Michael Fiorillo at NYC Educator blog: Ivy League Union Busters, Then and Now

There is a history of tensions between college educated elite and the labor movement. Michael Fiorillo provides a good history lesson tying the Teach For America mentality towards unions today in the context of the past. For those who read it at NYC Educator but tend to forgot history, I'm cross posting to make sure you are not condemned to repeat it.

Michael's piece elicited this comment from Pogue at NYC's blog:
Wow, great piece. What a fascinating historical perspective. So, the TFA'ers aren't the first to be a part of union busting policies. Strange how past anti-war demonstrations were led by college students where nowadays we have a president whose conservative-like policies are given a pass by our youth.

 

Ivy League Union Busters, Then and Now

By special guest blogger Michael Fiorillo

Conventional wisdom holds that universities are repositories of liberalism and progressive politics, in which innocent students are indoctrinated into holding borderline deviant, un-American beliefs. Right wing authors, pundits and politicians are forever bemoaning how American universities are controlled by a liberal/left wing/anti-free market orthodoxy. And in marginal and declining humanities departments that may be the case. But a review of US labor history and current labor issues shows that in reality elite universities have often been a source of reactionary, anti-labor attitudes, policies and actions. A brief look at early 20^th century labor history, and current academic efforts associated with so-called educational reform, bear this out. While the recruitment of student strikebreakers one hundred years ago was couched in the explicit language of class warfare, today anti-labor ideologies and recruitment is spoken in the superficially milder, pseudo-scientific language of ideologically-framed education research, economics and human capital deployment. One hundred years ago, largely unorganized manual workers bore the brunt of this assault; today it is teachers and their unions.

Ralph Fasanella: “Lawrence,1912:The Bread and Roses Strike”

In one of the paintings that Ralph Fasanella did of the great Lawrence, Massachusetts, textile strike of 1912, a detail shows the state militia entering the city to help break the strike, while the strikers and their supporters are massed along the sidewalks. Standing there are three little boys, each holding signs that together read “Go Back to School.”

While the meaning of those signs may not be so clear today, at the time it was obvious to all concerned what they meant: that students from Harvard, Tufts and other elite universities in the region had willingly joined the state militia, with the support of their school’s presidents, to break the strike.

Indeed, according to Stephen Norwood, whose “The Student as Strikebreaker: College Youth and the Crisis of Masculinity in the Early 20^th  Century” (Journal of Social History, Winter, 1994), “…college students represented a major and often critically important source of strikebreakers in a wide range of industries and services.”  Student strikebreakers, often but not limited to athletes and engineering students, were involved in strikebreaking in the 1901 dockworkers strike in San Francisco (Berkeley), the 1903 Great Lakes seaman’s strike of 1903 (U of Chicago), 1903 teamster and railroad strikes in Connecticut (Yale), the 1905 IRT strike in New York City (Columbia), and many, many others. During the great strike wave that followed WWI, Princeton president John Grier Hibben told officials of the Pennsylvania Railroad that his students were “ready to serve” in the event of a railroad strike. The Boston and Maine Railroad actually placed an engine and rails on the MIT campus to help train student strikebreakers.

Today, elite colleges produce endless studies and turn out cadre to facilitate the privatization of the public schools, which occurs under catch phrases such as “the business model in education,” “school choice,” “market-friendly policies,” “social entrepreneurialism” and others. These efforts presuppose the avoidance, neutralization and ultimate elimination of teacher unions.

The fact of student strikebreaking in the early 20^th century is not so hard to understand. Unlike today, a university education was limited to a tiny percentage of the population, and the student body was composed of a homogenous group composed almost entirely of wealthy, white males who aspired to and identified with the interests and ideologies of the captains of industry at the time. According to Norwood, there was an additional overlay of obsessive concern with toughness, strength, and the “cult of masculinity” associated with Teddy Roosevelt’s “bully” persona. These tendencies combined to make it easy to see why “Employers considered students to be the most reliable strikebreakers of the period,” since their complete remove from the conditions under which working people lived at the time, combined with the prevailing attitudes of Social Darwinism, combined to make their antagonism to labor unions of a piece.

“Fight Fiercely, Harvard:” Massachusetts Militia (composed  largely of Harvard students) confronts Lawrence strikers in 1912

In fact, public and private universities at the time were so identified with monopoly capital that their very nicknames stand as signposts of their class identification: “Standard Oil University” (U of Chicago), “Southern Pacific University” (Stanford), “Pillsbury University (U of Minnesota).

Today, with the near-total collapse of private sector unionization, the last bastion of organized labor in the US is in the public sector. And among public sector unions, teacher unions have become a major focus in the effort to “reform” or “rationalize” the educational workplace, and to shape and form the “product” (aka students, according to NYC Department of education consultant and management avatar Jack Welch)) that is to be delivered to employers upon graduation. While this effort is always couched in the language of “Children First,” “The Civil Rights Movement of Our Time” or other such PR and focus group-generated slogans, the reality is that recent efforts to change public education are largely motivated by a desire to control the labor process and labor markets within and outside the schools. The language of corporate education reform rarely, and then only half-heartedly, invokes the now-quaint language of citizenship or democracy. Instead, it openly discusses the purpose of education as producing students who meet the needs of employer-dominated labor markets and a globalized, neo-liberal economy.

So, having taken a peek at the Ivy League (and other) union-busting efforts of one hundred years ago, what do we see today?

Let’s (to use only one of numerous examples) briefly look at Harvard, where in 1904 university president Charles W. Eliot described strikebreakers as “a fair type of hero.” Harvard is the currently the home of The Program on Educational Policy and Governance (PEPG), which is affiliated with the Kennedy School of Government, and has notable alumni such as Michelle Rhee (whose anti-teacher and anti-labor behavior needs no introduction) and Cami Anderson (who is currently busy privatizing and charterizing NYC’s District 79/alternative high schools).

PEPG describes itself as “a significant player in the educational reform movement” that provides “high-level training for young scholars who can make independent contributions to scholarly research… foster a national community of reform-minded scientific researchers… and produce path-breaking studies that provide a scientific basis for school reform policy.” (I’ll have some more to say on the ideological basis of the pseudo-science that forms their “scientific research”)

A quick look at their Advisory Committee and major funders, shows it to be made up almost entirely of pro-privatization and anti-labor individuals and groups. Its funders include foundations such as the Walton Family Foundation, Bradley Foundation, Olin Foundation, Milton and Rose Friedman Foundation and the William E. Simon Foundation. Its Advisory Committee includes Jeb Bush and a host of investment bank, hedge fund and private equity interests. Its affiliates include the Thomas B. Fordham Foundation, The Hoover Institute and The Heritage Foundation (with the Brookings Institute thrown in for a bi-partisan gloss). While claiming to be independent and non-partisan, it in fact espouses and is dominated by the free-market fundamentalism that has served the US so very well in recent years, and is now (to use a term from the Wall Street backers of corporate ed reform)) engaging in a hostile takeover of the public schools.

Studies and reports by the PEPG show an obsession with vouchers, charters, merit pay, the “inefficiencies” and failures of collective bargaining, and other “market friendly” topics and policies. While ostensibly using the scientific method, the entire premise of their research is based on assuming as a given the existence of so-called self-regulating markets: in other words, unquestioned assumptions and ideology masked as science, and a latter-day counterpart to the 19^th century medical “science” that strove to “prove” the efficacy of bleeding as a medical procedure.  A 2009 paper co-authored by PEPG director Paul Peterson purported to “scientifically” show how for-profit school management companies were superior to both traditional public schools and non-profit school management entities. Independent and non-partisan, indeed.

The PEPG’s 1998-99 Annual Report, in a prominent sidebar to an article entitled “Do Unions Aid Education Reform?” (I bet you can guess their answer to that one), stated that collective bargaining and unions “reduce the diversity of instructional methods, reduce low-and high-ability test scores” and “increase high school dropout rates.” Sounds scientific, no?

Unlike the early 20^th century, union busting emerging from the academy no longer takes place at the (literal) point of a gun, as in Lawrence. At least, not yet. Instead, it is done in calm, measured, reasonable-sounding tones, using the façade of faux scientific inquiry, and by creating an academic, philanthropic (or in this case, malanthropic might be a more accurate term) and media echo chamber that endlessly repeats its unexamined assumptions, half-truths and outright distortions. Additionally, in the realm of real world practice we have the union-busting efforts of Teach For America (founded by Princeton grad Wendy Kopp, and recruiting exclusively among graduates of elite colleges and universities), which happily supplied replacement workers (aka scabs) for the schools in post-Katrina New Orleans, where the entire teaching force was summarily fired.

While it would be grossly inaccurate, and is nowhere near my intention, to tar all college students, professors and administrators with an anti-labor, anti-humanistic brush, the reflexive assumption that universities are always exemplars of social progress is due for some revision and skepticism. That elite universities should be so complicit in the ongoing destruction of public education is a cruel paradox that exemplifies the many dilemmas teachers face today.

History, however, should teach us not to be too surprised.

Antonucci - the 13th Russian Spy?

I often call out Mike Antonucci on his selective research and reporting - always designed to show teacher unions at their worst - with the words, "I know, Mike, I know, showing the other side of the coin is not your beat." It is his beat to show a union stealing a dime while ignoring when people running schools steal millions.

I like this comment by Leonie Haimson on his latest work for EdNext:

I wonder if Antonucci and/or Ed Next will next analyze how much the Billionaire's boys club, plus DFER, ERN, EEP and all their associated networks of hedge fund networks spent on lobbying and campaigns. Don't hold your breath!
.....I'm sure these conservative groups far outspend the teacher unions in the category of "research" as well.

This story reminds me of the NY Post making a big deal over UFT campaign contributions to Bill Perkins while ignoring the massive charter school contributions to politicians who support charter schools. (Have the attacks on Perkins by charter school proponents and the fact that they are funding his opponent in the primary caused him to disappear from the charter school wars?)

Mike is a funny guy and here he tops himself.
From the press release (Norms Notes):

Antonucci follows the money and the impact it has on policy.

Which money is Antonucci following? He must be a slow reader as he apparently hasn't gotten to Diane Ravitch's chapter on The Billionaire Boys Club. Now there are a few bucks he should be following that have real influence on policy. Ahhh, not his beat. Just make the union nickels and dimes look like boogeymen.

He gets into Jon Stewart hilarity territory with this one:

"The Long Reach of Teachers Unions: Using money to win friends and influence policy,” featured in the Fall 2010 edition of the Education Next journal, Antonucci also reveals that teachers unions have become a force in matters beyond education policy, including weighing in on domestic policy issues such as taxation, healthcare, gay marriage and redistricting.

“The unions’ influence over education policy is well known, but their influence over government is not. Teachers unions are by the largest political contributors,” said Antonucci.

Gee, he left out the real influence we have - whether to use Charmin or Scott toilet paper. Oh, sorry, I forgot. We don't even have a say in that.

Yeah, this Race To The Top stuff and non-unionized charter school takeovers shows just how much teacher unions influence policy. I must be living in an alternate universe.


Leonie continues:

See new EdNext analysis by Mike Antonucci of how much teacher unions spent on political campaigns in 2007-8. Full study here:

http://educationnext.org/the-long-reach-of-teachers-unions/ You can also comment on the page if you register first.

Press release (Norms Notes)

Interestingly, despite all the fear-mongering from the NY tabloids, in NY State, the NY teachers unions spent less than $5 per teacher on politics, compared to more than $100 per teacher in states like Oregon($356.60), Colorado ($173.98), Montana ($141.74), Utah ($140.60) and South Dakota ($132.15). California spent $41.21 per teacher, and even Texas outspent NY ($2.24 compared to $2.18).

NY was outspent in most of the 22 "right-to-work" states like Texas; (for a list see http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Right-to-work_law) in which cannot compel teachers to pay union dues. The only states that spent less per teacher were DC, Florida, Georgia and Vermont.

The article also points out that the NEA supports EPIC and Great lakes research institutes, which have issued critiques of some of the unreliable studies that were financed by the Gates, Broad and Walton foundations.

Or for that matter, the Hoover Institute, the conservative "think tank" that publishes Education Next, ( full disclosure: Ed Next published a radically edited letter from me without my consent a few years back.)

I'm sure these conservative groups far outspend the teacher unions in the category of "research" as well.

Leonie Haimson

Commenting on Randi Weingarten National Sellout Tour

Our posting Randi Weingarten Continues Her National Sell-out Tour raised some comments on ICE mail:


Bill
I have heard a lot of people complain about Randi selling out the union but what's her motivation, what does she have to gain. Does it help her political career or is she just doing what every petty dictator needs to do in order to survive. Wouldn't it be easier for her to do the right thing?

Norm
She may think she is doing the right thing from her point of view. Making the union a partner rather than antagonist goes way beyond Randi and if you read the Tough Liberal book you will see Shanker laid the seeds.

After '68 the union had no stomach for going through confrontations. But for Randi there is the added element of personal glory as she tries to be viewed as a so-called progressive leader. Which translates into selling out.

Lisa
The privatizing forces and money that are against the "real" reform of public urban education are VERY strong. Randi knows this. It will take building a movement and awareness of the general public as well as teachers. Union leaders do not see themselves as movement leaders...they see themselves as "managing the members" to get the best they can for them at this point in time and also staying in power themselves.

Michael
I'd also add that Randi wants it both ways: to be seen as a "progressive unionist" and as a "collaborator" (her term) with management. But something's got to give when there's that kind of contradiction. And guess which one it is?

The members interests get short shrift, because "collaborating" gives her more credibility in the eyes of the Important People whom she seems need validation from. Additionally, it advances her career in ways that truly representing the interests of teachers and students would not.

I don't know if you've ever heard her speak of herself as a combination of John Dewey and Samuel Gompers; she's done it more than once at the DA. The totally-off self-perception is enough to make you wince but it says a lot about how she sees herself. Sadly, the reality for teachers is far different.

Angel
Thanks Bill for your question. I am sure many are grappling with that one also.

I agree with the above.

AND would add that we can characterize the UFT/AFT/NEA as:

-business unionists who sell its members a service. We pay them to manage us for the interests of the corporate sectors.

They are the professional corporate CEO unionists who will manage us and put the militancy and grassroots struggles in deep-check. The necessary strategy of mobilizing & organizing the membership will not be done because in addition to threaten the powers that be, also threaten their bureaucratic CONTROL over their members. Instead of militancy, these bureaucrats only sell us futile strategies of lobbying and backing so-called "sympathetic" candidates in elections.

• - top-down bureaucrats
• - in bed with government, management and corporate sectors
• - complicit with promoting right wing reactionary foreign policies
• - undemocratic well-paid labor aristocrats (making 6-figure salaries - close to the 1/2 million dollar range) who are out of touch with their rank and file
• - co-opters & saboteurs of grassroots democratic struggles to improve education and worker/teacher rights.
• - their income levels and comfort zones keep them more in tune with the corporate sectors
• - opportunistic dues-suckers (literal translation of chupa-cuotas term from Puerto Rico) which better translates with something like Dues-Vampires or Dues- Vultures. The AFT served to sabotage the progressive education struggles in Puerto Rico -- that is why the FMPR disaffiliated successfully in 2005.
• - pro-war & militarism (and zionism, I believe)
• - ideologically see capitalism as the answer to our societal ills. As anti-socialists, they will rebait viciously whenever it suits their needs. They are in essence class-collaborationists who sell out the working class interests.

Besides Great Salaries from our dues, seats at the corporate tables, great perks for their stooges and cronies, how else does the AFT/uft leadership benefit? The AFT/UFT helps to union bust and balkanize schools with their support for charters -- how will they benefit from these in the long term? Can our union & locals be tranformed from within? What is our strategy to transform our union to a defender of rank & file & community interests????

It would be good to have a workshop or forum on these important questions and what Bill raises. I am sure many of us have begun to or have studied these union characterizations and questions that apply to our AFL-CIO and other federated union formations. There should be analyses and critiques of that we can collectively study, publicize and disseminate especially to new recruits to our democratic progressive dissident wing.

Deb Meier on Teacher Unions and KIPP

From The Nation

TEACHERS' UNION

I'm rarely cheerful these days about matters that relate to schooling in America. But the decision by teachers at a KIPP NYC school to join the United Federation of Teachers, joining two other KIPP schools where the teachers are already union members, lifted my spirits. As the favorite flavor of school reform these days, KIPP (Knowledge Is Power Program) is perhaps the fastest-growing charter school network in the country. The organization of KIPP, which some schools are resisting, suggests that even those teachers attracted to "boot camp" reforms can see that America's young people shouldn't be in the hands of Ivy League volunteers who dedicate a few years "in passing" to education. Precisely out of loyalty to their students and to KIPP, some have begun to see teaching as a lifetime commitment that requires teachers' voices to be heard. A young KIPP teacher told me that he and his colleagues were looking to revise some aspects of the KIPP model as they became more experienced.

The organization of KIPP teachers refutes those who relentlessly and falsely suggest that unionism is a crutch only for weak teachers, or that without collective bargaining we'd easily produce good schooling for one and all. In some fifteen Southern states, teachers are denied the right to collective bargaining--and those states are among the lowest educational performers in the nation. What these KIPP teachers are telling us is that the best schools, regardless of their pedagogical philosophies, are those in which powerful and unafraid adults join the young to create powerful and unafraid schools.

DEBORAH MEIER

Teachers as Organizers @ NYCORE

Nothing will change in the UFT or the DOE unless teachers get active and involved as organizers and agents of change starting at their own school level, whether in the classroom or in the UFT. A

And there will be little change unless younger teachers get involved. We often find very dedicated teachers are wary of the union or outrightly hostile, viewing it as anti-children. While we have been extremely critical of the UFT, we are also extremely pro-union and feel an influx of these teachers into a movement for change within the UFT will have an impact. We must reverse some of the anti-teacher union propaganda. But we must also build a more progressive union to make their involvement more meaningful.

So if some of these teachers float on by this blog,I ask: Feel isolated in your school environment? Change begins by starting to work with other people who feel like you do. Here is an opportunity to get started through the upcoming NYCORE ITAG (Inquiry to Action Group) on labor.

I and Angel Gonzalez from ICE (Angel's 4th year teacher daughter has been working with NYCORE this year) are going to attend as many of these Thursday evening sessions as possible, starting with Jan. 22, which we hope we can combine with the big conference on organizing in the UFT at CUNY (details later in the week.)

The duality of NYCORE's announcement below which ties union organizing to the classroom experience has some interesting possibilities. I have questions myself as to exactly what this might mean.

NYCORE's announcement:

What organizing lessons can we learn from the labor movement in order to create a collective work ethic in our students and ourselves? This inquiry to action group will provide a setting for educators to reflect on the role that educators play as organizers in their classrooms and as union members. We will explore how power dynamics affect our government, communities, school system, schools and classrooms through analyzing labor organizing strategies and campaigns as a way to break down power dynamics for us as educators and for examples to share with our students. We will discuss readings, ideas, and materials to help us find new ways to bring these ideas into our classrooms and connect our students to current movements. In addition to looking at global and local collective actions and campaigns, we will explore some turning points in the history of the UFT and challenge ourselves to reflect on our own orientation to the union as individuals and as part of a collective of social justice educators.

Facilitators: Rosie Frascella is a former labor organizer, a teacher at the High School for International Business and Finance and a member of NYCoRE working group NYQueer.

Seth Rader is a teacher at the James Baldwin School and a core member of NYCoRE.

Click on leaflet to enlarge

Location: James Baldwin Academy, 351 West 18th St
Dates: Thursdays 6-8PM.
1/22, 1/29, 2/5, 2/12, 2/26, 3/5, and the finale on 3/13.

Register at NYCORE and check out the other ITAGs.

Want to know more?
On Friday Jan. 16 from 6-8, NYCORE will be holding an ITAG kickoff event at NYU.

Contact them for details.

Teacher Unions and the UAW

Why Teachers Have an Interest in the Survival of the US Auto Industry

GUEST EDITORIAL

By Michael Fiorillo, Chapter Leader, Newcomers High School

The fate of the US auto industry, and particularly General Motors, has been much in the news lately. The pitiful performance of auto executives appearing before Congress with their begging cups, the morality play of their flying in private corporate jets to Washington to plead for taxpayer assistance, has become a rallying cry for people who are appalled at the long lines of executives seeking corporate welfare. People are rightfully upset that incompetence and dishonesty in business are being tolerated, if not rewarded, by their tax dollars. Oddly, though, most of the anger and calls for discipline have been directed at Detroit, rather than the banking and securities industry. What are some of the deeper reasons and assumptions behind this, and what are the implications for teachers?

This may seem like a strange topic to bring up on a blog that mostly concerns itself with educational issues. But in fact the fate of unionized teachers is now closely intertwined with the fate of the UAW. The reason is that, just as anti-union forces are calling for letting GM go bankrupt – which would lead to the nullification of contracts between the Big Three and the UAW – emerging fiscal crises for states and localities will energize forces that have been calling for the elimination of tenure, work rules, defined benefit pensions and union representation altogether for educators. In this sense, the fate of unionized autoworkers and teachers are joined. The attacks on the unionized auto workforce – coded in statements by senators from right-to-work states and financial industry types – are a prelude to what educators will be facing shortly as states and localities grapple with collapsing tax revenues and financial crises. It’s a scenario right out of Naomi Klein’s Shock Doctrine: those with their hands on the levers of power will use crisis and disruption to implement policies that they could never have otherwise achieved.

First, a disclaimer: while the industrial base of the US must be preserved – and the auto industry is its core – that doesn’t mean that Detroit can continue with business as usual. Auto management must be replaced, and the industry must re-tool in order to produce reliable, fuel-efficient vehicles that people want to buy. The industry must also be reconfigured for production geared toward less reliance on cars and toward investment in mass transit. However, finance capital must not be allowed to fatten itself on the carcass of the auto industry, otherwise we will see investment bankers earning huge fees to dismantle auto plants and ship them to Mexico, China and elsewhere. Additionally, the federal government must resolve the health care crisis, which accounts for a large part of Detroit’s competitive disadvantage.

Much of the moralizing about letting the auto industry go under masks a deep-seated antagonism to union standards and worker rights. Critics of Detroit openly say that autoworker wages and benefits must immediately fall to the levels paid by Toyota, Honda, et. al. in their non-union plants in the South. This overlooks the fact that the wages workers enjoy in those plants are entirely dependent upon and follow from the wages established by years of struggle by the UAW. We could call it the Invisible Hand of labor economics. Non-union auto workers, and non-union factory workers in general, only get what they do because of the scales and standards established by the UAW. Here in NYC, non-union construction workers only get the wages they do because of the scales established by the organized trades. Likewise in education, the pay, benefits and working conditions in non-unionized schools track – at a lower rate – the scales established by the union. Take away the protections earned by unionized workers – whether they be teachers, electricians or auto workers – and you will quickly see a “race to the bottom” with employers going on the offensive to lower their cost structures and exert absolute control over the work lives of their employees.

People must question the fact that, while Wall Street and the banks have literally been given blank checks by the Treasury Department and the Federal Reserve Bank – money that has not been used to lend to the real economy but has instead been used to buy up competitors and strengthen balance sheets – Detroit, which has asked for a mere fraction of what the financial industry has had thrown at it, must jump through hoops to obtain a fraction of the needed funds. When you think about it, Congress seems to be saying that when an industry is run by criminals, parasites and predators (Wall St.) rather than idiots (Detroit), it is deserving of special consideration.

Ultimately, saving the auto industry is even in Wall Street’s interest, although their short term greed blinds them to that reality, for what will happen to the parasites and predators when they kill off the remaining hosts and prey? Who will continue to buy their junk and pay their mutual fund management fees?

So, teachers and other school workers, don’t fall into the trap of supporting attacks on “lazy” and “spoiled” auto workers, and how they must be subjected to the discipline of the market. Those arguments are being turned against us, and the screams will become louder.


FOLLOW-UP
Giving credence to the points Michael makes, Fred Klonsky posts this video of Congressman Mark Kirk urging the use of bankrupting GM to bust the UAW contracts.

More on Detroit Union Elections: Steve Conn and Heather Miller Get Jobs Back

Both Steve Conn and Heather Miller recently go their jobs back after being fired for participating in a rally.

See http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7lpkyNHYZck for the press conference on the law suit.

Steve Conn was an activist in Teamsters Local 688 and Teamsters for a Democratic Union in St.Louis in the in the 1980's. He is now a supporter of the civil rights group BAMM and current candidate for President of the Detroit Teachers Union. He recently spoke on the panel on "Defense of Public Education in the USA" which was part of the AFT Peace And Justice Caucus events at the American Federation of Teachers, AFL-CIO convention last July in Chicago.

So what's going on in Detroit with a slate of pro Green Dot so-called "reformers" (see post previous to this) and Steve Conn running in the Detroit teacher union elections? I'm efforting to get more info and will post an update attached to this post when I do.

And of course, there is the questions of whether there will still be a Detroit if the auto industry goes bust.

The Next Line of Attack on Teacher Unions: TFA Slates Run in Union Elections?

The Detroit News is urging support for a group of pro charter school teachers who are running a slate in the Detroit Teacher Union elections. Under the title of "Reform-minded Detroit teachers deserve help" - you know the drill: "Reform Minded" is code for "the union and teachers are the problem" – the article goes on to say

[Teachers] Crowley and Turner have organized the Detroit Children First slate. Made up of 19 diverse classroom teachers, it faces the current union President Virginia Cantrell and a host of other candidates.

The Children First slate's goal is two-fold: First, to begin a reform conversation among teachers who too often are ignored by the district's dysfunctional, bloated bureaucracy. Second, to create its own charter school. Its model: the Green Dot Schools, a Los Angeles nonprofit network of unionized charter high schools that is proving poor, urban and minority students can reach the same academic heights as their white and suburban peers do.

Children First? Sound familiar to Joel Klein's "Children Last" initiatives? Think there's a chance there is some connection to Teach for America?

You can read all about Green Dot's contracts with teachers in Michael Fiorillo's excellent post on ICE-mail: "The UFT and Green Dot Schools : Pragmatic Unionism or Trojan Horse?"

Is this the next level of attack – run in union elections. If we see this popping up in other cities, what organization is capable of mounting such an effort? It starts with a "T" and ends with an "A." Of course it would be surreptitious, but don't be surprised to find some high end political consultants giving such slates advice.

Will we see a pro-Rhee slate in union elections in DC? We saw lots of blog chatter this summer from some of these teachers ("Oh, my car is packed in July so I can run into school early to get ready.") One of the most vociferous pro Rhee ("I love her outside the box thinking. She has thought of a new way around the stubborn WTU - just eliminate the need to work with them altogether!") anti-union bloggers recently announced she had had it and was quitting, never to go back to teaching again.

My guess is they are wasting their time because even newer teachers who last beyond 2 or 3 years see the anti-teacher handwriting on the wall. We are beginning to see that happening in NYC was some of the TFA and Teaching Fellows are emerging from their years of learning and intense studying for their Masters to begin to want to learn more about the union.

As a matter of fact, I'm giving a presentation to a group of these teachers tomorrow at the Justice Not Just Tests group.

Of course in NYC we won't see such a slate run in the UFT elections since the UFT is in proper alignment with so much of the Joel Klein/Michael Bloomberg program. Mayor Mike is showing his appreciation by introducing Randi Weingarten at a big shindig in DC.

Randi watchers are sitting back to see how Randi, with her speak-out-of-5-sides-of-her-mouth tendencies," handles the Rhee situation. A recent NY Times article on Rhee by Sam Dillon, talked about a confrontation between Randi and Rhee.

In May, hundreds of people at a convention of educational entrepreneurs here watched spellbound as Ms. Weingarten, a commanding presence onstage, and Ms. Rhee, challenging her from the floor, clashed over what should happen to tenured teachers whom no schools hire.

Randi? A commanding presence on stage? And Rhee challenging her from the floor? Reminds me of my old days at the Delegate Assembly.

I'll bet Randi's response to Rhee wasn' t much, though she can throw the words around to make it appear so. Appearance over reality. One thing we can expect: there will be some militant rhetoric from the AFT, but not much action.

I posted the complete Detroit article on Norms Notes.

Digging at the Underbelly of Teacher Unions

The stuff going on in Washington DC with new teachers attacking career teachers for not going along with Michelle Rhee's offer to end job security for more money may just be the war for the future of teacher unions. This is a complex issue that requires more analysis than I'm willing to give it right now. The attacks on DC union Pres. George Parker for sending out a reminder to teachers that they are not required to go into school early are pretty astounding. Check out this blog and some of the comments - a comedy routine can be written. George Carlin, where are you?

The real underbelly of most teacher unions is that they are truly undemocratic. We've seen that in places like our own UFT and in Chicago, where cooperative, collegial, and collaborative unions have gone along with the corporate plan. Are they worried about an attack of youthful Teach for America zombies out to cut the guts from the union? Is this a cadre being egged on by the EEP thought police?

My guess is that the DC (and Denver) scenario will start playing itself out in urban unions, which are mostly AFT. Don't discount Randi Weingarten's nimbleness in making all sides feel she agrees with them. But the long-time prospect for teacher unions to withstand the onslaught from without and within is not looking too well. Oh, the undemocratic leaderships will consolidate power and do what it takes to keep control even if it takes giving them what they want. But the rank and file is looking mighty ill these days. See New York City.

For progressive, career oriented teachers who have a full understanding of what is going on, yet are also opposed to a dictatorial union, there has to be some level of ambivalence.

Creating 5th Columns Inside Teacher Unions

The next wrinkle in the assault on teacher unions and public education will be to create a 5th Column* of teachers within unions that advocate for the end of tenure in exchange for higher pay. Job retention would be based on student performance on high stakes tests.

Though some are anonymous, I would bet that many of these teachers have connections to Teach for America and have no intentions of staying in the system for any length of time. They have also been inculcated with a bias against career teachers.

Thus, the wars begin. Right now the chief battleground is Washingon DC, where TFA alum Michelle Rhee, who formerly worked for Joel Klein in NYC, is leading the assault. Internal battles are also taking place in Denver.

But don't expect any of this to occur in the UFT because the leadership itself functions as a 5th column and there is no need to create a divisive group there since they have functioned in a collaborationist manner. Thus the opposition, who are branded as divisive by the leadership, has consisted of people calling for a stop to the givebacks.

I remember issuing a challenge to find NYC teachers who support the policies of BloomKlein. Where are the blogs of support while there are so many blogs out there that are critical? Many of these bloggers are career teachers who demonstrate in their blogs indications that they are supremely dedicated to their students and to teaching.

At one point a someone who left comments under various names like Socrates claimed to be a NYC teacher who defended the entire TFA/KIPP/BloomKlein package but was so clearly a phony, he was soon exposed. He even ran a blog briefly and left comments at many ed blogs. Many suspected he was being paid.

But why pay a phony teacher when you can find teachers without a career perspective to lead the fight for the corporate privatizers and anit-unionists within their own unions?

Not that there are not a number of new teacher blogs in NYC, many of them from TFA and Teaching Fellows. But they have not generally been political, but more directed at the teaching experience.

One particular example of this genre that we should expect to see a lot more of is D.C. Teacher Chic in Washington. The blog has been out there for 2 years and promised an insight into a classroom in a DC school. But there are precious few posts giving us these insights while the overwhelming majority of posts fall into a political area, mostly in support of the Michelle Rhee agenda. There are also a bunch of supporting blogs out there with lots of attacks on senior teachers for not being willing to go along with the program.

But the DC teachers union is so weak from previous scandals, it shouldn't take much to undermine it. If any of these teachers were to stay in teaching, which I believe they won't, it wouldn't be shocking to see an opposition come together to challenge the union leadership on the grounds it's not willing to give up hard won teacher rights.

Teacher unions seem outflanked and outspent by a sophisticated corporate attack. A basic lack of democratic input and leaderships out to serve themselves rather than the members leave them extremley vulnerable. The UFT, which has been considered the most powerful, is already basically a head without much of a body. As long as dues flow in to keep them in power, expect then to compromise and collaborate. Only the growth of a serious opposition movement can put a check on these trends. And if such a movement ever got started to be a serious threat, watch whoever is in charge of the DOE do whatever it could to aid and abet keeping Unity Caucus in control. But we're a long way from that.

Here are some articles and blog pieces worth checking out from DC and Denver where groups of teachers are calling on the union leadership to agree with the so-called "reforms" that would lead to the end of a real teacher movement.

Bait and Switch In DC

Teacher John Thompson writes at A. Russo's TWIE

What could be wrong with Michelle Rhee's proposed $70,000 per year teacher pay increase, in return for a year of probation? Lots, as it turns out. First off, the plan doesn't include a neutral party in the due process role, which could endanger teachers. Second, it would undercut contracts throughout the country. Last but not least, there's no guarantee the resources would last. And then what? Would Rhee perpetually pass the hat for permanent wage increases? Bonuses and salary increases for teachers have a strange way of drying up after a few years. --

John Thompson

Teachers to March on Union Offices

Washington Post, Aug 13

A group of D.C. public school teachers who want Chancellor Michelle A. Rhee's salary proposal to come to a union vote say they will demonstrate outside of Washington Teachers' Union headquarters at 9 a.m. tomorrow. The protest is being promoted on the blog D.C. Teacher Chic, and several teachers have told The Washington Post of their plans to participate.

The teachers are upset by reports that union president George Parker is opposed to a provision of Rhee's plan that would require instructors to go on probation for a year and risk dismissal in order to remain in the top tier of proposed salaries and bonuses. The pay schedule could yield more than $100,000 annually for teachers with just five years of service.

Teachers also have the option under Rhee's system of taking less money and retaining tenure protections.

The union has been battling internally over Rhee's proposal, with some members initially upset that Parker would consider negotiating away seniority protections. They criticized the president for being too chummy with the chancellor. Tomorrow's protest will reflect those teachers who believe Rhee's proposals present an opportunity rather than a threat.

Holes in NEA’s Denver Doughnut Diplomacy

The Denver Classroom Teachers Association is in a contract dispute with the school district. It is gaining national attention because the major point of contention involves the future of the city’s unique performance pay program.

That’s the standard plot you’ll find in any story about the dispute. But there’s a subplot as well. It involves a group of teachers who think their own union is being obstructionist on the contract. They have set up a web site, and have 287 teacher signatures on a petition calling for a settlement.

Teacher Jessica Buckley says the union is reacting to the opposition. “I honestly felt very intimidated,” she told Rocky Mountain News reporter Nancy Mitchell. Mitchell explains that Buckley “cited the presence of the National Education Association and envelopes of cash given to schools as ‘incentives’ for teachers to pass out fliers explaining the union’s side of the dispute.”

Mike Antonucci's Intercepts.

*a group of people who clandestinely undermine a larger group to which it is expected to be loyal, such as a nation. - Wikipedia

The attack on teacher unions...

..... is broad-based and international - Lois Weiner put together an excellent presentation at the Teachers Unite forum last week and I hope to have the video up in a few weeks.

Naturally, one aspect is money. Non-union teachers can be paid less - don't be fooled by 125K salaries - the numbers still don't compute in terms of time. The other costs associated with contracts are health care, preps, and class size and other aspects.

But it goes beyond to the ability of organized unions (not the UFT, of course) to drive a progressive education agenda by mobilizing people.

Teachers are the point people all over the world in bringing information to the mass of people and are viewed as potentially dangerous to any agenda unless they can be controlled through fear and intimidation. That's the Taliban assassinate teachers, especially those working with girls. And why teachers in Mexico have been murdered. This is echoed all over the world where teachers are amongst the leaders of progressive movements - except here.*

Thus the real reason for the attack on tenure and senior teachers, people who are the most capable and knowledgeable in terms of resisting the idiot ed ideas being fostered on them.

They want teachers to respond when they are told at 12 midnight that it is really noon to say, "Where are my sunglasses?"

*[Analysing the Kahlenberg "Tough Liberal" book on Al Shanker with supplemental reading goes a way to explaining a lot.]