Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Teacher Pay Salary Schedule topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Teachers, union leaders press Caddo Parish School Board over pay schedule, seek raises
Summary
Teachers and Red River United urged the Caddo Parish School Board to fix a salary-step discrepancy and deliver raises; board staff outlined the cost of a 5% across‑the‑board raise and stressed dependence on restricted grants and one‑time funds.
Several teachers and union leaders told the Caddo Parish School Board at its June 3 budget work session that discrepancies in the district’s step‑based salary schedule and the absence of a raise are harming morale and retention.
Carl McDaniel, a Caddo Parish teacher who said he will begin serving as president of the Caddo Federation of Teachers, told the board the district moved to a step system in 2013 and later began placing some new hires on steps that matched total years of experience rather than the older rubric. McDaniel said that practice left some long‑serving teachers on lower steps and “demoralizing” pay differences. “When a wrong is known yet perpetuated, it’s no longer a mistake, it’s an injustice,” he said.
Jordan Thomas, president of Red River United, urged the board and administration to honor prior commitments to fix the salary schedule and to deliver a pay raise. “We are asking you now, honor those commitments, value your employees,” Thomas said, adding employees want to be part of the process rather than sidelined.
Board members and staff discussed constraints the district faces. Chief Financial Officer Jeffrey Howard said the district has produced a balanced general fund budget for 2025–26 with revenues and expenditures “right at $426,000,000” and an anticipated fund balance of about $162,000,000. He said that some funds in the budget are restricted to specific purposes and that prior federal ESSER funds have expired for 2024–25, returning the district to a more typical funding profile.
On the cost of a permanent pay increase, Howard said a 5% raise on roughly $200,000,000 in payroll — including retirement costs — would be “about 12 and a half million dollars.” He and board members noted that one‑time balances and federal grants cannot safely fund recurring salary increases. Board member Tramiel emphasized the need for a sustainable, ongoing funding source before committing to a permanent raise.
Board leadership reiterated next steps in the budget process: staff will remain available to answer questions and the board will hold a public hearing on June 17 before adopting the budget. No formal pay increase was approved at the work session.
The discussion combined public comment from teachers and union leaders with board questions about revenue durability; it did not include a board vote to change pay scales or adopt raises.
