As teachers aligned themselves more and more closely with the labor movement, collective bargaining emerged as the means for determining teacher contracts. In 1961New York City teachers elected to collectively bargain their contracts, with the United Federation of Teachers (AFT affiliate)operating as their agent. This idea quickly spread throughout most school districts in the United States and Union membership skyrocketed.
PROS-
- Teachers are all treated equally.
- It permits teachers to increase their "fringe benefits," particularly during lean years when raises cannot be afforded and school districts need to satisfy the unions.
- It gives teachers a very powerful seat at the table during discussions on educational policy.
CONS-
- It forces school districts to make long term, more expensive concessions in exchange for short term savings. This hurts teachers and students.
- It can be unnecessary since most of the major points in the teacher contract are now granted by virtue of state law, and not the collective bargaining process.
- It hurts the profession of teaching by treating educators like factory workers instead of academic professionals.
Early in its history, collective bargaining was viewed as a way to unite teachers against administrators that had for years discriminated against and underappreciated its work force. Many proponents of collective bargaining will point to the early history of collective bargaining, and the subsequent improvement to teacher working conditions, as justification for its existence in today's reality. Collective bargaining also spawns things like the unified teacher salary schedule, which many proponents might look to as a benefit (to form your own opinion view the blog entry on said topic). Many also argue that collective bargaining is what gives teachers and unions their power when discussions of edcuational policy arise in a community.
Myron Lieberman, early champion of teacher collective bargaining, has since written several books on how collective bargaining has ended up damaging the profession. It drains valuable resources into contractual obligations (i.e. mandatory professional development days for teachers cost an estimated $84 per student per year, you can do the math on how much extra money that could be in your pocket; restrictions on teachers covering duty stations require principals to hire additional aides and other support staff). Many teachers enjoy these benefits without realizing that they come at a price and that this money could be used to pay them more and recruit and retain more talented teachers. Much of what is collectively bargained in teacher contracts, from planning periods to health benefits, have unintended consequences that cost school districts, and ultimately teachers and students, billions.
The state of Georgia does not collectively bargain their teacher contracts and currently their teachers salaries are rated #3 in the country in the salary comfort index (www.teacherportal.com), which factors in cost of living. Teachers at charter schools, which do not collectively bargain, often enjoy higher salaries then their collective bargaining counterparts.
Many also argue that collective bargaining classifies the teaching profession as more like a factory worker, where everyone is equally valuable (except for seniority) and equally replaceable without reward for innovation or creativity, and less like the academic professions of lawyers, doctors, and engineers that do not collectively bargain.
Further Reading:
http://www.hks.harvard.edu/pepg/PDF/Papers/BetterBargain.pdf
http://www.performanceincentives.org/data/files/directory/ConferencePapersNews/Hannaway_et_al_2008.pdf
http://www.educationsector.org/usr_doc/FrozenAssets.pdf
In the News:
As was seen in Florida with Senate Bill 6, collective bargaining is powerless in the face of changes to state laws. We must ask ourselves, as professional educators, is it more important to get involved in reforms at the state level or at the bargaining table?
http://jacksonville.com/news/florida/2010-03-24/story/florida-senate-passes-overhaul-teacher-contracts
More current news about collective bargaining and teacher contracts:
http://jacksonville.com/news/metro/2010-08-09/story/school-board-wants-discuss-end-some-teacher-raises
Monday, July 26, 2010
Tuesday, July 6, 2010
Unified Teacher Salary Schedule
Across the country states and school districts currently use a Unified Teacher Salary Schedule, or "grid", to determine a teacher's pay. The factors that determine salary increases are years of service and advanced degrees.
PROS:
- Teachers are guaranteed a certain salary.
- Teachers are encouraged to pursue advanced degrees.
- Teacher raises at the bottom of the "grid" usually lead to increases across the board.
- Teachers are rewarded for the amount of time they serve in the system.
- Makes budget projections easier on school boards and administrators.
CONS:
- Hard-working young teachers are more likely to pursue career opportunities that compensate their talent and extra effort.
- Attempts to entice more qualified new teachers (especially in math and science) become too costly as all salaries in the grid must then increase.
- Strips the system of accountability as all teachers are compensated the same regardless of effort or outcomes.
- Pays teachers the same no matter the difficulty of their subject matter.
- Creates a mentality that denegrates the educator profession by not treating teachers like other academic professionals.
The argument for the unified salary schedule is simple, its proponents believe that because time served and advanced degrees are the only thing that educators can control, then it should be the sole basis for their compensation. They claim it is unfair to base a teacher's salary on other variables that they believe hinder student performance and are out of the control of the teacher, like the socioeconomic background of their students. Opponents of this method of compensation take a broader view of what is within the control of educators.
Opponents believe that educators across the country have proven that increased effort and skill on the part of the teacher can be quantified. No matter the socioeconmoic background of the student, quality teaching will lead to increased student performance and they believe that educators should be compensated based, in part, on this measure. They believe that a unified salary structure hurts the education system by offering incentives to teachers that use their flex time working on advanced degrees (especially degrees that are not in the field of education) instead of focusing on current student achievement. They believe it also deters young and talented individuals from pursuing a career in education (especially in math and science) because they can advance much more quickly in other sectors where their creativity and talent will be compensated accordingly, no matter the amount of time they have been with their organization. Some also argue that it creates the perception that teachers are like assembly line workers, all of equal value and easily replaced. They believe that this pay structure, instead of being compensated like doctors, engineers or other academic professionals, has damaged the status of professional educators.
Further Reading:
http://repository.upenn.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1144&context=gse_pubs
http://www.heartland.org/policybot/results/14817/How_Teachers_Are_Paid_The_Salary_Grid.html
http://www.psrf.org/gur/gur20.3wenders.jsp
News from around the country:
In Washington D.C. removing the salary grid led to a 21% raise in teacher salaries and the opportunity to earn more.
http://voices.washingtonpost.com/dcschools/2010/06/council_approves_teachers_cont.html?hpid=newswell
PROS:
- Teachers are guaranteed a certain salary.
- Teachers are encouraged to pursue advanced degrees.
- Teacher raises at the bottom of the "grid" usually lead to increases across the board.
- Teachers are rewarded for the amount of time they serve in the system.
- Makes budget projections easier on school boards and administrators.
CONS:
- Hard-working young teachers are more likely to pursue career opportunities that compensate their talent and extra effort.
- Attempts to entice more qualified new teachers (especially in math and science) become too costly as all salaries in the grid must then increase.
- Strips the system of accountability as all teachers are compensated the same regardless of effort or outcomes.
- Pays teachers the same no matter the difficulty of their subject matter.
- Creates a mentality that denegrates the educator profession by not treating teachers like other academic professionals.
The argument for the unified salary schedule is simple, its proponents believe that because time served and advanced degrees are the only thing that educators can control, then it should be the sole basis for their compensation. They claim it is unfair to base a teacher's salary on other variables that they believe hinder student performance and are out of the control of the teacher, like the socioeconomic background of their students. Opponents of this method of compensation take a broader view of what is within the control of educators.
Opponents believe that educators across the country have proven that increased effort and skill on the part of the teacher can be quantified. No matter the socioeconmoic background of the student, quality teaching will lead to increased student performance and they believe that educators should be compensated based, in part, on this measure. They believe that a unified salary structure hurts the education system by offering incentives to teachers that use their flex time working on advanced degrees (especially degrees that are not in the field of education) instead of focusing on current student achievement. They believe it also deters young and talented individuals from pursuing a career in education (especially in math and science) because they can advance much more quickly in other sectors where their creativity and talent will be compensated accordingly, no matter the amount of time they have been with their organization. Some also argue that it creates the perception that teachers are like assembly line workers, all of equal value and easily replaced. They believe that this pay structure, instead of being compensated like doctors, engineers or other academic professionals, has damaged the status of professional educators.
Further Reading:
http://repository.upenn.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1144&context=gse_pubs
http://www.heartland.org/policybot/results/14817/How_Teachers_Are_Paid_The_Salary_Grid.html
http://www.psrf.org/gur/gur20.3wenders.jsp
News from around the country:
In Washington D.C. removing the salary grid led to a 21% raise in teacher salaries and the opportunity to earn more.
http://voices.washingtonpost.com/dcschools/2010/06/council_approves_teachers_cont.html?hpid=newswell
Welcome to PEN's Blog!
As a part of PEN's commitment to empower teachers with the facts about education reform we are launching this blog to offer a series of research-based examinations on both current practices of the public education system and ideas for reform that could potentially challenge the status quo.
It is our goal that teachers will weigh the pros and cons of each, form an opinion, and voice their beliefs in the way they see fit. It is a core belief of PEN that informed professional educators promote what is best for public education.
We know that a teacher's time is valuable and it is our intent to make each entry as concise as possible. We plan to list the pros and cons for each topic, write a brief synopsis containing the more salient points, and provide links for further reading for those who are interested to learn more.
Please feel free to comment on and share this information with as many professional educators as you can! Teachers voices are too important to this cause to be silenced or manipulated by misinformation!
It is our goal that teachers will weigh the pros and cons of each, form an opinion, and voice their beliefs in the way they see fit. It is a core belief of PEN that informed professional educators promote what is best for public education.
We know that a teacher's time is valuable and it is our intent to make each entry as concise as possible. We plan to list the pros and cons for each topic, write a brief synopsis containing the more salient points, and provide links for further reading for those who are interested to learn more.
Please feel free to comment on and share this information with as many professional educators as you can! Teachers voices are too important to this cause to be silenced or manipulated by misinformation!
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)