PCSD response about outsourcing substitutes to EduStaff
After the news broke that Park City School District’s substitutes would no longer be working for the school district, we reached out to the Superintendent’s office to see if they had a comment on the situation.
Dr Gildea’s office responded quickly with the following comment. We may not like the decision to do this but we appreciate the quick response.
We have heard from our educators and staff for multiple years that there have been a shortage of substitute roles across PCSD – teachers, instructional assistants, etc. We have tried a variety of strategies to recruit and retain including shifting the pay rate without improved results. Last year, we began to explore an outsourcing service.
The benefits of the service include: pay is more frequent (bi-monthly versus monthly), incentives and bonuses are available which is not possible in the public sector such as attendance and days worked incentives, early retirees do not have a conflict with URS if they work for a private entity, and there is a more targeted recruitment and attention paid to the temporary workforce.
An RFP process was followed, and EduStaff was selected by HR/Ops team/Business Services Team in October 2020 as the preferred vendor for this process, and they will launch their services in January 2021. Because they are a separate entity, they do require their own intake application for confidentiality purposes; however, the placement remains within PCSD and works to maintain sub preferences for sites, etc.
In the meantime, PCSD has also added permanent building substitute teachers to support each school site. Those roles will remain in place to cover preventive quarantine educators or longer-term sub placements. The goal is to provide a seamless learning experience and continuity for our students. We are working with a new strategy to better support our schools.
Let me know if you have additional questions.
It would be nice to know why they decided on a January launch, though, rather than, say, next August.
I would really like to know what strategies besides “shifting the pay rate” have been implemented to recruit and retain subs. I am not sure what the pay rate was prior to the increase about 5 years ago, but currently a non-licensed substitute teacher (one who does not have a current, active license) is paid $106 per 8 hour day. For reference Reno, NV paid subs $100/day in 1995. So a pay raise to a terrible rate was unlikely to have an effect. Like what was mentioned in the article, I have never seen anything in the community soliciting applications from subs. There wasn’t even an email to the substitute teacher pool asking us to help find people. Even this year with so many subs declining jobs because of the pandemic, it was down to word of mouth. Every chance I got I was telling people that we need more subs. This year was the perfect time to recruit with so many parents that normally come in to schools to run reading groups and otherwise volunteer with nothing to do. How would the community even know about the need when no one can come inside the schools and the district doesn’t mention the problem?
The permanent substitute position is a fantastic idea, and I support that position whole-heartedly. It is an amazing position for someone that wants to sub full time, and, from what I have seen, the teachers are made to feel like an equal member of the teaching staff. However, that is only one person who can be in one classroom at a time. It is not enough, especially at the larger schools. Two or more of these positions at each school would be better. Or add a position that could be shared by two subs that both want to work half-time, which would be no less consistent than kids moving between DLI classrooms at the elementary level. Additionally, the job requires an active teaching license and was posted AFTER the start of the school year, when the vast majority of candidates would already be employed.
Bottom line: too few efforts with the wrong timing.
They began a process LAST YEAR? How come nobody knew about it? Incentives and bonuses could have been handled by the district through a salary increase. AN RFP process? What process? Here it is again. The problem with our district is an explanation (that leads to more questions) always seems to come AFTER the decision.
Stop acting like you owe nothing to taxpayers who pay your salaries and maintain our buildings. Stop acting like just because you hired our teachers you own them.
Start doing your jobs. If you can’t do that, leave. There are plenty of smart skilled people who need jobs right now.
To taxpayers and parents
Why you put up with less for higher salaries and benefits while teachers and subs get shafted and left in the dark?
Concerning any frustrations noted above, our teams are here to serve. Please reach out to us for any assistance or to shed light on the new partnership with PCSD and EDUStaff. Please reach out to us at:
Live Chat: http://www.EDUStaff.org
EDUStaff is excited to serve both the Park City School District and the substitute community beginning in January.
As of this morning, they pink-slipped the existing subs!
Was this the continuation of the expected process? Or was this earlier/different from what subs were thinking?
Leave a Comment