##VIDEO ID:izWstgMUNJ0## body good morning morning thank you all for being here uh this session two of our collective bargaining negotiations between the district and CTA um I I do see we have a couple new faces at the table so we'll run through introductions as quickly as possible so I'll start over there with ch Marie assistant general counsel office of general counsel morning Edney Deputy superintendent chief of schools good morning Kevin mccor executive director ESC Kim Thomasson principal Gove Elementary good morning P Buckman principal of Beacon Cove intermediate Philip py principal at Western Pines Middle School hello everyone Cory Brooks principal D high school administrative Association president good morning Sandra Edwards principal of Atlantic High School Brian mlen principal OA Creek Middle School Heather Frederick chief Financial Officer Mark mitell director HR Diane Wyatt director of HR compliance and processes I'm Tim kubri chief of Human Resources Chief negotiator also I I'll point out the the mics you would think red means off but red means on so good morning Shan Bernard general counsel Kier D Cory CTA the C secretary um Canal Point Elementary School good morning cardi a Scott math teacher SOS High School Ian Henry teacher at farell high school Adena CT Treasurer CTA and West Boon Middle School Edith Pride music teacher of Bon Elementary School Bill Rizza teacher Polo Park Middle School sorry fatty hatch Sabers part teacher professional development good morning Gilda Morgan Williams PRK diagnostician speech and language CTA vice president Gordon long Huffer CTA president Justin C CTA executive director Randall AI CTA Labor Relations consultant Angelina gesme CTA labor relation consultant all right so again thank you all for being here today I appreciate uh you taking the time out of your day for these discussions so we we um following our our first session we do have some feedback on some of the proposals and and uh just going to go through them here so um I'll get started with sign in my name I guess all right there you go um with the elementary planning so we did look into this a little bit uh at our elementary school schools um we have found that the majority of our elementary teachers are using this time for for individual planning or preparation for the day um students are typically not allowed in classrooms during this time and staying in common areas under supervision of non-home room teachers or non-instructional staff um many of the schedules also we found that uh are in place to to kind of handle what the day looks like have been something that the EVC and the administration have agreed to um teachers with Home Room duties often have those morning duties such as monitoring the the cafeterias the the hallways or or car line something like that um so we we do have some concerns with with making some adjustments here um also with the the changes that the looming changes on the the school start times um the the you know with the the upcoming year uh and the very little time we have in in the elementary day as is um we just aren't ready to to make any sort of uh proposal on that so our position would really be to just continue some discussion on this um and I try to identify the specific challenges that we're or problems that we're trying to solve here because we don't feel that this is a a widespread problem with that that's not being handled at the schools already so um and and through doing that maybe we could provide some additional guidance or or some best practices or recommendations but in terms terms of the the um contract language where our position is status quo I'll move through our our um position on on the proposals that from last session and then we go back and and have discussion um just so you know where we're at with with everything uh so the after school Child Care proposal the The Proposal was to a couple different things one was to add like before and after school to to the L language and adding Middle School um we agree to those proposals of of adding middle schools and and we're also adding Ka uh as well because we feel that this is more inclusive of of you know the grade levels that have these programs um but in terms of the the employee discount The Proposal of increasing the discount for before and after school programs from 25% to 100% has a significant cost associated with it um other things to to note and and I the first off the cost of the district the annual cost of the district is more than $3 million um other things to note would be that the the discount above 20% will also be considered taxable income so it will impact employee tax obligations teachers receiving the discount will be taxed on the benefit so anything above with 80% of it basically considered taxable income um and they wouldn't be able to count this as a deduction for tax purposes um the program is already one of the most affordable in the in the in the county um the part-time program was designed to accommodate employees schedules um so so in addition to the the $3 million cost that we mentioned we have concerns that going to 100% will also for you know not force but but encourage people to go 100% full-time right um and then the those costs we feel would be even more than that so um we we feel that with also with the if every employee you know is is free is free um 100% you know uh discounted by the district uh and employees already having priority of over uh non-employee children uh we would see just our programs filled with with employees 100% of it being paid for by the district so our our position on the discount increase is is is status quo on the ese differentiated pay uh and the release days for uh ESC teachers so the the proposal for four days of ESC teachers working with EBD ASD and some other special needs students um we we have concerns with uh the the negative impact that the students are going to have and the required services that the district is has to provide um the we did make increases a few years ago a couple years ago I guess it was now um to the ESC differentiated pay supplements going from $100 uh to $11,000 um which we felt was a significant increase in a nice Improvement um where we can go somewhere on this was also with your request done on adding in school psychologist there psychologists there's 140 of them at least 140 it's right around there maybe or 141 or two but um we would add those to the ESC differentiated pay supplement eligibility list for advanced degree pay um The Proposal was to add Ed leadership ad uh Administration supervision decrease the uh Advanced degree pay so our our our position would be to dedicate as much money as possible towards a base salary rather than supplements um so on that our our position is status quo on the additional period supplement um your proposal will increase the additional pay uh period pay to $35 per period um we do have some concerns with the impact on operations there but we do propose to meet you halfway at at $30 per period if if you're agreeable to that and with that I'll get into I last year uh uh we reviewed your proposal from last session and it's the same as what we offered last year um last year was a great year uh we wish we could do that every year we believe me we do um teachers are worth it we we get it but we just don't get that kind of funding from the state um so I just want to point out a reminder that the state provided 1.27% for salary increases so all the money that is on the table is significantly beyond that um and and we know uh we have made some movement here so we we we're at a 3.32 blended recurring increase where that brings our performance salary schedule to to a 3.8% uh and effective 3.1 highly effective 3.8 effective 3.1 um that does bring our teacher starting teacher salary to 53,000 which we feel is very competitive um and then that would bring our total over the past 10 years to 37.5 s% so we know we have some other room to move but we know we have a lot of different proposals on the table right now that that involve compensation so depending on where each other's priorities lie um I guess will depend on where we go from here with with some of these these numbers so I think that covers all the and I know um we put a proposal out there on the assault language um so if you have a any feedback on that or discussion um I'd like to turn it over to to CTA for for any comments okay um so thank you for your responses there's obviously some some positive things in there if if not being able to achieve our our proposals in whole so we do appreciate that um so I'll go through a couple quick responses to some of yours um as it relates to article 2f and article 5B all the language changes relative to the in line of Duty assault charges um We've ran that initially by our legal team and our our response to that would be that since it's such a serious topic and there are weighty legal implications to changing that upon initial review some of it were open to Sation to make sure that our language is aligned with state law where required some of the proposal from the district is the the district's subjective desire to alter the current language um to reshape the potential benefits relative to in the line of duty assaults so at this time we would we would simply request to to keep present language with the understanding that we are absolutely open to to finding the best outcome to make sure this this uh contract language either as it exists is properly implemented in accordance with the law and in adherence to the contract or if needing to be modified is done so for the sake of clarification and for legal purposes not uh to potentially limit the benefits as they currently are defined so we're open to a a more lengthy conversation just because the seriousness of the topic and the legality of it so I I get that and and I know that uh with negotiations we we always try to meet the state deadline of October first and and understand that these conversations might drag out a little bit longer I guess then where I would go with it is is requesting that we actually sit down and and work through it maybe in a study uh group to you know to iron these things out because the district's position is is has not been and and is not to to um take away any bargain benefits that were there but really to provide clarification so that everybody knows exactly what process to follow and that we are in line with the the state laws so understood and we 100% agree that we would we would be happy to form a committee where where our people in our our legal could join with your people in your legal to to have those higher level conversations about the implications in State Statute in our language sounds good um as it relates to all the appendices we we want to kind of just sit down and review all that because there are a lot of documents but the short version of the answer is yes we agree obviously to remove any expired mou um and obviously we agreed to make sure that any renewed or new mou is inserted into the contract appropriately so we were just cross referencing our our documents new documents new M us over the past year and looking at um at your proposals and we just want to make sure we sit down kind of as deliberately as possible to make sure nothing slips through the cracks specifically as it relates to anything newly signed maybe not not making it in there so we're we agree to remove what's no longer applicable and add what is now applicable I feel is though over the past few years and being in this role that we're we're constantly doing that right we're because you know it this is a lengthy process we we may here now you know School Year's already started so some of these processes are already in place now you know um I wonder if is it something where we could say we list our active M on our website so we don't have to keep doing this every year and we put a page in the in contract that says you know for for to to access all you know um memorandums of understanding between the district and CTA go to this website I just wonder if that might be a better way of handling to know so everybody could see because people who aren't maybe used to looking at these may open the contract or or see the contract online and go through it and think that these are in place and not necessarily pick out that the language say well this is expired but we have to go through the ratification process before we can remove things I feel as though it's just a a very lengthy process I'm just wondering if there's any interest in trying to make this um clearer to to our our employees yeah I think we're we're open to collaborating on trying to find the most efficient way to juggle the expiring and then renewed documents and and making sure that they're they're disclosed and available digitally and or in print so whatever we can come up with jointly I think we're on the same page to improve that process okay um and as it relates to I think salary will be the only thing left as far as our counters um we do have a proposal so we'll pass it out um what I guess before I pass it out um as it relates to the the potential increases in the supplements for coaching and sponsorship yeah we we we haven't made any movement on that for for coaching um you know we did make some significant increases there and and I mean really where we're at is like I said earlier with some of the other stuff pushing your money towards your base salary we we de is the the the wisest Choice with a lot of things and we understand that there might be some outliers and our our principles on the team here are working with other principles to identify if there are any supplements that are sort of way below what they should be and and try to maybe Target it like that rather than across the board because some of them might be higher than than they need to be anyway so we're still doing some work on that we're we're not um it's not as though we're saying no or status quo we're just we're looking into that a little bit more to to really try to identify ones that hey this this should be increased rather than just AC and across the board um push we we had we dedicated you know more than $2 million to that last year and um you know last year was a little bit easier because we had a lot more money uh but you know in in in some you know this year and in some other years you try to just push everything towards the uh starting salary uh as much as possible possible at least you know uh because we feel that that's you know that's what gets people in the door that's what fills positions and and you know that also you know goes spreads across all of our teachers so that that we're just we just don't have any uh feedback or anything like that just yet okay and we appreciate that our are kind of the truck of The Proposal obviously not with any intention when the district chose to kind of selectively pick ones to increase last year one of our our number one responses to our Outreach to our members on suggestions for this year were people who said why not me um so there is there is some wide sentiment among the sponsors and coaches of sports or clubs or activities that that were not included in last year's increases that they felt as though again I I know it wasn't the district's intention to do so so I'm not in any way trying to repeate that but they felt as though they were viewed as less important um and and that's kind of why we're trying to to bring this to try to bring some Equity to those increases we know there are districts that have language that um that tie their supplements on a annual or semiannual basis to their raise increases so that they index up with the base salary and the the salary levels for you know effective and highly effective teachers over their career um so just just some food for thought behind our logic that that this was something that a large number of our our teachers your employees brought um to to try to try to grasp why some people deserve whereas some people did not deserve in their opinion I I understand that um I could say that you know thingy back to last year when we were reviewing our our athletic supplements that was really where where we focused right we we add the school-based team leader supplement but that what we were doing with athletic supplements was um I'm sorry I'm left because I heard the alarm that's all um uh we we really looked at the the market rates at at other districts right and and we F we our our position was we wanted to lead the state um Mr Burke was was adamant about that that we really wanted to be a state leader in in athletic supplements because we felt we were falling behind with some of them and we made huge improvements on on some of them adding new ones adding new sports that that weren't included so uh but in some of them that weren't increased it was because we may already be leading the state right and um you know so so on some of those that maybe feel they were left out the reason behind it was we we try to come to Market and or or maybe just above Market you know for for some of these positions but you know we didn't we we didn't have enough to go around and and increase everything um no matter what so we will take a look at additional supplements if there are specific ones that we really think like hey this just doesn't seem right we're we're willing to look at that but we're also doing some research on our side on that still so okay right and thank you for uh for your response could we take two minutes just to to caucus given given that response because our supplements were tied to our salary proposal of course okay so is there there the room it's the room right next door right the conference room the room next door is open too though right I I believe so I believe the room next door is open I'll go check real quick okay so I think we literally need less than five minutes okay e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e I'm good you guys have a lot of people so I apologize more bad decisions everybody's good yes okay all right so um a couple things so I've provided you a uh a salary counter proposal um with a a top line of approximately 7% for highly effective which incorporates a cost of living and then for the grandfathered schedule or psse teachers uh utilizing the flexible language as it relates to the tsia funds for Teacher raises we're still looking to perpetuate the tsia compression increase um to try to find some degree of parity between um all employees who achieve uh an evaluation result so you you have a a new salary proposal as I said with a Topline increase of approximately 7% um give or take and then as it relates to our proposals on the supplements um we are happy to engage in dialogue with the district to try to identify specific supplements which might be below market rate that hadn't been adjusted per the district's proposal last year so um as much as we would like to see some degree of universal movement combined from last year's increases and these proposals um we're open to looking at information to get more context uh to use the district's own position that we should be striving to be competitive and where we're not those are valuable places to look for potential increases on a couple of other um proposals just to provide updates or counters uh based on our conversation so one uh as it relates to the elementary planning um is the district it sounded like you you were interested or willing is the district saying that in those schools which appear to be finite or limited where the principles have taken it upon themselves to assign teachers an open classro take students at 7:30 on the dot position that that the district would be willing to work with us on a school by school basis to try to look into better versions of a schedule because most of the elementary schools per per year comments earlier don't in fact kind of impose that the second you walk in the door you're responsible for students and you don't have any time to get get ready so yes uh we are saying we're willing to look into that with you I I I'm not making any promises in terms of what we can do about things I will because some of the the concerns we had were you know we're already into the school year schedules are set and and sometimes it's very hard to adjust but we can I think we can look to see well what is it going what what is happening here to find out if maybe we could learn something from it and and find you know alternative methods yeah so we're we're definitely willing to to continue discussing it and see what we could do understood and one we appreciate that um two we had had some internal discussions as well to that point about schedules we already set that if we were to find some solutions if it was on a moving forward basis at a semester or even next year as long as we found Solutions in our view to try to carve those minutes out if not in contract and practice because it seems to be a best practice because most elementary schools aren't imposing such a requirement um where some others are so we appreciate your willingness to to look into that um so we obviously agree um and thank you for your your codification of middle school before and after if available into the contract um as it relates to the discount we hear the district's position we'll look further into the the tax implication argument so we might have follow-up questions to that we do have one one specific spefic counter if not to Discount um a form of discount or kind of a waiver to a fee there's a specific scenario where you have Middle School teachers who have students CH or children rather uh in the after school program and by virtue of the time that they get out of middle school for work they're perpetually late to pick their students up because they simply cannot get there any quicker we're looking for some sort of leniency where um you know up to 5:00 let's say cuz right now I believe 4:30 might be the official pickup time before they start to get penalized there's a fee for being late um if for Middle School teachers who have students in elementary after care if they cannot be penalized with that fee up to 5:00 p.m. which will allow them to get out of work because again from from what's been reported to us right now for for many of those parents Middle School teachers no matter what they do they have to be late by virtue of their contract day so that we feel like that's kind of a small potential consideration that they're not penalized by virtue of their schedule understood we could definitely look into that okay thank you um as a counter on the four ESC days we're we're still looking for time we would request two days if not four um if you recall we we had a joint committee um the information that kind of bore that specific proposal was a collection of contract languages from around the state and some comparable districts uh so we haven't heard from anybody from our counterparts unions or ESC teachers in those counties that that their use of these days has led to any decrease in student achievement it's already in in execution in certain counties our language was was very similar what exists in D's contract currently so um we would ask as a counter for two days under the assumption that if it's working in other districts and assisting these ESC teachers to perform these um you know documentation duties and and Logistics of completing these forms and and IEPs with no ill effected it should mirror the same here um we appreciate and agree obviously to the addition of the school psychologists into the the differentiate Pace supplement um we had had there there wasn't a cter response from the district on one of our proposals as it related to trying to to better Define what a case manager is and the role of a case manager um one of your team might be able to elaborate for us but we we believe one of the titles we've been told that teacher ESC other captures people who are who may be formally case managers um but we're still concerned about people who are kind of informally or unofficially dubbed case managers at their school sites and with that unofficial titling have no work requirements defined protections limitations Etc so um I don't think the district responded but we're still looking for a a potential committee if you will but certainly a dialogue to try to Define what case manager is to find a universal term or to try to limit certain schools or all schools from from co-opting that term to assign additional responsibilities to people who didn't formally agree to or weren't formally assigned to case management yeah um we're we're we're not you know opposing a a study committee uh we we rarely would right um I think what we needed we had some discussion on it that we just wanted to try to um better understand exactly like what we're considering in that study committee so by next session I'll definitely have something for you where I think we can we can narrow down that scope to to make sure what that we all understand what we're looking at in that that committee okay we we appreciate that um on the advanced agrees we'll we'll kind of keep circling back to that we understand the argument we made the argument in the past that you know the base salary obviously the increase to salaries is kind of the Supreme increase um but it is something that both sides juggle back and forth depending on if the district wants to increase these side supplements if CTA wants to um so we are going to continue to pursue that but we hear your response as it relates to the additional pay or additional period supplement that's something that obviously we're in interested in an increase and we would be willing to agree to that but we also would like to to consider a committee or a discussion to look at the increased utilization of six period supplements the cost as it relates to a full-time average teacher salary versus five six period supplements to see if there's still significant savings for the district and if there's a way to fund increases by limiting those savings what I mean by that is that in years past and numbers have changed so it's it's probably changed to some degree it used to in reality be that if you got five people rather if you got 10 people to take a six period supplement that was the equivalent of one position so by not hiring one teacher you could get two teachers worth of classes covered it was basically u a 50% discount on the cost by employing people in six periods versus hiring two two employees um we're really shooting to try to get this at some point as soon as possible possible to to at least a minimum teacher hourly pay because these people I can speak from experience I did it one year and as limited as that time was I still talk about it because it was to me decreasing my planning Time by 50% and increasing my workload by 20% I didn't ever do it again because it just wasn't worth it um and now obviously 10 plus years later with costs going up and salaries going up dollar value wise it's even less worth it there's a part of the contract that says that if no volunteers come forward the principles can assign people to teach the sixth period so unlike most if not all other supplements this is one that they don't have a choice in many cases schools to say you have a six period you can't you could say you don't want to teach it and maybe the principal will be flexible to try to find someone else but uh we feel like this is just a a special supplement that hasn't been indexed or increased in a long time we appreciate and will accept the $5 increase with the full understanding that we we do want to pursue this to try to get it to a better level just because it is it is a tremendous responsibility to increase your workload and decrease your planning it's a tremendous benefit to The District in terms of dollar savings to have a bunch of people teach a six period versus having to hire multiple employees with benefit packages and cost Associated um so is the district open to to having I know we're we're stacking up committees here but this will just force us to continue to have these conversations um to looking into the data we made a basic a basic data request from the district and the numbers you provided has showed that the the instance of additional period supplements teachers taking on a six period has gone up by over 30% since 2020 um we wouldn't mind taking a deeper look at those numbers to try to find out what's the cause of that is it because more administrat ERS at the secondary level are imposing more six period supplements and as a result forcing teachers to take on this extra work producing additional cost savings to the school and the district while the teacher pay has not increased so we got a lot of questions that we wouldn't mind hashing out in a in a more intimate setting so yeah I I mean I think we can always have disc continue discussions I I would say though when we're talking about things that result in cost savings for the district I also just want to bring light to that to say that well that's how we get to where we're at with salary I think knowing that the state gave us 1.27 right so the any kinds of cost savings we're pushing a lot of money back into salaries am I right well it really is not a a cost savings uh because what we do is we trade off a teacher for those extra period supplements so yes it's it's a one for one whereas before we used to say which is what you're remembering is that there for every one teacher it's equal to 10 extra period supplements now it's now it's equivalent it's not now it's tied to the actual teacher salary and so the school is receiving the full benefit of all the extra period supplements uh so now the ratio is slightly higher than the 10: one and that was a change we made when we changed our budgeting systems uh because it was some it would have been a customization if we were to keep it like we had it which was not tied um so it is before it was actually would have resulted in an additional cost um because it was a savings for our district that we were realizing but that is no longer um uh accurate are are you able to not necessarily now but elaborate on that because I'm not sure I apologize I need water um yeah get some water I think um maybe next for next session we could bring something maybe that better displays what that looks like but in in response to your your request to you know continue to having discussion on it we we don't we don't object to that at all I would appreciate a little bit of information though in that direction because as I as you even just said a moment ago given that the uh the salary if traded off for extra period supplements does equate to 10 supplements no it's it's it's more than that I what what Mr Katz was referencing before is we used to have a fixed amount of um how many extra period supplements the schools would receive okay for that teacher salary and that's something that we changed 3 years ago when we implemented a new uh budgeting system um that is now aligned directly with the actual um average salary so as the average salary goes up the schools actually receive more extra period supplements whereas in the past previously it was a fixed amount and so it was truly a a savings to the district um and when we you know it was an additional cost when we made that change in that transition I I think the part that I'm getting at though is that when even when when they're used if the if the supplements are not used um even if we use as an example 10 supplements if 10 supplements are are paid out that is going to be uh when I say supplements 10 period supplements that's the equivalent of two teachers um whose price tag right now with benefits on average would be about $150,000 the two of those together I think I'm close there um the uh when you take average salary plus benefits um when you do that when you take that particular amount and use it and each supplement at the current level $4500 at at the $30 I think that's going to be on the order of uh what 5,300 bucks um do 10 of those that's $53,000 and and what's um or 10 periods of that there's still a tremendous Savings in there that goes beyond what it seems to be there for the positions needed and for the benefits that are saved because you're not employing an additional individual with Health Care uh costs part of that being Health Care other parts of it are flexible fringe benefits uh that you know they vary and so that seems to be still part of the cost savings we're talking about um which is the reason for asking for the number to be more in line with where teachers are actually earning at the lowest level uh on an hourly rate rather than something that is below that and appears to devalue their work when it goes beyond five classes and that's not the intention but what I'm trying to now say is that it would have a direct impact to those uh secondary schools with the tradeoffs the way that we are now um implementing a a one for one uh between the the salary and the cost of the tradeoff so as we increase U that hourly rate it's now going to be worth fewer extra period supplements so it is going to have a direct impact uh to those secondary principles certainly information we're willing to look at and study further to be more uh enlightened uh as to what your position is um in any kind of a committee where we can actually dig into this a little bit more um trying to do negotiations at this point uh in advance of the State's deadline uh makes it a little difficult so right and I would definitely recommend going back prior to 2020 you know you want to go back prior to go to preo is what I would recommend when we're going through this process because extra period supplements have been something that we've always utilized in the district so I was a little interested to hear that you know it went up 30% I I really do believe that it's it's always been a mechanism used because it's it we've never been able to fill all of our our teacher uh vacancies we've never been at a 0% and that is why I also have to build in a vacancy rate into the average salary because we know we're always going to have vacancies I think there's no disagreement that we'll we'll have conversations to throughout the year on that so okay oh yeah um and I guess I think just two final comments on the the salary while we we do acknowledge that that state funding based salary out or based student allocation State funding went up to 1.2 1.27% um that doesn't incorporate the tsia funds which are dedicated for raises uh nor does it typically incorporate the attrition savings um that we usually look to to try to roll back into instructional salary so we just want to point out that base salary increase or base student allocation increases aside there are a kind of collection of monies that lead to a larger percentage which is where we feel gives a little more latitude to try to increase the salary um well I did want to just correct that the 2.7% doeses include the TSA tsaa money I was I meant to say the 1.27% that was on the screen that was the that is within the .7% so that's within the 2.7% uh total increase in per student funding includes that 1.2% into tsia okay so we're still pretty far off in salary obviously um it looks like the the your proposal is Lands somewhere right above 6% I'm guessing right something like that for the like the Blended the Blended probably six six and a quarter yeah okay probably six six and a quarter and and as mentioned before we do have some you know we are able to make some movement um it just depends on what we're able to you know say all right we're going to you know not do this um you know and and some of the other things and and supplements and stuff like that so um we are and we did not include anything in terms of uh the tsia compression increase that we did we we've did last year and I think we've done for three years now we've done something right um and we we I I I the reason why we didn't do it is I thought last year we we kind of agreed that we're going to kind of put that aside um but I I see that that is a priority of yours so it is something we'll have to take a a look at and see you know when we when we move it back in um and how that impacts overall the the raise you know the percentages for everybody else so if um if there's nothing else to discuss right now we could if we could maybe caucus for say 15 minutes or something like that just to um see if there's something we could bring back before we we leave here today okay we appreciate it okay um e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e one all right well welcome back um thanks for the time we we have um we have made some movement we have taken into consideration your your um the TSI compression increase we've gone we've done uh the last you know couple years I think um and so adding a a percentage to there and and by taking off you know like Advanced degree pay piece um we're able to put that you know for that uh TSI compression increase it's um about $2.6 million uh there devoted towards to towards that bringing them up um our grandfather's schedule to a a highly effective to a 3.9 um we we still have a lot of different things on the table here uh so we we will have to continue to work through this I think but um you know understanding where that that is something one of the priorities that you have um we're not we're not opposed to it as we haven't been over the number of years now um but that lands us somewhere here so that start where we started at a 3.0% increase in in our our second proposal that we started with today with 3 uh 32 uh this this right here represents a 3.5% uh base salary increase and um you'll notice that some of the other pieces had to come down slightly in order to to take into consideration some of that tsia compression increase and and that still brings our minimum salary salary to 53,000 so I know um you'll probably need some time to talk about about it with the team but is this a slide you can send to us yeah of course good appreciate it any questions or no questions at this time we might um request a couple minutes to caucus to see if we have a counter for today or for the next session okay thank you do you guys want the room here or or you want okay that's [Laughter] right e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e for e is the video we're back on yep all right so uh we'll counter next time as it relates to the the salary we do appreciate the incorporation of the the TSI compression consideration um and we just have to run some some math under that that construct to make sure that we have a good counter okay and um you know in years past we have collaborated on that so you could see using our data to so that you know we're we're as close to exact as possible so if you need any help with that on the running the numbers you know feel free to reach out to Mr Mitchell um on that appreciate that all right okay and we'll come back next time with uh try to review our our back and forth today to consolidate some of the general understandings that we got to specifically as I mentioned earlier and know we ultimately ended with a a number of requests to to study or look into a number of topics so I'll make sure to consolidate that next time so there's a coherent list all right well I appreciate it I appreciate everybody's time today I think uh our talks were pretty pretty good and worthwhile so uh we'll see you in uh let's see September 17th all right thanks everyone have a great day