Is the Teachers Union Moving Forward?

Great Public Schools - Pittsburgh (GPS-PGH) is a consortium of local groups who want to improve education in Pittsburgh. These groups include Action United, One Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania Interfaith Impact Network (PIIN), Pittsburgh Federation of Teachers 400, SEIU Healthcare PA and Yinzercation. Great Public Schools - Pittsburgh continues a long tradition of progressive, working class activism whose roots can be found in local labor unions and activist religious organizations.

Great Public Schools - Pittsburgh is actively pursuing a reform agenda in Pittsburgh based on a Community Schools model. Representatives from GPS-PGH recently visited Community Based Schools in Cincinnati. They published a report that puts forth a recommendation for Community Based School reform in Pittsburgh. And they are conducting rallies to build momentum for their plan.

To be honest I was shocked, not that a local group of concerned citizens were engaging in public education issues, but that the Pittsburgh Federation of Teachers (PFT) was partnering with a group that is putting forth a reform model for the district to consider. This is a powerful precedent for the union. And one that is welcome.

I was a member of the Pittsburgh Federation of Teachers during the 1980's and 90's. The PFT was a strong and active union capably led by Al Fondy. Mr. Fondy, a high school mathematics teacher, was elected union president in 1968. He proceeded to lead the union through a series of strikes that created a more professional and fair contract that defined our working conditions. "Al", as he was called respectfully by his membership, excelled at this effort. And as a retired teacher, I am forever grateful for his and the union's efforts. I taught at a time when teachers in Pittsburgh were paid professionally, treated fairly, and were able to have a middle class life with a reasonable retirement after 35 years in the profession.  

That being said, I often argued with Al and the union leadership suggesting we should take a leadership role in the district's educational model. Who better than the teachers to provide input and lead reform efforts? Teachers are where the rubber hits the road. Al was reticent to do so. He told me on a number of occasions that the union was there to negotiate contracts that provide teachers with a quality income, fair benefits, due process and working conditions that are conducive to being successful. But he was clear that the school board was responsible for the education model. We would go along with the district's efforts and would expect the district's support at contract time. That was the paradigm for the 35 years Al Fondy served as the union president. After a rewarding career as an education leader in Pittsburgh and Pennsylvania, Al retired in 2003 and passed away in 2005.

Much has changed since the union was created in the late 1960's. The district's population decreased by over 50%, charter schools compete for district children and parents are upset at the low achievement in many of our urban public schools. A recent A+ Schools report highlights the large achievement disparity between schools in the district. With the large number of school closings since 2000, there has been a parallel decrease in the teacher population and the membership of the PFT. That is one reason the union is stepping up.

To their credit, the model of school reform GPS-PGH is suggesting, Community Based Schools, is a good one. The model is used in Cincinnati and Chicago and is being contemplated for New York city.

"A community school is both a place and a set of partnerships between the school and other community resources. Its integrated focus on academics, health and social services, youth and community development and community engagement leads to improved student learning, stronger families and healthier communities. Community schools offer a personalized curriculum that emphasizes real-world learning and community problem-solving. Schools become centers of the community and are open to everyone – all day, every day, evenings and weekends."

Community schools are a good idea, particularly when you are working with communities that have high unemployment, poverty and disenfranchised youth. As you can see from the Great Public Schools - Pittsburgh Vision and Strategic Overview on the right, the plan builds on a variety of best practices.

The proposal also addresses many current cutbacks in the district. These include arts, library and athletic programming. It addresses the fact that many local neighborhood schools have closed. And it suggests the district find a way to create adequate school funding at the local and state levels. Basically they are suggesting that it is time to get back to focusing on the very simple and powerful fact that "as our schools go, our city goes." No argument here.

It is not surprising that both major teachers unions, the American Federation of Teachers and the National Education Association, are partnered with the national Coalition of Community Schools. A strong community support network can be extraordinarily helpful in moving a neighborhood school to success. I would suggest that both national unions and our local PFT are supporting the Community School effort to try and move the national, state and local education focus to the need for equitable funding to guarantee that all students succeed. This too is an honorable cause.

So is there a downside to this effort? I don't believe so. However, I would suggest it does point out a challenge for the Pittsburgh Federation of Teachers, as well as any union that engages in this type of effort.

Since the union's inception in 1968, teachers have worked in the trenches and observed as urban school districts and their families grappled with poverty, unemployment and the breakup of the core family structure. Unions are well aware that our cities have lost their tax base, their middle class families to the suburbs and their financial support from the state. In fact, most union members who teach in the city moved to the suburbs as well.

As rust belt school districts address a poorer and increasing at-risk student population, their reform efforts are often criticized by the union. Teachers know, at the classroom level, that many mandated reforms are naive at best and a huge burden at worst. A perfect example of this is the over testing of students. This reticence by the union to overwhelmingly endorse district reform initiatives has created tension between the union and the district.

Historically, school districts and teachers unions have been adversaries rather than partners. The blame for this can be shared by both parties. The sad part is that this adversarial relationship hampers progress at solving district problems. And as one can guess, the students suffer the consequences.    

The current union contract is the end result of over 60 years of administrative behaviors that were anti-teacher in a pre-union time. The resolution of these issues occurred through both state legislation and union negotiated contracts. Both provide safeguards from unethical employment practices that previously existed in school districts. These safeguards are successful at avoiding unethical practices. However, some of the negotiated safeguards are counterproductive to quality school efforts.

As the PFT puts forth a Community Schools model to be considered, I hope the union begins to modernize its own internal ideology and culture and finds a way to become consistent with what we know about quality urban schools. To do so, the union must grapple with certain aspects of their contract that are inconsistent with a quality school culture.

Sick Days

One has to look at teacher sick days from both the teacher and student perspective.

From the teacher's perspective, missing work due to illness is something that can't be helped. One would assume taking a day off when ill should not negatively affect your position as a teacher. Prior to teacher unions, teacher illnesses were handled at the discretion of the district. In some cases, you lost a days pay when you were sick. If a female teacher got married or became pregnant, she could be fired. Teachers who became ill were at the mercy of their employer.

This arbitrary approach toward teacher absences ended with union contracts in the late 1960's and with workers rights legislation over the last century. Most teacher contracts provide for 12 sick days and 2 personal days annually. Any days not used accumulate from year to year. When a teacher retires they receive severance pay for unused sick days. The current PFT severance pay is 28% of the daily teacher's rate multiplied by 1/2 of the teacher's accumulated sick days. The maximum payout would be around $24,000 (14 days *35 years*1/2*$100 per day) assuming the teacher never missed a day of work over 35 years.

Unfortunately, the sick day policy has created two unintended consequences. First, some teachers feel sick/personal days are earned days off and take them off annually one way or another. These teachers take all 14 days every year whether they are sick or not. Second, some teachers work nearly every day and complete their 33rd year with over 360 accumulated sick days. A significant number of these teachers, with a doctor's excuse, take nearly two years off, get their full pay during that time and accumulate two years toward retirement benefits. This provides them with much more money than severance pay. It is not hard to get a doctor to sign off on some form of illness when you are in your mid-fifties. Thus, some teachers choose to take the sick time.

Both of these scenarios have a negative effect on the schools. In the first, the teacher misses 14 days a year which is more than one day every three weeks. In the second, the teacher misses the last 2 years of service. The problem is that while the teacher is on sick leave, he/she is replaced by a long term substitute who is a new, inexperienced teacher, paid at the minimum salary with no benefits. The district cannot fill the position with a permanently hired full time teacher until the teacher on sick leave retires. In either case the students lose quality instructional time and their achievement suffers.

From the students perspective, when your teacher is sick, little is accomplished in your classroom. Substitute teachers are at a huge disadvantage. They don't know the students names or learning needs, often they aren't familiar with the curriculum and they have no familiarity with the school's operation. Simply put, from the students perspective, they need their teacher there as much as humanly possible.

I would suggest it is time to reconsider sick leave. In the private sector, professional employees that are ill take time off and continue to be paid. If they are sick for an extended time they are required to bring a note from their doctor. And if they have an ongoing disability, there is both short term and long term disability insurance policies that provide coverage. Since they are considered a salaried professional, they should receive their compensation until they are declared disabled. If it becomes apparent that an employee is abusing the sick leave policy, this should be dealt with in the same manner that any work related concern is dealt with. Without evidence of an ongoing illness, employees who are chronically absent should be terminated.
 

Transfers, Layoffs and Seniority

Prior to state legislation and the union contract, transfers and layoffs occurred at the discretion of district administration. It was not uncommon to be laid off or transferred for unprofessional reasons such as nepotism, sexism, racism or personal relationships between administrators and teachers. In some cases, a higher paid teacher might be laid off in order to keep a lesser paid teacher. Many decisions were made without attention paid to what would be best for student achievement.

Large urban school districts have a significant amount of personnel activity in a year.

• Positions open due to retirements, sick leave, sabbaticals or vacancies.
• Positions are closed and layoffs occur.
• Schools open or close.

When the union contract was first negotiated, the concept of seniority was used to ensure a fair, unbiased methodology to manage transfers and layoffs. State law supports the practice of seniority. Seniority is measured by how many years a teacher has worked in the district. Simply put, the most senior teachers are the first to be allowed to transfer and the last to be laid off. Here's how it works.

Let's say a teacher at school X retires.  The open position is posted to all teachers in the district with the appropriate certification. A number of teachers apply for the position. The person with the greatest seniority is given the position and transfers. This, of course, creates an opening at school Y. This "bumping" occurs until a position is open that noone wants and a new teacher is hired from outside of the district.  From the teachers perspective this is fair and equitable.

From the students perspective this is a mess. First, quality teachers leave their school, new teachers come to their school and there is a sense of constant transition in the school. Sometimes this transition occurs in the middle of the year. Second, more senior teachers have the ability to move and often look to find the "prime" jobs in schools. This creates the unintended consequence of having the most senior teachers working with gifted/honors students, often with small class sizes, often in schools with the least amount of poverty. It would seem that the most experienced teachers should work with the most challenging students. In fact, it makes sense that they should be paid more to work with the most challenging students. Third, during transfers, no attention is paid to quality or specific abilities of teachers. Often teachers are placed in positions that don't take full advantage of their skills.

The same activity occurs with respect to school closings and downsizing. The only difference is the teacher with the least experience is laid off and often leaves the district seeking work elsewhere. Since these decisions are based strictly on seniority with a blind eye to quality, the district often loses quality teachers while keeping less able (but more senior) teachers. This is another case where the effort to be fair and unbiased has a negative effect on the quality of the education provided. Alternative models for determining who gets laid off would have to be based on teacher quality. The union argues that the district has yet to find an agreed to evaluation system that is fair, reliable and valid. And what goes unsaid is they don't trust the administration. That sentiment is troubling in Pittsburgh where the district and union just spent $90 million partnering to create an evaluation and improvement system for teachers. When push came to shove, the union forced the district to use seniority rather than teacher quality as the basis for their most recent layoffs.  

Tenure

Prior to 1937 a teacher could be fired without cause or due process.  If the administrator did not like you, you were fired. In 1937 the Pennsylvania legislature passed a law to rectify this problem.  

The Teacher Tenure Act, which was passed by the General Assembly in 1937, Act 52 of 1937 (P.L. 213) is located in 24 P.S. §§ 11-1121 through 11-1133. ...

The Supreme Court succinctly summarized the purpose of the legislature:
The Teachers' Tenure Act was designed to secure to the citizens of Pennsylvania a competent and efficient school system by preventing dismissal of capable teachers without just cause. It is clear that the legislature did not intend, as appellants contend, that the Act should confer any special privileges or immunities upon the teachers themselves to retain permanently their positions regardless of merit or the future policy of the legislature as to their employment.

Here is how tenure works. Currently, when a teacher graduates from college, he/she has fulfilled the course requirements and passed the PRAXIS exams to become certified to teach in Pennsylvania. The teacher is awarded a Temporary Certificate by the state. The teacher then has 6 years of active duty to complete the requirements for Permanent Certification. The requirements for Permanent Certification include obtaining 24 college credits beyond a Bachelor's Degree, three years of satisfactory evaluations as a public school teacher and completed a school-based induction program.  Once the teacher is permanently certified, they have tenure.

According to state law, tenured teachers are evaluated by their principal once a year. If they receive two consecutive annual unsatisfactory ratings, their employment can be terminated. The argument from the union perspective is if the administration does their legwork, follows due process, and works closely with the teacher, the district can terminate a mediocre teacher. That is correct. But an honest observer would admit that this is a long, drawn out, two year activity that often does not end in termination. The data speaks for itself.

A 2003 Public Agenda survey reported the following:

Teachers acknowledge that getting tenure is neither a long nor difficult process; 73% work in districts that make tenure available after 3 or 4 years. Most teachers (58%) say that when teachers gain tenure in their district, it is no guarantee that they have worked hard and proved themselves.

Teachers also recognize that tenure sometimes protects the incompetent. Nearly 8 in 10 say there are at least a few teachers in their building who fail to do a good job. And over a third (36%) say that it is too hard for administrators to remove any but the very worst.

The question remains as to what type of system could be used to replace tenure.  Many charter schools and private schools have an at-will employment policy to expedite the removal of mediocre teachers. I agree with the union that there must be a plan in place to support teachers and help them to improve. I would hope they would agree that there also must be a more efficient methodology for terminating the employment of teachers that are simply not very good at what they do. A typical elementary school teacher will work with over 1000 students during his/her career. For every year a mediocre teachers is in a class, the class falls .5 years behind in learning.  It simply is not acceptable for a mediocre teacher to remain in the system.

---

I believe there is a place for the union and the contract it negotiates with the district. The contract makes clear what is valued with respect to teachers, administrators, students and culture. I believe it is time to modernize the contract and the relationship between the union and the district. It is to the benefit of the district, the union and most importantly the students to create a successful, collaborative enterprise. Everyone benefits.

It took a century for public school HR policies to become equitable, fair and codified in law. Teachers who are treated with bias, harassed and threatened have federal, state and local laws that now provide them with recourse. Their unions provide them with representation and support. The current question is whether negotiated and/or legislated concepts such as sick days, seniority and tenure can serve both the needs of teachers and students. Policies such as the three mentioned have led to an adversarial relationship between staff and administration. And they have taken the focus off the mission of public schools: improving the lives of our children through educational empowerment.

It would take an enormous amount of courage for the union and school board to pursue a more modern, appropriate and fair methodology to address these issues. They have the ability to negotiate and replace the current language of the contract (and bypass state guidelines if agreed to by both parties.) When the union steps up and advocates for a school reform effort, as is suggested by the Community Schools initiative, they are saying they want to help fix education. I commend their efforts as they move forward. On the other hand, if they are interested in fixing education, are they willing to create a union contract that is progressive, supportive of teachers and consistent with best educational practices for children?  That would be the true test of moving forward.