Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Labor Paraprofessionals topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Paraprofessionals urge Wakefield School Committee for higher pay and workplace protections
Summary
Paraprofessionals and parents used public comment at the April 8 Wakefield School Committee meeting to press for a livable wage, citing expanded job duties, low pay ($28,000–$33,000), and safety and training concerns while Unit C contract talks continue.
Paraprofessionals, parents and other residents urged the Wakefield School Committee on April 8 to prioritize higher wages and stronger workplace protections during ongoing Unit C contract negotiations.
Speakers described paraprofessionals’ expanding role in classrooms and special programs, and said current pay—reported during public comment as between $28,000 and $33,000—falls short of a living wage and hurts retention.
The push came during the meeting’s public-comment period, when Unit C representatives Kim Smith and Sheila Giunta described paraprofessionals’ daily responsibilities—one-to-one support, small-group instruction, lesson modification and behavioral support—and asked the committee to seek a contract that recognizes that work. Several parents and district employees echoed the request, describing cases in which paraprofessionals helped students remain in inclusive settings and participate academically and socially.
Speakers also referenced broader workforce and safety concerns raised in the Massachusetts Teachers Association’s recent ESP (education support professionals) Bill of Rights initiative. Commenters asked for employer-provided training, clearer safety protocols, whistleblower protections, and benefits such as paid family and medical leave.
Parents described the practical consequences of low pay: many paras hold second jobs, said speakers, and some cannot afford housing and basic expenses on current wages. One parent who said her child benefits from one-to-one support said that without consistent paraprofessionals her child’s ability to participate in the classroom would decline.
Committee members acknowledged the comments during the meeting but did not vote on a contract or on specific budget changes at the April 8 session. The superintendent and labor subcommittee were later authorized in separate agenda items to advance bargaining and impact bargaining with labor groups when the committee approved a separate motion about school start times and implementation planning.
The public-comment segment included additional requests and criticisms about transparency in posting meeting materials and about planning costs for the new high-school project; those remarks were recorded separately in the meeting transcript.
What’s next: Unit C negotiations are ongoing; the committee’s labor subcommittee and administration plan further bargaining sessions. No contract was voted on April 8.
Ending: Committee members thanked speakers for their testimony and said they would continue to receive public input as negotiations proceed.
