The contract dispute in the South Butler School District, now in a waiting game while the school board and teachers union await a nonbinding-arbitration decision, has focused primarily on wage-increase percentages.

In the "final best offer" submitted to arbitrator Michael McDowell, the teachers are demanding annual pay increases of 5.23 percent, 5.07 percent, 4.8 percent, 4.63 percent, 4.56 percent and 4.28 percent retroactive to the 2008-09 school year and extending through 2013-14. They've upped their demand to a six-year contract from a five-year pact.

The board's final best offer, still based on a five-year contract, calls for yearly salary hikes of 3.5 percent during the contract's first two years and 4 percent for each of the final three years.

The average teacher salary in the district — some teachers make more, others less — is $51,249. The actual salary of each district teacher was published by the Butler Eagle on Sept. 22, one day after the teachers went on strike.

The strike, which lasted through Oct. 8, was the second strike since the teachers' latest contract expired on June 30, 2008.

While health care coverage issues, the length of the school day and early retirement also remain unresolved issues in the lengthy contract stalemate, it is pay that has remained at the forefront — at least in the eyes of most district taxpayers.

But the final-best-offer annual pay percentages being sought and offered, although accurately depicting how close the two sides are to reaching an agreement, don't provide the full picture of what the financial obligation will be for taxpayers under the new pact. A comprehensive understanding of the pay issue necessitates looking beyond the annual increases — to the cumulative effects of the contract.

Using the teachers' six-year contract proposal as a guide and using $2,713, the pay increase each year that the union is demanding for each teacher, the total "new money" that teachers would reap under their offer would be $56,973.

Using the same $2,713 raise figure for the board's five-year proposal would provide $40,695 in new money.

And, of course, whatever new money the teachers gain under a new contract would have an impact beyond 2013-14 in subsequent contracts.

It is up to the school board and teachers union to iron out their differences and reach an agreement. No one can do that for them.

But it's interesting to notice what happened recently in the suburban Pittsburgh Keystone Oaks School District, where the teachers agreed to pay increases averaging 3.5 percent per year in a contract extending through June 30, 2013. The Keystone Oaks teaching staff also OK'd paying more for health insurance coverage, and also accepted a board proposal that will require them to spend more time in the classroom. As with South Butler, the previous Keystone Oaks contract expired June 30, 2008.

South Butler's 185 teachers have expressed no interest in anything approaching 3.5 percent pay increases. Yet, it's doubtful that their duties involve challenges any more daunting than what exist at Keystone Oaks.

While not wanting to spend any more time in the classroom, South Butler teachers also have so far rejected any "give-back" on health care coverage beyond retirement. Currently, district health care coverage beyond retirement extends for 14 years; the board has proposed shortening that benefit to eight years.

For workers in most businesses and industries in Butler County and beyond, many of whom receive no company-based health insurance benefits after they retire, even the board's proposal for eight years of coverage would seen as extraordinarily generous.

Meanwhile, most employees' workdays are eight hours, not including a lunch break. South Butler teachers' workday is 7 hours and 20 minutes, which includes their half-hour lunch break.

And, while most workers only hope to receive expressions of good luck and best wishes upon early retirement, South Butler teachers are seeking early retirement cash incentives of from $7,500 to $9,500, up from the current $7,000 to $9,000.

To be fair, a district saves money by way of the early retirement of a higher-paid teacher. It can hire a younger, less-experienced teacher for lower pay.

On Monday, the South Butler arbitration proposals entered a 30-day public comment period. All documents related to the nonbinding arbitration proposals are available on the district's Web site, www.southbutler.org; or at the district administration office.

The public can e-mail comments about the proposals to the arbitrator at PLRB@dli.state.pa.us. Comments to him can be mailed in the following way: Arbitrator Michael D. McDowell, c/o Pennsylvania Labor Relations Board, 651 Boas St., Room 418, Harrisburg, PA 17121-0750.

In forming their opinions, district residents should weigh what's in the competing contract proposals against their own financial circumstances and ability to pay increased taxes. While the teachers contract in itself might not immediately trigger higher taxes, although there is no guarantee that it won't, looming ahead, in about 2012, is the prospect of significant tax increases resulting from state-mandated local payments to the teachers retirement fund.

South Butler teachers have ignored that district obligation in holding firm on — and even expanding — their contract demands, including adding the sixth year.

How soon the current South Butler waiting game will end remains to be seen, but a closed hearing for the two sides is set for Dec. 16 before McDowell. After that, at some point after formal issuance of the arbitrator's decision, the board and teachers union will be required to vote on the arbitrator's recommendation.

The current waiting game will provide ample time for district residents to clarify their thinking on what direction the school board should take. The arbitrator has the task of choosing one of three options: the board's offer, the teachers' offer, or a fact-finder's report prepared in 2008.

If either side rejects the arbitrator's recommendation, it's back to square one, along with the potential for another strike this school year.

Regardless, district residents have the right to a full cost analysis of the pay issue, as well as the projected cumulative costs for health care.

Focusing just on annual pay-increase percentages ignores the dollars and cents of what's at stake.