Union’s stand only serves to hurt the teachers

[FBaggins]

They voted “no” because, among other things, they felt they wouldn’t be paid enough for the extra time with students. Maybe they are correct to feel that way. Maybe the plan hurt them financially. But giving Gallo the power to fire them was immeasurably worse financially. Why would they have done it?

I have a theory.

I have been in a union for 30 years, and have come to feel that in standoffs with management, members often get into a collective self-righteousness that makes them vote against their individual good.

...snip...

The teachers there may well be able to claim they were right to ask for more pay. But they knew — they knew — that voting down the superintendent’s plan would put a target on their backs. Union solidarity is fine in some circumstances. But it can be blinding, too.

I assume I’m not the only one who followed the early negotiations in Central Falls, clearly saw that if the teachers rejected Gallo’s deal they’d be fired — and then, in disbelief — watched as they rejected it anyway.

...snip...

We can continue to debate whether that union vote was right.

But it wasn’t smart.








http://www.projo.com/lifebeat/markpatinkin/Mark27_02-27-10_3IHJ1LC_v10.217f798.html

[Starry Messenger]

1. I bet he'd be singing a different tune

if the owner of his newspaper chain fired him and all the reporters over a union negotiation. It's easy to be an armchair quarterback when it isn't your paycheck. I wonder if his union knows he's supporting union busting...

[FBaggins]

6. But it wasn't a union negotiation

It was a situation that the union decided to MAKE a negotiation... and then lost.

A better example than what you posted would be a newspaper that was struggling. It's a tough economy (not the writers' fault) and readership is being lost to free web sources (not the writers' fault) and advertising revenue is down (not the writers' fault) and the paper hasn't turned a profit in several quarters (not the writers' fault). Now the owner of the paper has cut staff by 25% and told the remaining staff that they need to pick up the slack. The extra work will come without additional pay, but without a commitment to this plan, the paper will shut down. Those are the only two options.

What tune do you think he would sing? Is this a good time for the union to insist on a raise?

[Starry Messenger]

7. We've been over this.

If you are changing the contract, it will be negotiated. It's a union negotiation at that point. Why aren't you getting that? I'm really puzzled that you have entered into this subject without a seeming grounding in the fundamentals of how labor works.

Of course that's a good time to insist on a raise. If you embolden the owners by always capitulating to their demands in their manufactured "crises" then you, the worker, are just shooting yourself in the foot. This signals that the operation can safely demands freebies from you if they make threats. What might be considered "struggling" to the owners and their definition of profit, might actually mean that they wish to increase profitability by taking it out on the backs of the workers. Why take the owner's word for it "that the paper will shut down"? The union has to assess that statement to gauge what that actually means and bargain for their members. Without writers, there would be no newspaper. At all. The owners could fire themselves and the paper could run itself with the remaining staff.

[FBaggins]

8. They aren't "changing the contract"

If you have a contract that says you can drive a company car at 70 mph on the highway and the law changes to say that nobody can drive over 55... that doesn't become grounds for negotiation.

If a school is closed by the state, the teachers can't go to the county and sue for breach of contract.

If you embolden the owners by always capitulating to their demands in their manufactured "crises"

It isn't their manufactured crisis. It's a federal mandate.

BTW - there is a crisis that is quite real. There's a valid debate over whether ANYTHING they are doing will help the crisis... but it isn't manufactured.


Why take the owner's word for it "that the paper will shut down"?

Well... that becomes pretty obvious when you reject his demands and then the paper is shut down. Wouldn't you agree?

The union has to assess that statement to gauge what that actually means and bargain for their members.

And in this case the union did a terrible job. There were four legal options and only one of them allowed the teachers to keep their jobs... the union decided that left them room to negotiate.

Understand this simply fact. If there had been another school in the district, Gallo could have closed the school and fired everyone. There would have been no negotiation (and this has happened to schools across the country). If there had been a charter willing to take over the school she could have handed it over to them and fired everyone... again, the union would have no option. There is no federal mandate to try a restructuring before you decide on "turnaround" - Gallo could have started with that and the teachers would have, again, no negotiating power.

[Starry Messenger]

9. If a school is adding more hours than bargained for

they are changing the contract. Teachers negotiate with the union down to every single hour they spend as paid labor at a school. If the schools want to change that, they deal with the union. Period. They exploited a loophole in the federal law to punish the teachers. I expect there's going to be a lawsuit and a world of bad PR for the Obama administration. Tant pis.

Well, I was arguing from your example of a news business and now you have dragged it back to make your point about the teachers. Yes, there is a "crisis". But why aren't the supervisors also giving themselves new duties for tiny pay? You believe that the teachers should have sucked it up and done what they were told and negotiated "later". I'm telling you there would be no "later". Anyone who has been in labor knows this. It's always jam tomorrow and jam yesterday and never jam today. If you don't make the money-people put up or shut up when they want things, then they will always take advantage of you.

There's always money for stupid shit, there should be money for labor. And in this case there probably will be, I think I read somewhere that RI is fast-tracked for granting of their Race to The Top application.

[FBaggins]

10. "exploited a loophole"

It isn't a loophole... it is the purpose of the law.

I expect there's going to be a lawsuit and a world of bad PR for the Obama administration.

I don't know about the lawsuit (not sure what grounds they would claim... Gallo had the option of firing all of them from the start) but outside of the teaching profession and those who support them (including some other unions), moves like this have been pretty popular.

But why aren't the supervisors also giving themselves new duties for tiny pay?

Because they, too, have been fired. Unlike the teachers, there was no option that could have retained the principal.

Oh... I get where you're going. What about Gallo and company? I understand how that resonates with teachers... but I don't understand how anyone thinks that's consistent. We take the risk of sounding like we're saying it's everyone's fauly except the teachers. There's nothing more than teachers could have done, but the superintendent should have worked harder?

Also... it wouldn't be wildly presumptuous to assume that Gallo will have quite a bit more work to do in the coming months than she would otherwise have on her plate. Has she asked for a raise to cover it?

[Starry Messenger]

12. How would it be inconsistent?

It would show solidarity and demonstrate a real commitment to reform. But that's not what this is about. It's about busting the union and putting in cheap teachers and charter schools. It's about instituting merit pay, while bypassing the unions.

Now I know what people mean when they talk about the "ownership mentality". This has been a very instructive conversation for me. You are either on the side of labor, or you are not. I stand foursquare for labor.

The higher-ups in this district have made it clear that they are against the teachers and are putting the onus on them for "results". But really that's all street theater. I still maintain they would have found any pretext to fire them all. Arne Duncan just gave them lovies in the press today applauding this move.

This is from January 31st

http://www.projo.com/education/juliasteiny/content/EDWATCH_31_01-31-10_Q8H8922_v9.3460344.html

Gist says, “The single most important factor in education is the quality of the teacher. People say ‘That’s ridiculous. It’s their parents!’ Well yes, but I’m talking about education, so what can we do within our schools? While welcoming parents is important, there’s so much more we can do as educators. Honestly, I don’t understand what it means when I’m ‘blaming the teachers.’ Aren’t they responsible? But am I blaming? No. We need to help them be as successful as they can be. So I’m holding school committees and principals accountable. All of us have to be accountable, starting with me!”

...

“We are perfectly positioned for success!” she says. But more darkly she notes, “We have our challenges, the budget certainly being the biggest problem. But challenges always offer an opportunity to do something creative. Race to the Top money would help us kick-start some of the things we want to see. Professional development is a huge part of our application. And tracking teacher results back to the preparation programs,” which would look at students’ achievement results in relation to where their teachers received pre-service training.

“But that,” she sighs, “brings us back to blame. Blame the students, teachers, leaders. It’s not blame. It’s accountability. When we use data to track the teachers back to their preparation institution, sometimes we’re going to say that you need to improve your program, or not prepare teachers any more.”

Just for the record, she held me accountable for a recent column I’d written about the downside of rewarding the best teachers financially with a “merit-pay” system. She pulled out a copy so she could take exception to certain specifics. In the end, I shrugged, asserting that after years of effort in many states, not a single merit-pay system has successfully avoided becoming onerously expensive or undermining teamwork.

She insisted, “I know. But why can’t we be the first?”

This is from today

http://www.projo.com/education/content/CHARTER_SCHOOL_BILL_02-25-10_URHIPLH_v14.38ad7f9.html

State Education Commissioner Deborah A. Gist opened the public hearing by telling members of the House Committee on Health, Education and Welfare that maintaining the cap could jeopardize Rhode Island’s chances of securing $126.6 million in education aid from the federal Race to the Top competition.

Noting that President Obama and Education Secretary Arne Duncan have been outspoken in criticizing caps, Gist said, “It makes me nervous when it is so clear that this is an issue.”

State law, passed in 1995, limits the number of charter schools, which are publicly financed, to 20 and the total number of charter students in the state to no more than 4 percent of the 148,000 public-school children. Rhode Island has 13 charter schools with 3,200 students, and another 3,600 on waiting lists. Several more schools are in the works.

A bill before the committee, sponsored by Rep. Douglas Gablinske, D-Bristol, Warren, would not restrict the number of charter schools or the total number of students attending them. It would preserve a requirement that half of the overall number of students be “at-risk pupils.” Legislators said they would work with education officials to better describe these students.

Merit pay is NOT the standard and has been proven not to work. Contracts were not written to be merit pay contracts. She is trying to institute a unilateral change to the contracts and bypass the unions. This is every owner's wet dream. I don't know who is getting sued, I am not a lawyer, but I will eat a hat of your choosing if there isn't some legal action over this.

[wickedcooldem]

11. No bargaining went on...

when the union decided to stick the teachers neck on the chopping block. Unions are designed to protect people from unfair practices, but they also have an obligation to protect workers from being fired. The union in this case decided that they would push their agenda instead of negotiating. It's like when you take a college quiz, you pick the best right answer by eliminating the others. I think the union had a big head and forgot how to do it's job. AND...the crisis is real. The government was allowed to keep this stupid NCLB crap in place, cuz there's nobody with anything better, and the whole mess was in regards to failing students. I feel that there should be some accountability, when it can be proven, but to put the failure of the children squarely on the shoulders of educators is unfair. In some areas of the country, failing is not a big deal and parents either condone or push this idea.

[Starry Messenger]

13. The union is the teachers.

Welcome to DU.

[wickedcooldem]

15. Thank you, but...

the real meat and potatoes of a union is in those trained to represent the other members in negotiations and I feel that they mishandled the case. I may be wrong, I hope I'm wrong. What a waste of the remaining school year. Those kids are going to have to spend at least four months just catching up after this mess is over. FOR WHAT! :(

[Starry Messenger]

16. Too bad the supes weren't thinking about that.

I think the union did the best they could under the circumstances. Teachers have been holding the battle lines during the incredibly crappy Bush years, I think they deserved some loyalty under an administration that promised to listen to them. I think this will have long-term significance.

[radical noodle]

17. Sometimes one just has to take a stand

If something is terribly wrong, do we go along meekly and agree to stupid demands or take a stand for truth? Losing one's job is awful, but feeding public education to the wolves of the right may be worse.

Perhaps the unions did mishandle this. Few people know the real story, and we cannot trust the media to tell us the truth. Nonetheless, the whole idea of blaming teachers and no one else for underperforming students is wrong and someone has to say it. What was anyone else asked to do in this situation?

The teaching profession today is frightening. Everyone is just one false accusation or mistep away from a ruined reputation and firing (and possibly death as we've seen in a few schools). Wickedcooldem, if you're a fairly new teacher I feel very sorry for you.

[OneTenthofOnePercent]

2. "what is right and what is easy..."

These are "days when we will be forced to choose between what is right and what is easy."
- Albus Dumbledore

[FBaggins]

5. When what you think is "right" isn't an option...

...then the choice is between what keeps you employed and what doesn't.

[radical noodle]

18. I might agree about some things

I would (and do) work extra hours and do extra things for my employer but I get some form of recognition for what I do. Teachers are only bashed and then bashed again, no matter how much they do. Until they take each student into their homes, raise them as their own children, feed them breakfast and dinner, and make sure they do their homework, teachers will continue to "not do enough" in the minds of some. Where does it stop?

[Ozymanithrax]

3. Union busting is a sport among corporatist Conservative Republicans...

The teachers Unions is almost as reviled by the right as Obama.

Teachers are grossly underapid. Without Unions, it would be much worse.

[FBaggins]

4. All of that is 100% correct

But that doesn't mean that unions never make boneheaded mistakes... Or that those mistakes don't sometimes cost people their jobs.

[Ozymanithrax]

14. For all have sinned and fallen short of the glory etc.etc.etc. Nobody is perfect.

Perfection is beyound our reach but not beyond our grasp.

[elleng]

19. Thanks for this.