Worcester Schools Spend Millions Writing Unemployment Checks

Wednesday, March 28, 2012

Scott Van Voorhis, GoLocalWorcester Reporter

Worcester schools have shelled out more than $1.3 million in unemployment checks over the past two years, even as the district’s headcount has swelled.

Brian Allen, the financial chief for Worcester schools, contends the explanation for the discrepancy is simple: the district was forced to lay off teachers in some areas, while hiring additional staff in others.

But school officials face concerns that at least some of the unemployment checks may be going to employees who get pink slips in late spring, only to get rehired in September.

It is an issue that is far from unique to Worcester, with concerns raised in communities across the state that some school employees may effectively be picking up a summer bonus check, courtesy of the unemployment insurance system.

“There are a lot of people who would have a problem with that,” said James DelSignore, the city’s auditor. “I would think especially on the school side, it is taking dollars away from the classrooms, basically.”

Clashing numbers

The city’s school system paid out more than $880,000 during the fiscal year that ended last June and is on track to spend another $500,000 by the time the fiscal year 2012 wraps up June 30th, Allen explained.

Another $250,000 is budgeted for fiscal year 2013.

But even as unemployment expenses range into the hundreds of thousands, Worcester schools have been steadily adding employees over the past few years as well.

The school department’s payroll actually jumped by 45 positions from 2009 to 2011, hitting a total of 3,478 in 2011, the same year school officials paid out more than $880,000 in claims, DelSignore said.

Allen contends the numbers look odd because the school department was hiring teachers and staff in some areas, even as it was laying them off in others.

The biggest hit came in 2011, when school officials sent out layoff notices to 159 employees as federal stimulus funding aimed at local schools finally dried up.

The cuts included 45 teachers, 23 long-term substitutes and more than 90 other staffers, including custodians and cafeteria workers.

At the same time, school officials were hiring in other areas, such as English as a second language and special education programs.

“We’ve actually had layoffs,” Allen said. “We have been reducing teaching positions over the past several years.”

Summer layoffs?

However, Allen could not say how many teachers were let go during the summer and later rehired in the fall, especially long-term subs who make their living filing various classroom gaps.

“We watch it pretty closely,” he said of the unemployment payments.

However, a letter recently sent to Gov. Deval Patrick has raised concerns about how school districts are handling unemployment claims. Here's a copy of the letter: Download PDF

While no individual school district, such as Worcester, was singled out as an example, the letter’s signers included DelSignore, the city’s auditor, and other municipal finance officials across the state.

The letter cites school bus drivers who pick up employment checks for summer vacation, for holidays and even for professional development days when school is not in session.

It also points to retired school teachers brought back to fill gaps in understaffed subjects, who then file for jobless benefits when a replacement is finally found.

Given the amount of money Worcester schools are shelling out on jobless checks, DelSignore is concerned that the payments may include staff laid off for the summer, such as cafeteria workers, only to be rehired in the fall.

Also concerned is John Monfredo, a Worcester school committee member.

He said he doubts regular education teachers are filing summer unemployment claims, but noted it could be happening with long-term subs. The key is clear communication with school district employees, ensuring there is no misunderstanding related to their job prospects in the fall, he contends.

“We really need to avoid those situations because there is not enough money to go around in this tight economy,” Monfredo said. “We have to be careful about every dollar we spend.”