The Boston teachers’ contract in April 2025 delivered pay raises for staff, a $181 million increase in school spending, and the end of more than a year of contentious negotiations.
The deal, agreed to shortly before a planned union protest of Mayor Michelle Wu’s State of the City address, averted what could have been a high-profile battle during an election year.
What the deal didn’t do: Guarantee Boston had the money to pay for it.
By the January after Wu’s reelection, city officials proposed cutting up to 400 jobs in the coming year’s school budget.
It’s a scenario that has played out across the state. Teachers unions have flexed their muscles in recent years, picketing and even striking to secure contracts with better pay and working conditions. Local politicians, seeking to avoid school disruptions and union pressure in elections, agree to substantial raises and other benefits.
But a tradeoff has emerged: Many of the same districts, including Boston, Newton, and Marblehead, announced budget cuts and layoffs within a few years of the new deals.
Similar episodes have played out across the country, according to Marguerite Roza, director of Georgetown University’s Edunomics Lab.
“That’s the playbook these days,” Roza said. “Unions are asking for things they know the district can’t afford, and saying, ‘I don’t care, go get the money.’”
Often, school districts have managed to find the money. Brookline, for example, won overwhelming approval from town voters for a record tax override, to help pay for a 2022 teacher contract agreed to after a one-day strike. Of the $23 million brought in by the voter-approved tax hikes, about $18 million will go to the schools.
But that amount is still not enough to stave off all cuts, with some school positions set to be eliminated.
“If districts are unable to get more money, which often they’re not able to ... then the tradeoff is layoffs,” Roza said.
Brookline teachers union president Justin Brown noted that labor agreements involve two sides — unions and school committees — and rejected “the idea that contracts are at the heart of this.” Instead, Brown cast the blame on a state law that limits annual property tax hikes to 2 ½ percent unless voters approve a larger increase.
“Prop. 2 ½ is at the core of all this,” Brown said. “That needs to be revisited so there’s not this continuing pressure on municipal governments.”
New union contracts are not the only factor driving budget challenges across the state.
Brookline health insurance costs increased much more than 2.5 percent, Brown said. In Boston, staff cuts were driven by surging health insurance, transportation costs, and more. Other districts have cited rising special education costs, with more students being sent to specialized private schools with tuition paid by taxpayers.
Boston Superintendent Mary Skipper made clear in February, however, that one reason for the budget shortfall was “collective bargaining costs” — an oblique reference to the raises and benefits the city agreed to in recent contracts.
Some of the cuts — about 160 positions —are due to three school buildings slated to close at the end of the year. Enrollment has dropped in Boston and across the country in recent years, forcing administrators to consolidate schools.
But Boston’s layoffs next year extend beyond schools that were already scheduled to close.
In a statement, Boston schools spokesperson Samara Pinto said the teachers’ contract “reflects a shared commitment to strengthening student supports, improving services for staff, students, and families, and taking a more equitable approach to compensation, particularly for the district’s lowest-wage workers.”
Pinto did not address a question from the Globe about whether the city warned the union that layoffs would follow the new contract.
Boston Teachers Union president Erik Berg rejected the suggestion that the contract exacerbated the city’s budget crunch.
“No one should accept the false choice between fair compensation and fully staffed schools,” Berg said in a statement. “Boston’s students deserve both.”
But advocates like Keo McClay, executive director of the Boston Education Justice Alliance, say the possibility of job cuts months after reaching a deal should have been a factor in the contract talks.
The pattern has repeated itself across the state.
In 2024, teachers who walked picket lines in three North Shore communities — Beverly, Gloucester, and Marblehead — won substantial raises for teachers, increases to starting pay for classroom aides, and new paid leave benefits.
Less than two years later, Beverly officials proposed job cuts to help close a $4 million budget shortfall.
Marblehead school leaders approved at least $1.7 million in cuts and the elimination of more than a dozen positions. And in Gloucester, officials are discussing cuts that would impact nearly two dozen school employees.
In some cases, district officials warned that they could not afford the raises. After Marblehead agreed to a deal to end an 11-day teacher strike, the School Committee chair told the Globe the town would have to approve its first tax override in two decades to pay for the new contract.
That vote is scheduled for next month; without it, the town will need to cut dozens of employees to address a $7.7 million budget deficit.
Max Page, president of the statewide Massachusetts Teachers Association, rejected the idea that there’s a tradeoff between wages and staffing. Municipalities all over the state are facing budget challenges, Page said, including ones that have not had high-profile labor battles.
“The blame is that there’s not enough money in state coffers and the state is not spending enough to support our public schools,” Page said. “In a state this wealthy, with this many resources, I don’t accept that.”
On Beacon Hill, legislators are considering revising the state’s school funding system. But even some of the state’s biggest-spending districts face layoffs this year.
Newton Public Schools, for example, approved significant raises to end a contentious, 11-day strike.
“This is a sustainable contract,” then-Mayor Ruthanne Fuller said in 2024 after the deal was reached. “There will be no layoffs.”
It hasn’t worked out that way.
Now two years later, Newton schools are facing staff cuts even after the city allocated an extra $17 million for its next education budget.
During the 2024 negotiations, town officials warned teachers about the potential fallout.
“I know the negotiating team for the last contract discussed the possibility of cuts with the union‚" said Alicia Piedalue, the chairperson of the Newton School Committee, who wasn’t on the board during the talks.
The president of the Newton Teachers Association, Michael Zilles, said such claims are viewed as standard tactics during bargaining.
“We’re always told, ‘We don’t have enough money to do that. If we do that, we’ll have to cut jobs,’” Zilles said.
Christopher Huffaker can be reached at christopher.huffaker@globe.com. Follow him @huffakingit. John Hilliard can be reached at john.hilliard@globe.com or on Signal at john_hilliard.70. Follow him on Bluesky at iamjohnhilliard.bsky.social.