This week on Tuesday (17th), the Los Angeles Unified School District (LAUSD), the second largest school district in the United States, voted on a layoff plan involving over 650 positions, most of which are IT professionals. The main reasons for the layoffs are the significant decrease in enrollment and increasing deficits in the district.
The meeting on Tuesday began in the morning and lasted almost a full day, discussing various issues including the layoff plan. The school district board authorized the legal counsel office and the human resources department to notify relevant employees that their contract positions will be terminated no later than June 30. The human resources department is expected to issue notifications to relevant employees by March 15 and explain the decisions of layoffs and reassignments due to funding and organizational adjustments.
Last Friday (13th), the LAUSD board proposed the layoff plan, which was postponed to this week due to opposition from the union. Next, the district must vote on the layoff plan by March 15, which is the deadline for California school districts to notify employees of layoffs.
LAUSD has a total of 83,000 employees, and the layoff notices will be sent to 2,600 certified contract managers and administrative staff, but the actual number of layoffs is just over 650, less than 1% of the total employee count. The district’s education director also mentioned that employees who receive notices may be reassigned to other positions. A district spokesperson stated on Tuesday that the layoff plan did not consider teachers or counselors.
The layoffs are expected to save the district $250 million. Over the past two years, LAUSD has been relying on reserves to cover deficits of billions of dollars. Financial reports show that without changing spending patterns, the deficit for the 2026-27 school year is projected to be close to $900 million.
It is estimated that due to funding issues, this round of layoffs will not be the last. However, each round of layoffs in the district requires negotiations with the teachers’ union, and if agreements cannot be reached, the union may initiate a strike.
Based on current spending levels, LAUSD is set to face a $1.6 billion deficit by the 2027-28 school year. The main factors contributing to the deficit include a significant decline in enrollment, rising education costs, and the expiration of pandemic relief funds.
According to a report from LAUSD in January of this year, enrollment in grades TK-12 has been on a declining trend in recent years: there were 474,300 students enrolled in the 2019-20 school year, which decreased to 389,000 students in the 2025-26 school year, a nearly 18% decline. Looking at the past two years, enrollment was 402,500 students in the 2024-25 school year, dropping to 389,000 students the following year, a 3% decline exceeding the average levels in California and the whole of the United States.
Another major reason for insufficient education funds is the increase in labor costs. In January of this year, the Los Angeles teachers’ union (UTLA), representing 35,000 educators, did not agree to the district’s proposal of a 4.5% salary increase over two years plus a 1% bonus. This proposal would cost $4 billion over the next three years. However, UTLA believes this is far from enough to offset the high cost of living in Los Angeles.
SEIU Local 99 (Service Employees International Union Local 99), representing on-campus staff such as educational assistants and janitors, is also negotiating with the district for a raise. The union has proposed a 13% salary increase over the next three years, with an initial 10% raise in 2026. This will cost $3 billion by the 2027-28 school year.
In 2019, UTLA initiated a major strike that resulted in a 6% wage increase for teachers; in 2023, a strike by SEIU Local 99 led to a 30% pay raise.
LAUSD receives approximately $19 billion in funding annually, most of which comes from California, based on enrollment numbers. The district announced in January that each student receives about $24,000 in funding from the state government. Since 2000, the district has seen a continuous decline in enrollment, with a total decrease of 40%.