal years.

Unfortunately, legislative majorities may be turning against the more prudent approach in their wanting to add yet another statewide commitment to burden taxpayers, continuing a headlong rush towards throwing money at school employers. Since 2019, legislators have granted raises totaling $3,300 to teachers and $1,650 to support personnel each.

This approach only perpetuates a major impediment towards improving Louisiana elementary and secondary education – deferral in linking pay to performance. Only a little more than half of districts even supplement state base pay and hardly any connect pay to performance; the state portion isn’t linked.

Granting across-the-board raises does little to improve students’ academic performance, research reveals, contrary to much of the rhetoric that emanates from uncritical backers of these. Additionally, it subverts the idea of the MFP to move closer towards equal funding across richer and poorer districts.

So, if the goal is to use pay to enhance education rather than throwing more money at a special interest, any raise must have parameters attached that vary its size at an individual level according to student performance (a combination of competence level and growth, components already calculated at the educator level) and difficulty in boosting that (for example, proportion of students eligible for free meals as a proxy for households without the cultural and/or fiscal means to encourage learning). The formula already has baked in related measures that would address improved student performance, a differential compensation package based on local needs at a cost of $61 million.

Regrettably, language detailing the former specifies across-the-board hikes, but BESE members have given notice they can change that at the last minute. Fiscal conservatives must insist they do, or else they must reject the resolution. The reverse goes with the differential compensation; it must be in the resolution or face their rejection. Either case means reversion to last year’s formula, without additional funding. And, it all must happen without busting the state’s spending cap.

If legislators insist on the more reckless approach to doling out raises – pay boosts which appear warranted to some degree by spiraling inflation caused a debt-fueled spending binge by Washington Democrats – by putting state taxpayers on the hook for money that may disappear that would invite service cuts elsewhere and/or tax increases, they need to take that risk in a way that actually promises improved education outcomes. BESE should rewrite quickly a resolution that empowers it to distribute teacher pay raises along performance criteria it will issue prior to Jun. 30, and anything less than that legislative majorities must defeat.