Why District 204 is reducing pay for retired teachers who work as substitutes

In a reversal from a decision made earlier this summer, Indian Prairie School District 204 is cutting pay for retired teachers who work as substitutes in the district by 35%.

Despite some criticism of the move, the cuts were approved during the Indian Prairie school board’s meeting on Aug. 11. The district has said the substitute rates were creating budget concerns, and that reducing them is expected to save the district about $400,000 next year.

In June, the Indian Prairie School District 204 board OK’d raises for substitute teachers, including retirees. At the time, the district indicated that its goal was to remain competitive with surrounding districts.

Daily substitute teachers got a pay bump to their daily rate, from $126 to $130. Long-term substitutes and district retiree substitute teachers were slated to start making $310 daily, up from $300.

But on Aug. 11, the district brought forward revised rates for the board to vote on — with a substantial cut for retirees working as substitutes.

Under the new rates, which were OK’d by the school board, the $130 daily substitute rate will remain, as will the daily pay of $310 for long-term substitutes. But retirees will see their daily pay drop to $200, according to a memo from the district.

These rates are “competitive with surrounding unit school districts and aligned with expectations of the assignment,” the district said in the memo. And the previous substitute rates, they said, were “significantly above” similar districts’ rates and would create a “significant budget concern.”

The cut is slated to save Indian Prairie about $400,000 in 2027, the district said.

That savings is “significant,” according to school board president Laurie Donahue, who said the district is currently staring down a $5.6 million deficit.

“Every penny right now is going to count for us,” Donahue said at the Aug. 11 meeting.

Board member Mark Rising said the board “has always highly valued (the district’s) retired teachers, as evidenced by the rate that they’ve had,” speaking to their dedication to the district.

“But the reality is … that we had two employment contracts last year, we had federal fund cuts, we had state reimbursement cuts, our vendor costs went up significantly,” Rising said. “The rates that our retired teachers are going to be at are still higher than surrounding districts.”

The matter received some pushback from several retired teachers, who spoke of the value retiree substitutes provide to the district.

Retired district teachers who work as substitutes know the district and the building they’re working in and can “take over at a moment’s notice,” according to Michelle Corlew, who said she taught science for more than three decades and retired from the district in 2020. That kind of expertise, she argued, is especially important if an emergency arises.

Acknowledging that tough decisions have to be made to balance the budget — and suggesting that a less significant cut might have been more palatable — Corlew called the reduction “a slap in the face to the very staff that built District 204 into the top-ranked … educational system it is today.”

Mary Dolan similarly asked the board and district to reconsider the proposal, pointing to the unique expertise retirees of the district provide.

“Retired … educators are not just substitute teachers,” Dolan said. “We are experienced professionals who know this district. We know the curriculum, the instructional practices, the technology, the routines and the culture of our schools.”

And she questioned whether the move was a wise one for the district.

“If the savings are relatively small, is it really worth risking the loss of experienced retirees who choose to stop substituting?” Dolan asked at the meeting. “Is the financial benefit worth disrupting the continuity of learning that retirees provide?”

While the cuts were approved, the district has said it plans to review the rates going forward.

Superintendent John Price indicated the district plans to review substitute rates annually to ensure they are “competitive with the market.”

“None of us are happy about this,” Rising added. “And I hope we do take a look at this next year.”

mmorrow@chicagotribune.com