Raises Urged for Top District Administrators

Behind closed doors Thursday, Los Angeles schools Supt. Sid Thompson proposed $42,000 in raises for many high-ranking administrators, touching off a fury among representatives of other employee groups.

The proposal made to the Board of Education includes promotions, replacements for several retirees and the creation of several positions. Although it is not a huge amount of money in the context of a $4-billion annual Los Angeles Unified School District budget, it came as a shock to some because most district employees have not had a raise in five years.

“He’s sneaking it in in the last week of school, prior to knowing what the budget is really going to look like for other employees,” said teachers union President Helen Bernstein. “This is great for morale. . . . The teachers will be furious.”

All Los Angeles Unified School District employees--including Thompson, who is retiring in a year--could receive a 1% raise this year, depending on the state’s final budget. But that would mean an additional pay raise for those included in Thursday’s proposal.

Thompson defended the plan, presented for review but not a vote Thursday, as a fair reflection of additional responsibilities he has placed on his top administrators in response to school board demands for improved student achievement.

“If we’re going to make the changes we’re saying we’re going to make, we have to compensate people for it,” Thompson said.

The raises must be approved by the school board, and there was no immediate indication of when the issue might be scheduled for a vote.

Meanwhile, every union representative contacted launched into an angry recitation of basic needs they felt should be taken care of before their bosses get raises--ranging from promised class size reductions to mileage reimbursement for employees who must use their own cars.

“Their priorities are screwed,” said Connie Moreno, who represents 4,600 clerical and technical employees throughout the district.

Moreno and other union representatives complained that Thompson’s proposal to add more supervisory positions would increase administrative bloat.

Among those is the new position of assistant superintendent in charge of “Call to Action,” Thompson’s five-year academic improvement plan announced last June.

Current middle school Director John Liechty would be promoted to that post, for which he would receive $98,200 annually--a raise of more than $5,000 over his current salary.

In addition, Thompson wants to promote three people to director’s positions, and raise their salaries to $93,000. One would receive a simple title adjustment, from administrator of elementary education to director; one would fill a new job as director of professional development, and one would fill a permanent high school director’s slot, a position that was supposed to close when Director Dick Browning retired this month.

Plus, all leaders of the regional school groupings known as “clusters” would receive a $455 a year raise--bringing their salaries to $93,000--which Thompson described as a symbolic recognition of their ever-growing workload.

But that raise runs counter to a district promise not to pay “cluster leaders” more than the highest paid principals, made when the clusters were established three years ago.