Looming Strike for Teachers in Ramona, CA

Teachers in the Ramona school district in San Diego County have overwhelmingly voted to authorize a strike. CTA officials say that 99% of the teachers participated in the vote, with 75% voting in favor of a strike. The vote does not mean that a strike will necessarily happen, though. Rather, it is a legal requirement before teachers can actually walk off the job, something their union may ask of them in the near future if negotiations with their district fail.

Negotiations are currently stalled, according to the Ramona Patch, in the wake of recent school board decisions to slash teacher pay by 7.8% this year and 9.4% next year. Donna Braye-Romero, president of the Ramona Teachers Association, said “We don’t want to strike. We’ve never wanted to strike. The district is forcing the situation.”

Of course the district is not actually forcing the teachers to strike—they could just shut up and take it. After all, Superintendent Robert Graeff is saying there isn’t enough money and the county Office of Education won’t approve a budget that is in the red. So from their perspective it is perfectly reasonable to “trim the fat” to balance their budget, a claim that is routinely made by bosses in all industries during tough times to justify layoffs and pay cuts. Indeed, this argument is so “reasonable” that the union itself has accepted it, and even conceded pay cuts for the first year of the new contract. Rather than demanding raises, or least maintaining current salaries, with the money coming from the district’s reserves or from slashed administrators’ salaries, the union is merely asking for “restitution” language in the new contract, according to the Voice of San Diego, so that if more money comes in in the future, the extra would go into teachers’ salaries.

California Teachers Association spokesman Bill Guy believes that the Ramona district is intent on breaking the union. This is very likely true. However, that is not a good reason for accepting the bosses’ claims of poverty at face value or for conceding a significant pay cut, something that may very well weaken the union by driving some teachers out of the district. Requesting “restitution” language is itself a significant concession and contributes to the weakening of the union by showing teachers just how weak and conciliatory their union really is.

On the other hand, if the district does not moderate its aggressive stance (17.2% pay cut over the next two years) teachers will almost certainly walk off the job. The struggle would then be the union’s to “win” or lose. If they do walk out, the union will likely end the strike if the district withdraws its demand for a second year of pay cuts, probably even without the “restitution” language. The union will call it a victory, but the teachers will be working for significantly less money than they were before, with little hope of ever making up what they lost.

Another Looming Illinois Teachers Strike

Last week, teachers from Geneva School District 304, in Illinois, gave formal notice that they intend to strike, after a 12-hour bargaining session failed to reach an accord, the Chicago Tribune reports. Because state law requires a 14-day waiting period, the earliest the strike could begin would be Friday, November 9.

The main issue is salaries. Teachers say that there is plenty of money in the reserves to not only give them a raise, but to also refund some property tax dollars, as the district did last year. The district, not surprisingly, is crying “fiscal uncertainty” and wants to freeze salaries for the next year, including a freeze on step and experience increases. However, they are willing to give a paltry 1.4% raise in the second year of the contract, still with no step increases.

The union, for their part, is not asking for much. They want a 1% raise in the first year and another 1% raise for the second year. They are even offering a hard salary freeze for the first half of the third year, but want step and lane increases reinstated for in the second half of the third year. They also want a 6% increase in pay for three of the last four years of employment before retirement, so that their pensions will be larger.

Considering that wages have been steadily falling for the past 40 years (when adjusted for inflation), a 2% raise over two years will only contribute to this slide. While the greed of the employing class is the primary reason for the downward spiral in living conditions for the majority of Americans and the growing wealth gap, the unions have been complicit by continually asking for and accepting far too little. When one factors in the skyrocketing cost of health care and the increasing out of pocket payments being squeezed from workers, a 1% annual raise is a de facto pay cut.

Tacoma Teachers Strike Ends—Teachers Win Status Quo!

Huck/Konopacki Labor Cartoons

Tacoma teachers voted with nearly 99% approval for the three-year contract negotiated by their union representatives, under the guidance of Washington’s governor Gregoire, according to the CS Monitor.

So what did the teachers win?

Class size will remain the same. This might be spun as a victory, as the district had wanted to increase class sizes. However, the union had wanted to reduce class size by one student, and even this would have left class sizes larger than most teachers would consider safe and ideal for effective learning.

Teacher pay will remain at current rates. However, teachers will lose one day of paid professional development. Again, this might be spun as a victory, as the district originally had wanted to cut several days off the school year and significantly reduce salaries and professional develop days. However, with state budget cuts, most unions have given up even asking for raises, assuming there is no chance of succeeding. Therefore, teachers and other workers get de facto pay cuts each year, as their salaries remain the same while inflation raises their living costs.

One of the most contentious sticking points was the district’s demand that teacher transfers be based on evaluations, rather than seniority. The teacher-transfer policy will remain intact for one year. During the 2012-13 school year, a committee made up of teachers and district officials will develop a new policy, with approval by a two-thirds vote of the committee.

An amnesty clause will protect teachers from any punishment for striking. This is probably the best part of the deal considering that a judge had ordered the teachers back to work and threatened legal consequences against the 1900 who continued to strike.

In summary, the Tacoma teachers succeeded in forcing their district to back off of some of their attacks, effectively maintaining the status quo for one more year, a status quo that does not include raises to keep up with the cost of living. Next year, seniority could go out the window. Class sizes could be increased in three years, when the contract ends.

On a positive note, the Tacoma teachers did stand up to a judge and a legal system that said they had no right to strike. They risked jail time fighting to maintain their working conditions. And it should certainly be seen as a good thing that they will not be fired or imprisoned for their efforts.

On the other hand, they did not ask for much in the first place. They put a lot on the line, risked a great deal, to simply keep things the same, a status quo that provided mediocre working conditions for teachers and mediocre learning conditions for their students. Rather than entering negotiations begging for a lame status quo, a much better tactic is to enter negotiations demanding everything one really wants, no matter how unlikely one thinks they are. Then, instead of giving away a little more each year and falling further and further behind, there is the possibility of actually gaining ground.