A Superior Court judge in Los Angeles issued a temporary restraining order against Alliance charter schools prohibiting them from interfering with unionization efforts at their schools.
“The order, signed by attorneys from Alliance and United Teachers Los Angeles, states that the city’s largest charter group cannot coerce or ask teachers about their positions on unionization, must let organizers onto campuses, cannot block emails from the union and must stay 100 feet away from organizers….”
“Alliance has 27 schools, in mostly minority neighborhoods with traditionally lower-performing schools. Alliance has received large donations from some of the biggest philanthropists in the city, including more than $6 million from Eli Broad in 2007 to help expand the group.”
This is a sticky issue for the Los Angeles Times, handled well by Zahira Torres, the reporter.
“Education Matters, the Times’ new digital initiative devoted to more in-depth reporting on schools, is funded, in part, by the Baxter Family Foundation. Frank Baxter sits on the Alliance board of directors. The Broad Foundation and the California Community Foundation also provide financial support for Education Matters.”
I hope this becomes a trend. The right-wingers/libertarians claim that unions are no longer needed to which I say, baloney on steroids.
It wasn’t an accident that push to either gut or stop enforcing labor regulations coincided with the push to eliminate labor unions.
As there are fewer and fewer regulations protecting working people, those people will have to turn to non-state entities, and the only non-state, organized, existing entity that protects working people is labor unions. Deregulation only works if they also eliminate the non-state option.
What is so creative and innovative and cage busting and achievement gap crushing and 21st century about being & acting rabidly anti-union?
Or about lack of financial transparency with other people’s money?
Or enriching a few at the expense of the many?
Or massaging and torturing numbers & stats to make yourself look good?
“It is not the answer that enlightens, but the question.” [Ionesco]
😎
“Nontenure-track faculty at the University of Chicago on Thursday filed a petition with the National Labor Relations Board to unionize, the Chicago Sun-Times has learned.
They are requesting an election for a bargaining unit that would represent not only adjuncts, who work part time, but also full-timers. They would join a national movement that has sought better pay and job security for the nontenured faculty who make up the majority of the nation’s higher education workforce.”
I wonder when the anti-labor ed reform movement in K-12 collides with the increasingly pro-labor movement in higher ed. I don’t know- can you be an anti-labor ed reform “movement” member who works in higher ed while working to gain labor protections for yourself? Isn’t that a double standard?
http://chicago.suntimes.com/news/7/71/1053197/university-chicago-nontenured-faculty-union
I hope unions get a foothold in charter corporations as it may help temper the attacks of the anti-union zealots in the charter industry. Workers have a legal right to join a union to represent them in collective bargaining. If corporations see that collective bargaining rights follow workers into charter schools, or if they wind up in litigation about workers’ collective bargaining rights, they might be more willing to dial back their assaults on public education.
The really interesting cases, to me, are when charter employees organize under private sector unions.
When politicians want to win elections and they need the support of rank and file labor union members, they often draw a distinction between private sector unions and public sector unions. John Kasich in Ohio does this, but it’s a popular political tactic, so he’s not alone. They “support” private sector unions but they oppose public sector unions. Okay. Do they support private sector unions in the schools they turned over to private contractors, then?
A dilemma! They’ll have to do some VERY fancy footwork going forward! I think private sector unions also go under the ed reform campaign bus, but we’ll have to wait and see.
Charters chains have, for years, claimed to be public schools. Once they all start obeying our laws with open board meetings that foster democratic input, and with allowances for organized labor support, they will be public schools. They might even have the support of Diane Ravitch and friends if they did so because it would free teachers to fearlessly, truly collaborate and innovate beyond the restraints of administrative bureaucracy.
Yes, charter teachers should be allowed to unionize. That’s been a feature of Minnesota’s charter law from the beginning.
Well, that, “should be allowed” and it’s also against the law to stop people from attempting to organize. It isn’t really up to charter operators to graciously (if reluctantly) allow their employees to organize. Like everyone else, they have to abide by labor laws.
So the billionaires club hasn’t bought the justice system,yet.
Well, they’re spending less on judges than before. Don’t forget about the Vergara ruling. The judge called due process disgusting.
The Alliance Charter School chain is facing a vote from its
members to unionize. If successful, all their schools will
have union contracts similar to UTLA’s,
and over 600 teachers will join UTLA.
Initially, the Alliance management released a statement that
they would follow the law and stay out of the process,
letting the teachers decide and vote for themselves.
Again,California labor law is crystal clear on this—
once teachers have applied to
California Labor Board for protection, (known as PERB
“Public Employee Relations Board) management
has to stay out of the entire process..
Well, they lied about staying out.
Testimony and documents have come out
that proves the Alliance management are illegally
paying former students to read a prepared
script in phone calls to teachers and current students’
parents, telling them to fight unionization, and influence
the vote so it will fail. The parents contacted
will then lean on the teachers to vote “NO” on
unionization.
Here’s the script that is to be read to parents:
(it’s pretty creepy and manipulative)
http://www.utla.net/print/5671
————————————————————
ALLIANCE UNION-SUPPRESSION PHONE BANK Script
CALLER: “Hi, my name is _________________. Is ____________ there? I am calling from a group of alumni from Alliance Charter Schools. How are you doing today?
“Great. I wanted to make sure you knew about a situation at the Alliance that could affect how decisions are made about your children’s education. Did you know that right now there is an effort to start a teachers’ union at the Alliance?”
IF YES … say
CALLER: “What have you heard about what’s going on?”
— Please pay close attention to these responses and note what is said in NationBuilder. If they have heard something that you know isn’t true, refer to fact sheet to see if you can correct any of this information. Then go on to next paragraph.
IF NO: Just go on to next paragraph.
CALLER: “Well, what we know right now is that UTLA – the teachers’ union in LA Unified schools – is trying to organize Alliance teachers to join UTLA. Right now the Alliance is independent and doesn’t have a union.
“Having a teachers’ union would be a big change for the Alliance. It would end the independence that the Alliance has to make decisions on behalf of kids.
“And – I don’t know about your kids – but I chose to go to the Alliance because of the small class sizes, great teachers, and personalized attention. [Add any other reasons you chose to attend the Alliance.]
“If UTLA unionized at the Alliance, UTLA would get involved in decisions about those things – like how to evaluate teachers and how much learning time kids get. Even class sizes – and a lot more – would need to be approved by UTLA.
“And, did you know that UTLA actually has a track record of opposing charter schools?
“It’s true. UTLA has been against charter schools and the Alliance for years. They’ve given money to candidates for LA School Board who voted to close some Alliance Schools.
“And, UTLA has supported laws that make charter schools – including the Alliance schools – harder to start and operate.
“This isn’t right. So we are asking parents to sign a petition in support of the Alliance as it is today … without UTLA.
“Will you please sign our petition?
If NO: May I ask why you won’t sign it? [Gauge by their response if they are actually in support of UTLA or if they just need more info or say they are too busy. If they really won’t sign it, say:]
CALLER: “OK, thank you for your time today. Have a great day.”
If YES:
CALLER: “Great! Can I get an email address where we can send it to you?”
[Please record in NationBuilder if we don’t already have it.]
[If we don’t have an email, say:] Can we send you a text message with the web site so you can sign our petition? Is this number that I’ve called you on the best number to send it to?
[If they provide another number, please record in NationBuilder.]
____________________
CALLER: “Thanks so much for your time today, and thank you for your support of the Alliance. Have a great day!
____________________
AFTER CALL, PLEASE SELECT ONE OF THE FOLLOWING LEVELS IN NATIONBUILDER, AND NOTE ANY ADDITIONAL INFORMATION FROM CALL IN NATIONBUILDER.
Level 1: Supportive: This is if someone committed to signing petition.
Level 2: Neutral: Person didn’t commit to signing, but said they would “think about it,” “weren’t sure” or “needed more information.
Level 3: Not Supportive: This is if someone has indicated that they won’t sign petition.
THEN IT’S OVER AND ON TO THE NEXT CALL!
————————–
————————
Keep in mind that these recent Alliance grads are low-income kids, to whom $30 / hour is a lot of money. I don’t totally blame them if they go for this.
To the charters, it’s money well-spent… as it will save them hundreds of millions of dollars in the long run. If Alliance schools chain goes union, the others — KIPP, Aspire, PUC, etc. — may also follow. This is a war.
I think parents who are considering a charter school should ask the following questions:
1. Who is on the governing board of the school and how are they chosen? Are present teachers and parents included as voting members? If yes, are they elected by their peers or hand-picked by the school administration?
2. If parents and teachers are not allowed on the board, what kind of input do they have?
If there are advisory committees, how often do they meet and does the school post meeting times along with agendas and minutes? Is there any evidence that concerns brought up in these advisory committees ever get addressed by the board?
3. Does the charter school follow its own charter petition in terms of governance or does it just ignore its own mandate in terms of board composition and frequency of meetings?
4. Are the board meetings held at a location and at a time that makes them easily accessible to parents and teachers?
5. What is the teacher turnover at the school? If it’s high, then it’s in the parents’ best interest to find out why.
6. What is the dropout rate in the high schools? Do most of the incoming 9th graders graduate?
If the above questions were turned into a survey, you would find that Alliance would come up with a very poor score on all of the above. Is it any wonder that the teachers want to join a union? Charter law in California does nothing to address the issues listed above. Charter governance in this state is a joke with no penalties inflicted on any charter school for playing fast and loose with the promises made in the charter petition on stakeholder involvement. After all, how can charter schools continue to operate with impunity if parents and teachers were to be given a seat at the table and allowed to participate in the decision-making process? It should be no surprise that charters are finding more and more ways to keep parents and teachers as far away as possible from participation in governance. Just contrast this with the very specific requirements for parent and teacher involvement mandated by the state and in LAUSD’s traditional schools. The difference is shocking.
If you tried asking any of these questions, they’d first try to blather some sweet-sounding double-talk that doesn’t answer your question.
If you persisted, they’d then — or eventually — tell you to get lost.
The reporter cut her teeth on the El Paso IDS cheating story, and won several awards for her reporting. She was always looking for teachers’ and unions’ point of view.
Sad to say, several years later, the district has not got its act together.
The Los Angeles Times’ newly-formed branch that has taken over its education covereage — Education Matters — is funded in part by billionaire school privatizer Eli Broad, and other wealth folks similarly inclined, including the wealthy corporate reformist Frank Baxter.
While funding Education Matters, Baxter also sits on … wait for it … the board of the Alliance for College-Ready Schools, the group that is being reported on by Education Matters for union suppression. Yesterday’s Times piece — the one referenced in this piece — may seem balanced:
http://www.latimes.com/local/lanow/la-me-ln-judge-issues-temporary-restraining-order-against-alliance-20151030-story.html
After all, there’s one quote from UTLA President Alex Caputo-Pearl, and one quote from an Alliance spokesman Catherine Suitor. However, the story should have quoted from the leaders of the teachers who are trying to unionize, as they are driving this unionization effort, not UTLA.
Those teacher leaders are Elana Goldbaum and Oliver Aguirre — heroic underdogs if ever there were such people. In the pre-Education Matters coverage of education in the L.A. Times, Goldbaum and Aguirre were mentioned prominently
http://www.latimes.com/local/lanow/la-me-ln-state-labor-board-charter-20150805-story.html
as in …
————————————-
L.A. TIMES:
“Alliance teachers Elana Goldbaum and Oliver Aguirre said the labor board complaint reaffirms the right of teachers to organize at the campus without fear of reprisal.
“There is definitely an element of hope for me and other teachers as well that we can get a fair and neutral process so we can just have an open conversation,” Goldbaum said.
————————————-
However, in L.A. Times’ new Education Matters era, the whole unionization drive is being framed by the L.A. Times as a UTLA-originated, ULTA-driven movement, which it most certainly is not. I’m wondering why the reporter Zahira Torres ommitted Oliver and Elana and their efforts from the newest piece.
The story also needs details of how egregious the union suppression by Alliance is, as they hired some of the most vicious anti-union people — the same people that Walmart uses to quash any attempts by its workers to unionize — to carry out this suppression.
Read the complaints here:
and here:
Holy moley!
These complaints were so overwhelming and compelling that PERB (California’s “Public Employee Relations Board”) ordered Alliance management to sit down the teachers attempting to form a union, so that they could set up the parameters, guidelines, and rules whereby both sides — the pro-union teachers and anti-union Alliance management — could campaign in favor of their respective positions. An August 21st date was set where both sides could meet ostensibly as equals in this process.
Alliance failed to show at this meeting, per the advice of their union-busting group… again, the same group that Walmart once used.
Showing up would have given the pro-union teachers legitimacy and an acknowledgment of them as equals. Keep in mind that these are youngsters in their early-to-mid-twenties from low-income minority groups, some of them whose immigrant parents have shown them an example of “don’t-rock-the-boat” in any employment situation. These same “kids”—and yeah, to an old guy like me, they seem like “kids” in some ways — are going up against friggin’ anti-union Terminators from the group Mercury.
Edushyter wrote about what happened to similar teachers in Chicago who tried to form a union at schools belonging to the Union Prep Charter chain… they got fired:
http://edushyster.com/youre-fired/
In general, “Education Matters” are funded by anti-union, pro-privatization forces, and funding such as this can’t NOT influence their coverage, or the coverage that similar corporate reform orgs undertake.
For example, days before Campbell Brown’s privatization propaganda org “THE 74″ went on-line, Edushyster wrote about an un-named journalist who interviewed for a job there. The journalist related to Edushyster the following story. She was told in that interview for a job at ‘THE 74” that she, and the rest of the staff at “THE 74” staff would be barred from any negative reporting on charter schools and, presumably, the entire reform movement:
http://edushyster.com/will-the-74-investigate-charter-scandals/#comments
According to this insider, members of “THE 74” ‘s
“investigative team”—those gumshoes hired by Ms.
Brown to dig up dirt, and report on horrific problems at
traditional public schools—are simultaneously barred from
any activity that looks into charter school malfeasance, or
from ever speaking ill of charter schools.
Furthermore, the source told Edushyster that whenever other
media does high-profile exposes of charter scandals, the folks at
“THE 74”, per Ms. Brown’s marching orders, are supposed to
ignore them and pretend that they never happened.
We now can see that that is essentially how this as played
out with Campbell’s site — i.e. their total ignoring of the
P.R. disaster that is going on with Eva Moskowitz’
SUCCESS ACADEMY schools. Even though Eva is
a contributor at THE 74, there hasn’t been a peep
about Eva’s recent travails.
So I guess those children among Ms. Brown’s “74 million
students” who attend lousy and damaging privately-run
charter schools are not worthy of her advocacy or protection
(keeping a promise to her pro-privatization funders,
no doubt).
Edushyster contacted “THE 74” ‘s P.R. department, and got
into quite a tussle with the rep there, who demanded the
name of this insider who ratted them out. Edushyster
humorously described her refused — citing “career
suicide” for her source — then looked into the background
of the group Mercury that “THE 74” hired to do its P.R. …
… and this is where things come full circle…
Mercury is the same group that has been hired
the the Alliance management to carry out the union
suppression efforts in Alliance’s Los Angeles charter
schools. (It was hired by Walmart as well, but
Walmart fired them when Mercury operatives were
caught posing as “journalists” at an anti-Walmart
protest… and in the ensuing bad P.R. that followed
this unmasking, Walmart kicked them loose.)
Small world.
Mercury drafted this scurrilous letter to the parents of
Alliance students, in an effort to poison their minds
against their kids’ teachers’ unionizing:
https://d3n8a8pro7vhmx.cloudfront.net/alliancecommunity/pages/33/attachments/original/1427349218/Letter_to_Parents_English.pdf?1427349218
My favorite story on this topic is when some teachers
trying to form unions at charter schools in different
cities connected with each other on-line, then
crashed an event at a charter school convention,
and all hell broke loose (okay, a li’l bit of Hell, but
you get the picture)
http://edushyster.com/disrupt-this/#more-6931
One of them was from Alliance, or at least from
Los Angeles.
Thanks Jack for this comprehensive and accurate report.
Here’s another article:
http://www.utla.net/node/5627
—————————————–
UTLA:
“Alliance administration initially responded by issuing a statement assuring teachers and counselors that they would ‘support any decision made by employees to join or not to join a union.’ In later responses to news publications Alliance stated that their intent is simply ‘to put out facts so teachers can make informed decisions.’
“However, recent actions and an internal memorandum authored by Alliance and circulated to administrators show that in fact there is a concerted campaign coordinated by Alliance home office to coerce and discourage teachers, and even parents, from supporting educators forming a union. The document is a guide for administrators on how to utilize personal information in pressuring teachers to not support a union, to illegally block teachers’ access to union information during non-work time, to attempt to silence pro-union teachers’ voices and encourage anti-union teachers, and campaign to parents to discourage them from supporting teachers.
“ ‘ We are disappointed that Alliance would deliberately claim to their educators and parents that they would not pressure teachers on the one hand and then on the other hand run an intentionally divisive anti-union campaign against us,’ said Oliver Aguirre, English teacher at Alliance Susan & Eric Smidt Technology High School in Lincoln Heights.
” ‘In addition to this new evidence and in response to continued coercion, illegal surveillance, and threats of receiving negative evaluations, Alliance teachers are filing additional Unfair Practice Charges with the California Public Employment Relations Board.’
“ ‘The Alliance administration told us they would respect the decision of their teachers, but their anti-union behavior doesn’t feel respectful at all. This anti-union playbook shows that rather than respect the voices of their pro-union educators the Alliance is doing everything to discourage them,’ said Xochitl Johansen, special education teacher at Alliance Marc & Eva Stern Math and Science High School.”
—————————-
——————————————
Again, we’re talking about David & Goliath here… young folks, some in their early and mid-twenties, from low-income or middle-income backgrounds, going up against a billion-dollar organization like the CCSA… and courageously facing an implied threat of having their future careers as teachers ruined through being blackballed by CCSA and its allies.
Finally, here’s the memo given to Alliance administrators, and leaked to the press. It’s basically a “How to Crush Unionization” Manual:
EXCERPTS
———————————-
———————————-
“Talking directly to your people is the best way. Principals can and should tell everyone often that we are doing what we can to stop this (organizing of a union)”
– – – – – – – – – – – – – – –
“Make use of personal information about teachers in persuading them against forming a union: ‘ Feel free to highlight information you think might be useful to them. For example, if we know a teacher is concerned about finances, you might say,
” ‘I was amazed to learn that dues for this union could be about $700 a year. ’”
– – – – – – – – – – – – – – –
“You do not have to allow union representatives on your campus.”
– – – – – – – – – – – – – – –
“The goal is NO unionization, not WHICH union (becomes allied with Alliance teachers, once a union is formed, JACK)”
————————————————
——————————————–
Regarding part of the script where the Alliance administrator, with no prodding from upper management (COUGH! COUGH!), makes the “amazing” discovery that a prospective union—horror or horrors!—charges dues that may amount to $700/year, keep this in mind. UTLA just negotiated a 10% raise that covers that amount many times over, even for first year teachers at the lowest end of the salary scale.
Does that Alliance administrator actually think the teachers in UTLA would have received that double-digit salary increase if they were 35,000 isolated independent contractors, instead of collective unionized force funded by dues?
One more thing, here’s UTLA’s timeline of illegal union-busting activity:
—————————————
——————————————–
“Timeline of Alliance Anti-Union Activity:
“FRIDAY, MARCH 13th – Almost 70 teachers at Alliance announce that they want to form a union at their schools. Alliance Chief Executive Dan Katzir told the Los Angeles Times that ‘We acknowledge the rights of our teachers to undertake this effort. We also recognize that our teachers are under no obligation to participate.'[1]
Judy Burton, former Alliance CEO and Dan Katzir send their first communication to staff regarding union activity stating, ‘To be clear, we do not endorse or denounce any particular union or unions generally. Regardless, we will support any decision by employees to join or not join a union.’
“MONDAY, MARCH 16th – Alliance sends a letter to teachers under the guise of facts about organizing. It says that teachers have a right to join a union free from coercion. The letter, sent to every teacher from their supervisor, then attacks unionization and unions. (ILLEGAL, under California’s PERB laws, JACK)
“WEDNESDAY, MARCH 18th- Alliance, despite legal right to have union meetings on non-work time tells teachers and union organizers that they have no right to meet on school property. (ILLEGAL, under California’s PERB laws, JACK)
“FRIDAY, MARCH 20th – Alliance purchases a domain that will house their anti-union website.[2]
“FRIDAY, MARCH 20th—Alliance distributes another letter to certificated staff under the guise of more facts about UTLA and the union. The letter expands on the March 16th the attack on unionization, unions and UTLA. (ILLEGAL, under California’s PERB laws, JACK)
“MONDAY, MARCH 23rd—Dan Katzir sends an email to all staff encouraging staff to “give me a fair opportunity to prove that commitment to you—in not just words, but action—before you make any decisions on the unionization question.” (ILLEGAL, under California’s PERB laws, JACK)
“MONDAY, MARCH 23rd – Alliance management sends a letter to parents attacking the teacher’s decision to form a union signed by Dan Katzir and former CEO Judy Burton. [3] (ILLEGAL, under California’s PERB laws, JACK)
“WEDNESDAY, MARCH 25th- Alliance illegally blocks email newsletter to Alliance educators from Alliance Educators United. (ILLEGAL, under California’s PERB laws, JACK)
“THURSDAY, MARCH 26th- Alliance, despite legal right to have union meetings on non-work time tells teachers and union organizers that they have no right to meet on school property. (ILLEGAL, under California’s PERB laws, JACK)
“THURSDAY, MARCH 26th – Alliance website attacking the union goes online. [4] (ILLEGAL, under California’s PERB laws, JACK)
“THURSDAY, MARCH 26th—Alliance sends a memo to all certificated staff outlining the benefits Alliance offers its teachers and stating, ‘We respectfully disagree with the assertion that unionization with UTLA would help advance educational opportunities with our students.’(ILLEGAL, under California’s PERB laws, JACK)
“FRIDAY, MARCH 27th- Alliance does an automated phone call to parents and families at one or more schools criticizing the unionization effort of educators.” (ILLEGAL, under California’s PERB laws, JACK)
——————————————————
The CCSA knows that if Alliance goes union, teachers the other chains may also follow suit… KIPP, Aspire, etc.
Oh… and if you care about these teachers, go “LIKE” their “ALLIANCE EDUCATORS UNITED” Facebook page , and perhaps leave a supportive comment or two:
https://www.facebook.com/allianceeducators
… or sign Alliance Educators United’s petition on Move On.org:
http://petitions.moveon.org/sign/alliance-college-ready
It’s important to note that Alliance’s claim of teacher and parent involvement should not be taken at face value. Here’s a segment from the Governance section of one of their schools. Hint…..every school uses the exact same wording. Teachers and parents are appointed, not elected by their peers. This is NO accident.
AMESMASS Board of Directors
The nine voting directors of the AMESMASS Board of Directors include five members of the Alliance Board (Judy Burton, Alliance President/CEO; Gayle Miller; Dale Okuno; Darline Robles; and Marie Washington), two teachers, and two parents. Appointment of the teachers and parents are made by members of the board after considering recommendations of the principal. LAUSD reserves the right to appoint a single representative to serve on the Board. The Board meets quarterly, operating in accordance with the Brown Act, its Articles of Incorporation and its Bylaws.
Here’s an article about students protesting in support of a teacher who was fired for union activity:
http://inthesetimes.com/working/entry/18084/charter_school_students_rally_in_defense_of_fired_teacher
The NYtimes has a great piece on how the “privatization of the justice system” has harmed low and middle income people.
http://www.nytimes.com/2015/11/02/business/dealbook/in-arbitration-a-privatization-of-the-justice-system.html?hp&action=click&pgtype=Homepage&module=first-column-region®ion=top-news&WT.nav=top-news
After 30 years of watching lobbyists and their politicians privatize everything that isn’t nailed down, I have yet to see a privatization scheme that benefited low and middle income people.
But hope springs eternal, I guess. This school privatization scheme will be different.
CHECK OUT THIS CONTRADICTION:
It’s interesting how the California Charter Schools Association’s differing views — BEFORE & AFTER — on UTLA’s recent and successful efforts to gain a double-digit raise for its members.
When UTLA had been failing in their efforts to get ANY raise — let alone a double-digit raise — the Broad-backed and Broad-allied CCSA weaponized that fact, using it to their advantage, as in this quote from the union-suppression material handed out to teachers, students, and parents, and also posted at Alliance’s website …
http://www.ouralliancecommunity.com
Again, this was in their effort to keep teachers from signing on to a union, or to keep parents and teachers from supporting the formation of a union:
(Go to Page 9)
————————————————
“UTLA has not won a raise for teachers at LAUSD teachers for the past eight years. Their current negotiations are stalled. They are the only union not to reach (or nearly reach) an agreement with LAUSD (and obtain any raise, JACK).”
———————————————–
(NOTE: This has since removed after UTLA secured a double-digit 10% raise — not a bonus, but a permanent increase to both the hourly and annual wage … YEAH BABY!)
However, see how CCSA’s tune changes AFTER that raise was obtained, in the infamous and secret Broad Plan, which CCSA helped draft, and which was leaked to the media they have a different view of the raise — or rather, their opinion when UTLA succeeds in getting a double-digit raise:
http://documents.latimes.com/great-public-schools-now-initiative/
(Go to Page 29 … bottom half)
————————————————
“Across California, enrollment in teacher preparation programs fell by 53 percent between 2008 and 2013. As a result, charter schools are increased competition with LAUSD for a smaller pool of program graduates.
“Moreover charter operators are concerned that the new LAUSD contract, which includes a two-year quality-blind 10% increase over two years, will not only make recruitment more challenging, but may also increase attrition as existing (charter school) teacher leave for (unionized LAUSD) district jobs.”
———————————————–
So when it comes to teachers’ unions getting raises, it’s win-win … CCSA can spin it any way they like.
If unions fail to obtain a raise — i.e. prior to UTLA’s obtaining a 10% raise — unions are incompetent and ineffective … they can’t even get their members a raise, for gosh sakes! — so don’t join or support them.
however …
If unions succeeds in getting a large raise … unions are greedy and corrupt … what with their “quality-blind” raise, a raise that makes it harder for us privatizers to expand school privatization.
One more thing about this “quality blind” baloney.
That dig about LAUSD just gave a “quality blind” raise is patently absurd. Police, firefighters, nurses, librarians are all given such “quality blind” raises as well. Does anyone seriously think that they should differentiate salaries in any of those groups… merit pay… I work in LAUSD, and surviving in that environment—which includes regular and rigorous evaluation, both formal and informal… is not something that is “quality blind.”
One aspect that some folks have missed regarding the Broad Plan to privatize 50% of LAUSD schools:
Under Broad’s orders, the recently-departed LAUSD Supe (and alleged Broad Plan author … Deasy now works at the Broad Foundation after leaving LAUSD) John Deasy fought any salary increase for teachers tooth and nail—as he did an class size decrease—and now you know why. The Broad Report laments the monkey wrench that the current school board — and Deasy’s successor Ray Cortines — threw into their plans when they awarded teachers an across the board 10% raise.
Mind you, that’s no one-time bonus, but a permanent 10% increase to the hourly / annual salary schedule.
Here’s the report on that: (bottom half of p. 29 at
http://documents.latimes.com/great-public-schools-now-initiative/
——————————————-
GPSN document: (again, UTLA President Alex Caputo-Pearl reports that Deasy wrote this plan)
“Across California, enrollment in teacher preparation programs fell by 53 percent between 2008 and 2013. As a result, charter schools are increased competition with LAUSD for a smaller pool of program graduates.
“Moreover charter operators are concerned that the new LAUSD contract, which includes a two-year quality-blind 10% increase over two years, will not only make recruitment more challenging, but may also increase attrition as existing (charter school) teacher leave for (unionized LAUSD) district jobs.”
—————————————————————
Essentially, Broad-stooge John Deasy is now screaming:
“Damn that LAUSD School Board! If only they’d kept their teachers at the sh—y wages that I kept them at, we’d be able to lure more of their teachers, and recent graduates over to work at our privately-run charter schools… and we wouldn’t be losing our own teachers who defect to go and work in LAUSD.”
This analysis ignores other factors. It’s not just the money that’s luring charter teachers to leave and work in LAUSD— or in the case of the Alliance teachers, form a union that allies itself with UTLA.
The charter school teachers are not stupid, and they talk to LAUSD teachers, and among themselves. They talk to LAUSD teachers about the advantages of teaching in an environment set in part by the terms of a union contract. They hear about the respect that they’re afforded administration. They hear about being treated as a professional, while teaching among other professionals with decades of experience and expertise.
I can tell you about all my own personal conversations with the refugee teachers—those who left charters to teach in LAUSD.
“It was Hell working there.”
“It was an pseudo-educational sweatshop.”
“God, I can’t tell you how happy I am to be here. It’s so much better than at that charter.”
… and on and on…
I can only compare it to folks who breathe freely after leaving North Korea, or back in the day, who left the old Soviet Union.
Regarding salary, you notice how Deasy’s Broad Plan report doesn’t even consider the possibility of increasing the salaries of charter school teachers so that they will be on a par with, or closer to that of LAUSD teachers. That’s one opportunity to compete that Broad, Deasy, et al won’t seize.
Could you imagine if the top charter chains in Los Angeles got together and held a joint press conference, with their spokesman saying: “In response to the LAUSD granting a 10% raise to its teachers, we’re going to follow market-based principals and match that offer to all of our teachers (or exceed that offer)”?
Well, you know what? That ain’t gonna happen, and you know why.
Poor teacher pay is not a bug, but a feature of the charter school business model. They are a business, where you cut the costs to the bone whenever possible.
They blather away about applying market-based principles to education, but the one that they will never apply is “supply-and-demand” to teacher’s wages, with the accompanying result of increasing those wages.
With management however, that’s a different story. Campbell Brown defends Eva Moskowitz’ $600,000+ salary on the grounds that they need to compete with other industries to attract and retain such high quality leaders… such as Eva (COUGH! COUGH!) .
With teachers… not so much.
Essentially, because the charters are not regularly audited, and there’s no regulation setting caps on salaries, the bosses are paid more, and will be paid greater and greater salaries, while the teachers are being paid being, and will be paid less.
To put it another way, money will be taken from the line item of teacher salaries, and moved to the line item of administration.
All because there’s no union or democratically elected board overseeing them and stopping this practice, this practice will continue.
Jack, Like Wow.