Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Compensation topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Holmen staff propose 3% base wage increases across most staff categories for 2026–27
Summary
The district recommended 3% base wage increases for hourly/non‑affiliated staff, nurses, administrators and (via negotiated adjustment) educators; staff provided group budget impacts and said the educator increase reflects the CPI‑U cap plus a 0.37% alignment increase.
Get email alerts on the Compensation topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Holmen School District’s human resources director presented recommended base wage increases for the 2026–27 school year at the May 26 board meeting, asking trustees to approve the item on the consent agenda.
Director of Human Resources Melissa Keates outlined the district’s approach and the limits imposed by the Wisconsin Employment Relations Commission (WERC) for bargaining with educators. Keates said the CPI‑U for the July 1, 2026 renewal caps the negotiable increase at 2.63% for educators; the parties agreed to that CPI amount and the district is recommending an additional 0.37% to align educators’ base rates with other groups, for a 3% base wage increase across categories.
Keates broke the proposal into staff groups and reported the following base‑wage budget impacts: hourly and non‑affiliated staff — 3% plus longevity increases, budget impact $263,623; nurses — 3%, budget impact $6,642; educators — negotiated 2.63% plus a 0.37% alignment to reach 3% (educator base‑wage impact $667,660, with recent supplemental payments for newly earned master’s degrees of roughly $6,000 noted); administrators and directors — 3% plus longevity, budget impact $93,886. Keates said staff applied longevity where applicable.
Keates attempted to state a grand total “including taxes and WRS applied to those base wage increases,” but the transcript contains a garbled figure and did not provide a clear final total; staff did provide itemized group impacts as above. Trustees asked no substantive follow‑up questions.
The wage recommendations were placed on the consent agenda for approval at the same meeting.

