Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Attendance Pilot topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Committee debates attendance pilot and one-time retention stipend
Summary
Staff proposed a one-time $1,500 retention/recruitment stipend and a January pilot to incentivize attendance, noting the district spends roughly $335,000 annually on substitutes. Committee members discussed eligibility gates, tiered rewards, and exceptions (bereavement, jury duty, FMLA) and asked staff to return with a formal proposal.
District staff proposed two related ideas during the Oct. 28 classified Personnel Policy Committee meeting: a one-time retention and recruitment stipend and a separate pilot to incentivize staff attendance.
Staff told the committee it had set aside operating funds and proposed a '2one-time retention and recruitment stipend' of $1,500, which the presenter said could be paid in early December if recommended. "I'm looking at $1,500 as the possible bonus paid out in early December," the staff speaker said.
As background for an attendance incentive, staff said the district budgets about $335,000 a year for substitute coverage, arguing that some of that money could be redirected to reward employees who maintain attendance and reduce substitute costs. Committee members generally supported experimenting with incentives but raised operational and fairness concerns.
Design questions were the focus of a lengthy discussion. Staff proposed the incentive be paid at the end of the period rather than as a front-loaded payment. Committee members debated several eligibility options: make everyone eligible for an initial pilot, or impose "gatekeepers" such as disqualifying employees who had already been docked for pay; or tie eligibility to an accrual threshold (examples discussed included 50 or 100 accumulated sick days) and a tiered reward structure for longer-tenured employees.
Members also asked for explicit exceptions that should not count against eligibility. The committee discussed excluding bereavement and school-directed professional duties, and asked staff to clarify how jury duty, Family and Medical Leave Act (FMLA) leave, and workman's compensation absences would be treated under any attendance incentive.
Several members warned that incentives could unintentionally encourage staff to come to work while contagious. One member said, "I'll come in sick," as a cautionary example, and colleagues acknowledged the need to balance attendance incentives with health and safety.
Next steps: staff will discuss the idea with the certified personnel committee, prepare a formal written proposal that clarifies eligibility, exceptions, and recommended timing, and return to this committee for recommendation to the board. Committee members voiced support for trying a pilot, with the understanding the program's rules could differ between an initial pilot and a longer-term, full-year program.
