Why the Chicago Teachers Strike Should Matter to You

The Chicago Teachers Union (CTU) and Chicago Public Schools (CPS) were pretty close to agreement on salaries. CPS backed down on forcing teachers to work an additional 90 minutes without pay, agreeing to rehire laid off teachers to cover the extra time in the school day. The remaining big negotiable issue is evaluations, with CPS demanding that student standardized test scores be a significant factor.

This is terrible for both teachers and students. Student test scores depend far more on students’ socioeconomic backgrounds and other factors outside of school than on teacher skill. Furthermore, even the small influence teachers have on student test data is difficult to measure accurately and requires three or more consecutive years of data to provide consistent results. And even then, the data is only reliable for teachers at the extremes (i.e., very poor and superb teachers). Results are unreliable for the vast majority, who fall somewhere in the middle. Thus, the use of such data will likely result in many good teachers getting bad reviews and being laid off, which is both unfair to them and their students. Many mediocre or incompetent teachers, likewise, could slip through the cracks, particularly if the data is used yearly, instead of every three years.

Many teachers unions have already caved in to similar demands to use student test data to evaluate teachers. Randi Weingarten, head of the AFT, has helped broker deals in which student test scores play a significant role in teachers’ evaluations. The CTA has embraced a deal in California that requires student performance data be used to evaluate teachers, in a sellout compromise they have called a victory because the locals get to collectively bargain how such data will be used (but not whether such data will be used). Therefore, it is inspiring that the CTU has taken on this fight, when its brethren across the nation have given in.

CTU is also asking for smaller class sizes, another battle that many unions have long since given up. In California, classes of 35 or more have become the norm. In Chicago, teachers have been demanding reductions down to 23. It is perplexing why anyone would think that a class of 35 is acceptable, safe or good for children, yet it has not only become the new normal, but some districts have tried to increase class sizes well above this (e.g. Detroit’s financial manager imposed a contract allowing class sizes of 61).

A loss for Chicago teachers will embolden districts and states throughout the U.S. to mandate that student test data be used to evaluate teachers. Indeed, it is already a part of Obama’s education plan and a carrot for those states hoping to win one of his Race to the Trough grants. Similarly, a loss in Chicago could harm teachers in other regions fighting for smaller class sizes.

The battle lines have been drawn and the teachers have some powerful enemies. The Obama administration not only has strong ties to the Chicago establishment, but also has large stake in tying student test data to teacher evaluations. Obama cannot afford to lose this fight, as it will make him look weak on education and labor. Furthermore, he has already taken the union vote for granted and the unions have, for the most part, embraced his candidacy, despite his numerous anti-labor policies. Mayor Rahm Emanuel, who some see as a future presidential candidate, likewise has a lot riding on this struggle. Meanwhile, Mitt Romney is already coming down hard on the CTU and attempting to connect Obama with the selfish, greedy teachers, essentially egging him on to intervene on behalf of Emanuel and the Chicago school board.

According to KPFA (Letters and Politics, 9/10/12), CPS has already enlisted scabs. In this case, members of religious organizations were volunteering to work at some of the 140 schools that remained open for low income students to take advantage of the free and reduced lunch program. While this could be seen as merciful to low income students it is also an indication of the readiness of some to sabotage the wellbeing of the majority of students (and teachers) for the illusion of helping the needy. Indeed, some teachers are calling these schools holding pens, which is essentially what they are since they do not have credentialed or trained teachers and the students are not getting any type of meaningful education. They are basically fed and corralled there for half a day to make the district look like it has things under control.

Jobs Trump Pay & Conditions Says San Diego Labor Council

Huck/Konopacki Labor Cartoons

Collaborate with the bosses! Accept their unsubstantiated claims of declining profits and their insane demands for pay cuts and speedups, or else feel their wrath by way of mass layoffs.

Sound like the insane ravings of a corporate CEO, or right wing pundit or politician?

Think again.

This was the cry of the San Diego and Imperial Counties Labor Council, which recently called on the San Diego Educators Association (SDEA) to work more closely with San Diego Unified School District (SDUSD) in order to avert layoffs, according to San Diego 6.com.

To be fair, labor council CEO Lorena Gonzalez said she was not making concessions for SDEA and she did ask SDUSD to provide “real” numbers so the union could better assess their actual financial status. However, the council’s demand that they go back to the bargaining table and work together suggests the council has lost patience with SDEA, (which is a member of the labor council), and that they expect a quick resolution, even if that means more concessions on the part of the teachers. It also suggests that they expect SDEA to accept the district’s dubious financial prognosis and use it as a basis for determining how much to concede, rather than backing the teachers’ reasonable expectation that the district should be the party to compromise find a way to compensate and treat them fairly.

The union and the district have been in a contentious contract battle since last summer, when the district demanded numerous concessions from SDEA, including furloughs and a continuation of the pattern of no pay increases that has been ongoing for the past few years. The district says the concessions will avert mass layoffs, yet Reduction in Force (RIF) notices have already been sent out to nearly 1,700 SDEA members (one in five district teachers, according to the San Diego Union-Tribune). The district claims that either the concessions or the layoffs are necessary in order to close a $120 million budget gap. However, if the district follows through with all these layoffs, they will be unable to open school in the fall because there won’t be enough teachers.

Lorena Gonzalez, CEO of the Council, said "We can't sit back and wait for things to work themselves out like in years past." Yet she did not make it clear how today is substantively different than in years past. Sure, the budget gap is larger than usual and the number of layoffs is high, but large numbers of teachers are laid off every year due to budget uncertainties and most get hired back once the budget is ironed out in the fall.

There is, however, one difference that neither the labor council nor the district want to admit: teachers may be unwilling to go another year without a raise, while continuing to have greater and greater job demands and duties imposed on them.

Like most large labor organizations around the country, the labor council’s officials are more concerned with a possible public backlash against unions (and the potential threat to their livelihoods as union officials) than they are with the pay, working conditions and wellbeing of their constituents, San Diego’s teachers and other working people. Thus, getting the teachers to agree to concessions, in exchange for reduced layoffs and labor peace with SDUSD, become much more important than wages and working conditions.

SDEA has apparently come to an agreement with SDUSD that would give teachers a raise starting July 1. However, the district plans to lay off 20% of teachers starting on June 30 to pay for it, according to the Union-Tribune. It is a false causal relationship. The district has plenty of other ways to cut costs, starting with its bloated administration. It can also start doing what district throughout the country should have been doing long ago: demanding an increase in local and state tax revenues.

From the union’s perspective, it was the right move. Their members deserve a raise, as do all working people, who have been paying for years for a financial crisis caused by the wealthy and which has benefitted only the wealthy.

The district cannot open school in the fall with a 20% reduction in teachers without significantly increasing class sizes and cutting course offerings, something they are unlikely to accomplish without a significant backlash from teachers and parents. If they do, the union should strike.

SOS, I’ve Tripped and Can’t Come Down

Susan Ohanian summed up the SOS march pretty well in her commentary Sex, Lies and SOS. 

• Low teacher turn out
• Virtually no criticism of Obama
• Half-assed support by NEA and AFT, the former having already endorsed Obama, without asking, let alone demanding. a single thing for schools, teachers or children
• No attempt by the unions to organize or mobilize teachers to attend SOS or to strike
• No movement by unions to resist standardized tests

Bottom line: a million or even a billion teachers marching on Washington will have no effect on policy. If we want to end NCLB, increase funding, halt privatization, lower class sizes, decrease workloads and increase wages, we need to strike. We need to do it early and often. Anything short of this, and the quality of public education will continue its downward slide, along with our wages and working conditions.

Schools Saved, But At What Cost?

California Gov. Jerry Brown has come up with a new budget plan that not only preserves K-12 education funding, but adds an additional $3 billion, according to the Bay Citizen. The extra cash comes from an unexpected $6 billion increase in tax revenue this year. However, the $3 billion boost in Ed funding is a drop in the bucket compared to the $20 billion that has been cut over the last three years. From that perspective, one could argue that his budget calls for a $17 billion cut, instead of the $25 billion that would come from an “all-cuts” budget ($20 billion over the last 3 years, plus $5 billion more for 2011-2012). According to John Fensterwald - Educated Guess, education spending will be still be $4 billion less than in 2007-2008 (see why below).

Meanwhile, as the CTA celebrates its potential victory (falsely claiming that K-12 funding has been saved, when in reality it has only been saved from further slashing), numerous other state programs will see further gutting, including the elimination of the Departments of Mental Health and Alcohol and Drug Programs. The governor also plans on collapsing the Healthy Families Program into Medi-Cal. Healthy Families had provided insurance for 850,000 low-income children. One consequence may be an increase in absenteeism due to untreated medical problems resulting in a further decline in academic achievement, despite the preservation of teaching jobs and class sizes that should come from the preservation of education funding.

The governor’s plan also axes 5,500 state jobs, according to the Bay Citizen article. While it could certainly be argued that many jobs are superfluous or even detrimental to society, without a safety net the consequence will still be 5,500 more unemployed people struggling to feed and house themselves. Furthermore, the plan still requires a regressive tax extension that forces the poor and working class to bail out the state, while letting the wealthy off easy and it still requires the approval of at least four Republicans who are unlikely to budge without further concessions by the public sector unions, including the teachers.

The plan provides no extra funding for higher education, which has already been hit with $1.4 billion in cuts this year. Such a plan only serves to divide teachers and weaken unions in the two branches of education as they fight over the scraps available. However, public sympathy for K-12 education is higher than it is for other public sector workers. Therefore, the plan is politically expedient, like being tough on crime and anti-communist.

What Will It Mean for Schools?

 John Fensterwald - Educated Guess argues that the extra money will be unnoticeable. He says it will take years before most districts can start rehiring staff or restoring programs. Most of the money will be used to cover $2 billion in late payments and to pay down $400 million in previous K-12 deferrals, along with $350 million in community college deferrals. In historical terms, even with the tax extensions, state revenues as a percentage of personal income would still fall to 1972-3 levels (due primarily to the historically low tax rates on corporations and the wealthy.

Bill Gates: Punish “Good” Teachers With Bigger Classes

Overflow Classes of the Future (Image y ckaroli)

In a speech to the National Governors’ Association yesterday, Bill Gates suggested that the best teachers could take on larger class sizes as a way to solve state budget crises (just as long as they don’t increase his taxes, right?)

As usual, his “solution” had nothing to do with solving any real problem. The hysteria over our failing schools is based on numerous myths, while the state budget crises are also a fabrication, the direct result of the wealthy refusing to pay taxes. Nevertheless, as many as 83% of teachers said they were willing to take on more students if they received more pay, according to a survey the Gates Foundation did in 2008. However, even if teachers did say this, the data does not paint a complete picture. Teachers are poorly paid. In some districts they are not even paid enough to live in the communities in which they work. Therefore, it should not be surprising that many are willing to take on extra work in order to get a few more pennies. Yet that is not a good reason to harm students by crowding them into classrooms with less supervision, less teacher attention, and fewer resources. If the real problem is that teachers are not paid enough, then why not just pay them more?

Gates suggestion is based partly on the fact that small class sizes do not always correlate with better academic achievement. Korea, Japan and Australia all have larger average class sizes than the U.S. and better educational outcomes. However, their better outcomes have nothing to do with class size. Their academic success results from the fact that they have much less childhood poverty than we do.

Regardless of test scores, there are many reasons to support smaller class sizes, not the least of which being that it is safer for children. As class sizes swell, it becomes much more difficult to manage children, particularly if any of them have problems with behavior, or remaining focused and on-task. The more student interactions that teachers have each day, the less time they have for each student, making it easier for at-risk youth to slip through the cracks and for advanced students to miss out on opportunities to jump ahead. Also, smaller class sizes allow teachers to form deeper relationships with their students and to mentor them. These relationships often provide the spark that motivates kids in school. Smaller class sizes also provide teachers with more time to actually read students’ papers and record meaningful, helpful comments. They give teachers more time to write thoughtful letters of recommendation, and to provide hands-on, one-on-one attention.

Ultimately, though, Gates’ comments show the utter hypocrisy and cynicism of his education agenda. If he really cared about students’ wellbeing, if he had any understanding of what children really need in school, raising class sizes would not even be in his vocabulary. What Gates and the other Ed Deformers want is to make money off public education. They do so in numerous ways, including the defunding of public education as a way to keep their tax liabilities low. If that means firing teachers, shutting down schools, increasing class sizes, closing libraries, filling the schools will under-trained novices from Teach For America while firing experienced teachers, then they will come up with the data to prove that it works.