We Live in Fear

Oswald Murdered by Ruby - 1963

I was 10 years old when President John F. Kennedy was assassinated in Dallas by Lee Harvey Oswald. It was a Friday and I was in school. My fourth grade teacher told the class what happened and we all cried. That weekend I was riveted to the television watching news coverage of what happened. Sunday I woke up and immediately turned on the television set. Around noon they were moving Oswald to a different jail and I was watching it live on the TV. As he was escorted through the garage, he was shot by Jack Ruby on live TV. In a 48 hour period I had to grapple with the knowledge that our president was shot to death and watched as his assassin was murdered on live TV. The police couldn't even protect him. The images and sadness stick with me to this day. I was 10 years old.

Garner Choked to Death - 2014

I was 61 years old when Eric Garner was choked to death by a group of New York City policemen. The strange part was that I found out about the incident when a friend sent me a link to a video of his death. I clicked on the link and watched (and heard) how his death occurred. If you are so inclined (and frankly, it is so strange that you can see this), you can watch either murder online - Oswald and Garner.

When I was 10 years old I cried, couldn't sleep and could not make any sense of what happened. I was scared for my family's safety and the country's safety.  At the age of 61, I was horrified. Eric Garner was accused by the NYPD of selling single cigarettes on the street. He was frustrated and begged the police to leave him be. When they went to arrest him, it took 5 officers to drop him to the ground. One put him in a choke hold and Garner gasped repeatedly "I can't breathe, I can't breathe" and he died. There had to be another way to deal with this. From my perspective as an urban high school principal, this was an easy situation to manage. There were many ways to de-escalate and resolve what appeared to be an impasse.

Jonny Gammage - 1995

In America we are watching police/victim incidents played out on video and in the news on a weekly basis. In one week, I watched Eric Garner killed by the police for no apparent reason. And I watched a video of Michael Brown lying dead in a Ferguson, MO street for over 4 hours. And I read about a 12 year old boy in Cleveland shot to death on a playground for waving his friend's plastic gun around. It appears that nothing has changed since Rodney King's beating (1991, Los Angeles) and Jonny Gammage's murder (1995, Pittsburgh).

Emmett Till - 1955

We haven't moved beyond looking in Emmett Till's casket at his deformed dead body (1955, Chicago). Remember, he was the 14 year old boy killed by two men (not police) for speaking to a white woman in a small grocery store in Mississippi. Both were acquitted at trial by an all white jury. Both admitted to the murder after they were acquitted.





Is it possible to put the hundreds of police/victim incidents into a rational context? I'm not talking about the self defense cases. Or a man waving a gun at the police. Or a gun battle. We're talking about selling cigarettes (Garner), or "driving while black" (Gammage) or walking down the middle of the street with stolen cigars (Brown). We are bombarded by a never ending stream of these stories. To watch a man murdered... and by the police.

Is it racism?  Is it fear? And why does the jury always find the people who killed the man innocent?  ALWAYS! What are we to make of this? More importantly, what are our children to make of this?

Anyone who denies racism in our society is naive, foolish, ignorant. Both blacks and whites grapple with the vestiges of over 250 years of slavery, followed by 100 years of Jim Crow, followed by 50 years of economic, education and employment inequities. 350 years of treating a race of people like they were subhuman. Conservative Americans can't understand why "blacks" can't be more like whites... more responsible. They are incapable of understanding the effects of the African-American diaspora - the effects of racism, hatred, lack of employment, poor schools, overcrowded jails and harassment on a nationwide scale. They are blind to the emasculation of black men and the sexual exploitation of black women who were enslaved on American plantations.  And they can't imagine how this 350 year history could possibly effect the behaviors of the descendents of slaves today.

Are the police racist... some are and many are not. If you watch the Garner video, you sense the police are working on a very superficial level. They want this guy to quit selling cigarettes illegally on the street. He probably is a nuisance to local businesses who made a complaint. They are beat cops who are just looking to clear this man away. Are they racist, angry or looking for a fight? The video would suggest that is not the case. They just aren't going to take no for an answer. Once the police back-up arrives, a total of 5 policemen take the man down. Now the situation takes on a life of its own... that leads to death. The police are trained to be experts at de-escalating difficult situations. They clearly failed. Would they have acted the same way with a white man... my guess is yes. In either case, is killing this man justifiable? NO. This man is selling single cigarettes (although he denies it), the police overreact to a shocking extreme and within minutes he is dead.

Anyone who denies fear in our society is simply blind. The news media, both on television and online, would have you believe that cities are crime filled sinful places. NIght after night the local and national news projects images of black men being led away by police. In isolation, this creates a worldview that is seriously skewed. The Pittsburgh Metropolitan population, primarily white, is being fed a biased and near sighted bad movie. "Blacks are poor, blacks are on drugs, blacks are on welfare, blacks commit crimes". It's an old riff that is filled with both racism and fear. I would suggest our fear is fed through perception not through experience. My acquaintances who live in the suburbs won't let their children ride the PAT buses. Why not? They live in fear.

While census data from the past 30 years indicate some signs of increasing diversity, we still remain a region deeply divided. In 1980, the average white person in the Pittsburgh metro area lived in a census tract that was over 95 percent white. In 2010, that same white person lived in a tract that was about 92 percent white. (Post-Gazette, 8/9/2012)

The are two issues that I believe contribute to the victim/police killings. The first is that many white people (including police officers) simply have no day to day interaction with diverse, middle class populations. Most live in segregated communities. In America and certainly in the Pittsburgh Metropolitan area, most communities are segregated by wealth and race. Even in the city it is not surprising to find areas where whites (and white police officers) live in segregated communities. Whether in the suburbs or isolated areas of the city, a substantial number of police officers are not engaging with middle class black citizens like themselves. Lack of day to day interactions with middle class black families causes police perceptions to be skewed to the people they meet in their jobs.  Which leads to the second problem.

By definition, an urban police force engages with populations that are in poverty, are unemployed, are less educated, are often engaged in illegal activities and suffer from mental and behavioral health issues. Thus they have a well founded fear and mistrust. And they have few positive interactions to balance their perspective.

However, the police went into their profession with a desire to keep our communities safe knowing they would interact with at risk individuals and criminals on a daily basis. They are professionals who are trained to de-escalate and solve complex problems with a minimum amount of violence. These killings, although a small percentage of the overall policing of America, are abominations, and yet they go unpunished. Cops are good, poor people are bad, you guess who gets the benefit of the doubt. This is an unhealthy situation.

---

So why did I raise this issue in The Principal's Office? Obviously it is bothering me at a visceral level. The other night I watched Jon Stewart talk about the verdict in the Eric Garner case and it brought him to tears. All he could do was scream... literally. That is what I've been feeling. What can we learn from this madness?  Well here is what I have to offer.

First, from a personal perspective, I've lived in Wilkinsburg for over 35 years and worked in city schools for that time. My family has lived, attended school and worked in integrated environments during that time. Wilkinsburg has a reputation for being poor and dangerous. Yet we don't live in fear. Just the opposite. We have friends who are diverse and have the same values that we do. We find that everyone has a simple commonality regarding safety, education, desire to move forward and families that are at the center of their life. Wilkinsburg is portrayed on the news as a terrible place, with crime, bad schools and bad people. This is a small part of a much bigger picture that never gets told. We have had a safe and rewarding life in Wilkinsburg.

Second, there are some hard facts that might temper our collective fear. The 2012 US census shows that 25.7% of black families live in poverty. That would suggest that 74% of black families are not in poverty, they have moved out of poverty, are earning a living wage and seeking a better life for their children. If you look at the trend starting in 1959 you see that black families have benefited from the growth of the middle class in our country. With the growth of a black middle class, there has been a growth in black educational attainment as well. I would suggest that our country's black population has moved forward inspite of the barriers placed in their way.

If your perceptions of black people are limited to the media, than you will be shocked by this chart showing the percentage of black families receiving public assistance. Clearly, the majority of blacks do not receive public assistance of any kind. And surprisingly about the same number of whites receive public assistance as do blacks (http://www.statisticbrain.com/welfare-statistics/).

Third, let me provide you with some insight into racism and fear from an educational perspective. Pittsburgh is a parochial town. What side of the river you live on and what community you come from often determines your world view. I began teaching in the city schools in 1979 at Brashear High School. The school's history was borne out of forced integration.

In 1971, the Pittsburgh Board of Public Education formally approved construction of the first of five proposed 9-12 Super High Schools to replace the twelve comprehensive secondary schools then owned and operated by the Pittsburgh Public Schools. John A. Brashear High School, the only Super High School to realize fruition, was to be located in the Beechview neighborhood of the South Hills and would integrate 9-12 students from Fifth Avenue Junior/Senior High School, Hill District; Gladstone Junior/Senior High School, Hazelwood; and South Hills Junior/Senior High School, Mount Washington. The undertaking of melding these distinct communities into one was not easy; however combined dedication from progressive civic leaders and educators made Brashear not only a success but, also, a model for social integration and scholastic achievement.

Brookline, Beechview and Banksville were three all white South Hills communities on the south side of the Monongahela River. The Hill District was a famous all black community on the north side of the river up the hill. It was made up of both middle class families (Sugar Top) and poorer families (Uptown, SOHO and Center Avenue). And Hazelwood was a very poor ex-steel community that was mixed race on the north side of the river in the flats. It was assumed this would be a volatile student body from a racial, economic and neighborhood perspective. This new Super High School consisted of a beautiful physical plant with amazing programs - a dry cleaning facility, a student run restaurant offering lunch for staff, a computer science magnet, an automobile mechanic and body shop, business labs and great sports teams.

I taught mathematics at Brashear for 5 years. Simply put, the integration model worked. Students were integrated in classes with high expectations for all students. Teachers from the old Fifth Avenue High School in the Hill District helped the Brashear experiment move forward. What I learned in my classroom was that adolescents are experienced based. They talk and interact with their peers and make judgements based on their interactions. Frankly, in my five years at the school, I never had a problem based on race. My colleagues who were at Brashear from the beginning stated that the school had a smooth opening. Students rallied around a great football and basketball team. The school worked. And progress was made against racial stereotypes.  When you live, eat and learn with diverse students, your mind opens up. And you begin to cut people a break.

Years later, a few of my students at Brashear, enrolled their own children in my charter school. These were both black and white parents looking to find a quality education for their children. The issue of a mixed race school was not even a concern. Quality was all that mattered. This was the second generation of students who attended a quality integrated school. Race disappeared into the background and our students were able to concentrate on what they should concentrate on: learning, growing and experiencing the richness of our world. They do not fear each other. They hope for a future that is filled with success, prosperity and peace. Many of these students live in integrated communities. And many have friends from the other race. They don't fear each other. They do fear the police.

---

I don't know if we'll ever live without fear. I believe there will always be people in power who take justice into their own hands. Man's cruelty to man is not new. Frankly, whether you are Black, Jewish, Muslim, Italian, Irish, Mexican or from any immigrant parentage, your people have suffered discrimination and violence. The currency of totalitarian states is violence.


I believe it will take many more generations living in a diverse country before we get close to equity. It certainly won't happen in my lifetime. Attitudes, beliefs and behaviors change at a snails pace. We often measure change by looking at our grandparents, our parents, ourselves and our children - generations. It's important to note that as racial differences begin to mitigate, we learn that the greatest inequity comes from lack of employment, not the color of your skin.

CBS News

Democracy demands that we engage in public discourse.

To keep sane, to sleep at night, to rise above being animals... we must testify, speak out and fight against racism, classism and blatant violence that is the result of ignorance, anger and bias. And most importantly, we must not live in fear.

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.