The Threat to U.S. K-12 Education

[dgs49]

Most of the states in the U.S. are facing some sort of financial crisis because of shrinking revenues resulting from The Great Recession.

Not surprisingly, the biggest discretionary cost facing the states on an ongoing basis is the cost of paying for employees and their benefits. When there is one or a number of Collective Bargaining Agreements in place, these agreements generally mandate things like: (1) periodic, across-the-board salary increases, (2) maintenance of benefits - particularly health benefits - over time at a small fixed premium (if any at all) paid by the employee, regardless of increases in the COST of those benefits, (3) any reductions in force be made strictly on the basis of seniority, ignoring competence or anything else, and (4) early retirement of employees with not only guaranteed lifetime living stipends, but free health insurance until such time as the retiree reaches an age when she is eligible for Medicare.

Furthermore, the CBA's PREVENT the state-employer from doing the things that employers typically do under such circumstances, namely, changing assignments or schedules to enhance efficiency or utilization of scarce resources, hiring part-timers or contractors to do things that can be done cheaper, adjusting schedules to eliminate or minimize overtime compensation.

The CBA's also require that any new assignments or positions be allocated on the basis of seniority, rather than qualifications or suitability for the work.

In fact, the "crisis" in education is not a crisis at all. It is a set of circumstances that private sector enterprises deal with periodically throughout their history, using a variety of simple and obvious tactics, some of which involve a bit of pain to the employees. The first step is simply to demand that the employees produce more with fewer resources. Then they use things like reorganizations, oursourcing, pay freezes, reductions in force, restructuring of benefits, and so forth. Ultimately, the job gets done with less revenue and any well-run company will weather the storm. It is happening literally all over the country right now as I write this.

But this doesn't seem to be possible in the unionized public sector. It is a manufactured crisis, resulting mainly from the mandates and constraints of the CBA's.

I would submit that a teachers' contract, with all of the demands and restrictions that it entails, is a much greater threat to Education than any 5 or 10% cut in state funding. Private companies withstand that level of revenue reduction every day and don't even break a sweat.

[Big RR]

These CBAs are freely entered into by both sides, aren't they? Why promise something in a contract and then renege; if the people don't like the contracts elect a government/school board that won't enter into them. Don't promise one thing and thenback off it because circumstances change; I can pretty much guarantee that, if the schools were flush with cash, the boards would say,"Oh, let us give you more; we didn't expect to have so much".

[quaddriver]

A curious post from you Dave, considering that in the very state you report from, lately (as in earlier this week and YESTERDAY) two PRIVATE schools closed forever due to funding issues.

And in the state from which you report from, while teachers are overseen by the 'PDE', their employers are in every case, the local school district of which the board are locally elected officials and the super is a hired posistion.

If you need/want teachers gone - tell the principal who is in almost all cases the immediate supervisor to clean house.

[rubato]

Most of the states in the U.S. are facing some sort of financial crisis because of shrinking revenues resulting from The Great Recession.

Not surprisingly, the biggest discretionary cost facing the states on an ongoing basis is the cost of paying for employees and their benefits. When there is one or a number of Collective Bargaining Agreements in place, these agreements generally mandate things like: (1) periodic, across-the-board salary increases, (2) maintenance of benefits - particularly health benefits - over time at a small fixed premium (if any at all) paid by the employee, regardless of increases in the COST of those benefits, (3) any reductions in force be made strictly on the basis of seniority, ignoring competence or anything else, and (4) early retirement of employees with not only guaranteed lifetime living stipends, but free health insurance until such time as the retiree reaches an age when she is eligible for Medicare.
... "

The three largest items in all state budgets are (in no particular order):

Administration of justice and public safety (courts, jails, prisons, police, firefighters, paramedics &c)

Health Care.

Education

Unions have only produced relatively salaries in the first item where a high school education and little else can generate an amazingly high income.

In education teachers have very low pay compared to others with a BA/BS plus additional qualifications.

yrs,
rubato

[dgs49]

The point is that CBA's and "right" to strike were a bad idea ab initio in the public sector, given that the Real Party in Interest - the Taxpayer - is essentially unrepresented at the table. This had been recognized by all of the stakeholders basically since the dawn of the age of organized labor. Indeed, the demi-god who initiated the National Labor Relations Act, FDR, saw that there was no place in the public sector for collective bargaining or the right to strike.

The folly of collective bargaining in the public sector was manifest in the first real recession after states began allowing it, when the private sector saw (1) mass bankruptcies of enterprises with strong unions (most notably in the Steel Industry), or alternatively, (2) union contracts that contained serious "givebacks." At that time, Public Sector unions uniformly told "management" to go pound salt, and their pay & benefits continued to ratchet upward. In fact, in the 80's, the taxpayers were put on the hook for retirement benefits that were comparable to the BEST available in the private sector, combining defined-benefit plans starting at absurdly early age with fully-paid health benefits to "tide the retirees over" until they were eligible for Medicare. The coming crisis was masked by a stock market that was booming, resulting in phony projections of fund prosperity which gave the politicians cover.

In this regard, it is noteworthy that nothing in the National Labor Relations Act compels employers to even discuss benefits for retirees, as they are not a Party to the negotiation of the CBA. Not surprisingly, most companies who followed this path have gone bankrupt (General Fucking Motors), while it remains a very common feature in the public sector - where the Benefactors have no seat at the bargaining table. (For comparison, I and my wife both work for large, successful private companies. Our "company" retirement is mainly via 401k plans, and we are allowed to accumulate a pre-tax account which we can use after retirement to cover healthcare costs before we are eligible for Medicare - and subsequently).

But again, my point in this thread is that the constraints and mandates of the collective bargaining agreements are a bigger threat to the quality of education than any 10% funding cut. Absent the CBA, the schools could re-evaluate priorities, cut programs that make no sense or are not efficacious, reorganize, and easily weather the storm. It is done in the private sector ALL THE TIME, with minimal disruption to the "customers." Yet we are being told that these nominal cuts are going to devastate public education, and there is simply no solution but to restore funding - and increase it, if the truth be known. Indeed, our state colleges in Pennsylvania have a history of increasing tuition every year like clockwork, despite perennial increases in State funding.

[dgs49]

And o yes, I forgot: without the CBA's the school districts would be free to get rid of the fucking deadwood.

[Big RR]

The point is that CBA's and "right" to strike were a bad idea ab initio in the public sector, given that the Real Party in Interest - the Taxpayer - is essentially unrepresented at the table.

and why is this; they have the power to elect the school boards and local governments that represent them; if they don't represent their interest, they can elect someone else. Of course, most won't even vote, let alone seek such offices. They get the representation they deserve.

[Grim Reaper]

And o yes, I forgot: without the CBA's the school districts would be free to get rid of the fucking deadwood.

Where "deadwood" really means people who disagree with the school board, or whatever other reason can be thought up.

[dgs49]

RR: How many people run for school board because they want to bring fiscal discipline to the school district? Maybe one in 10. Most are either power hungry or want to promote initiatives that will benefit their own children. The imbalance of the system is obvious from the results.

G.R. How is it that 93% of employed Americans manage to survive in an environment where management is free to remove (fire) those who don't perform, and somehow when it comes to the unionized public sector there is an assumption that no one would ever be terminated with rational justification?

And why is it that Libs believe the "best" system of public K-12 education in one in which it is impossible for a superior performer to excel and for an inferior performer to fail? They still get the same step increases and cost of living increases regardless.

This is stupid on its face.

[Grim Reaper]

RR: How many people run for school board because they want to bring fiscal discipline to the school district? Maybe one in 10. Most are either power hungry or want to promote initiatives that will benefit their own children. The imbalance of the system is obvious from the results.

Perhaps an overhaul of the administration would be more beneficial than gutting teachers.

G.R. How is it that 93% of employed Americans manage to survive in an environment where management is free to remove (fire) those who don't perform, and somehow when it comes to the unionized public sector there is an assumption that no one would ever be terminated with rational justification?

Except plenty of teachers do manage to get fired each year. Amazing how that's possible when you keep babbling about these super unions that prevent anybody from being fired.

And why is it that Libs believe the "best" system of public K-12 education in one in which it is impossible for a superior performer to excel and for an inferior performer to fail? They still get the same step increases and cost of living increases regardless.

More strawman garbage. Try again with a real argument.

[dgs49]

"...plenty of teachers do manage to get fired each year."

Total fucking bullshit. Teacher turnover in districts where they have a CBA is NON-EXISTENT! In most districts, firing a teacher for something other than fucking a student is nothing more than a myth - it NEVER happens.

Put up or shut up.

[rubato]

"...
G.R. How is it that 93% of employed Americans manage to survive in an environment where management is free to remove (fire) those who don't perform, and somehow when it comes to the unionized public sector there is an assumption that no one would ever be terminated with rational justification?
... "

In my experience people in the non-unionized private sector are rewarded more often and far more richly for incompetence and corruption than school teachers are.

One can either be focussed on improving schools or one can be focussed on blaming something and turning your brain off. You can always spot the latter group because they alone do not know that motivating human performance uses both negative and positive means; and the positive means are the most potent.

If you want better schools then teach people to treat teachers with respect so that good people will want to do it. If you want schools to be worse teach people to hate teachers and blame them; like you are doing now.


yrs,
rubato

[Grim Reaper]

Put up or shut up.

You first. You made the claim that teachers can't get fired. You prove it.

And I want real proof, not an anecdote "some teacher I heard about was incompetent".

[rubato]

http://www.santacruzsentinel.com/nation ... i_17620546
"SAN BRUNO -- The California Teachers Association is reporting that school districts so far have issued nearly 19,000 layoff notices to teachers amid uncertainty over the state budget. "


yrs,
rubato

[quaddriver]

http://www.santacruzsentinel.com/nation ... i_17620546
"SAN BRUNO -- The California Teachers Association is reporting that school districts so far have issued nearly 19,000 layoff notices to teachers amid uncertainty over the state budget. "


yrs,
rubato

Mobilizing the NEA and CSEA to pressure lawmakers is not indicative of anything else, especially policing under performing teachers ranks.

[Big RR]

RR: How many people run for school board because they want to bring fiscal discipline to the school district? Maybe one in 10. Most are either power hungry or want to promote initiatives that will benefit their own children. The imbalance of the system is obvious from the results.

You may be right, I don't know for certain. but either way, the people who care CAN have a seat at the table, either by supporting a candidate who represents their view, or running themselves if need be. That they choose not to avail themselves of the seat(s) which they could have is not an indictment of collective bargaining

[dgs49]

As per usual, rube posts the irrelevant as proof.

A layoff notice due to a funding shortfall is not in any way related to removal of a teacher for non-performance, which is the point of this line of discussion.

Indeed it is an illustration of one of the catastrophic failings of the current system. The teachers who MAY be laid off (my brother was laid off from the LA school district last year) are the ones with the least seniority - giving no consideration whatsoever to performance, eh? Without the CBA, a layoff can be a healthful "pruning" operation in which the weakest performers are removed and the overall system improves. I have seen it many times in private industry.

Notes from New York (not atypical of school districts covered by a CBA):

"[T]he disciplinary system for tenured teachers is so time-consuming and burdensome that what is already a stressful task becomes so onerous that relatively few principals are willing to tackle it," Klein told The New York Times for a November 15 story. "As a result, in a typical year only about one-hundredth of 1 percent of tenured teachers are removed for ineffective performance," Klein noted.

Only 10 to 15 tenured teachers a year are forced to leave the school system entirely because of incompetence. But as of late 2007, more than 700 had been removed from classrooms and required to report to "rubber rooms" where they are separated from students but continue to receive full pay.

[rubato]

One can either care about improving education or one can care about fucking people and enjoying their pain.


You are the latter.


yrs,
rubato

[dgs49]

Nice, substantive response, rube. You should be proud.

Consider that you strongly support a system of "education" in which the providers are evaluated on precisely the same basis as coal miners. Excellence is not rewarded and failure is not punished or even discouraged. When headcount is to be reduced, it is done without regard to performance, thus ensuring that no possible benefit can ensue.

Consider that since the dawn of collective bargaining in public education, the word "professional" can ONLY be applied to teachers if one completely eviscerates the word and accepts it merely as the opposite of "amateur."

[oldr_n_wsr]

they have the power to elect the school boards and local governments that represent them;

We tried that, got a few of business owners in the district to run and we actually got one on the school board (I believe there were 3 open seats at the time). He was practically run out of his seat (and lost the next election) for suggesting that NOT spending so much money might actually be better for the schools and the kids. That the schools really need to look long and hard at their finances and get some sort of control. That a 0% increase in spending (and property taxes) from year to year is a sound fiscal policy especially when inflation was practically non-existant.


And NY state is looking into ways of "rating" teachers so that when lay-offs come (and they are coming, soon, very soon) the admin isn't hog tied by "Last in, first out". but I doubt anything will come of it at least in time for this round of lay-offs