Teachers Unions Are Hurting Students, Bad for Teachers, and Destroying Public Education
Having a good teacher in every classroom should be the number-one priority in public education, but the outdated employment practice known as teacher tenure has made that goal virtually unattainable. Teacher tenure lets teachers union leaders keep incompetent, troubled, and burnt-out teachers, while driving away talented, qualified, and motivated professionals who are committed to teaching. As DC Chancellor Michelle Rhee put it, teacher tenure “has no educational value for kids; it only benefits adults.”
Teachers unions require schools to pay teachers based on their years of service instead of classroom performance. In California, teachers only have to teach for two years before they are granted tenure. Once tenured, they become prohibitively expensive to fire. Terminating an underperforming teacher who is tenured can cost the district upwards of $200,000.
The rhetoric and the tactics used by teachers unions to block any meaningful reform is remarkable. Here in Dublin, CA, children of DUSD Board members who voted against the interest of teachers union have reportedly been subject to covert harassment by teachers, especially at the middle schools and the high school. The motivation of teachers union leaders is simple: Maintain the status quo and secure the uninterrupted flow of hundreds of millions of dollars in union dues.
I don’t represent the children. I represent the teachers. A lot of people who have been hired as teachers are basically not competent.”
– Al Shanker, the legendary former president of the American Federation of Teachers
Meanwhile, the reform proposed by union leaders’ suggestions is best characterized as a membership drive, as they push for “more money to hire more teachers,” who will in turn become dues-paying union members. California’s inability to qualify for the first round of Race to the Top funding was directly related to the vociferous resistance from teachers unions, as they fought tooth-and-nail to maintain the status quo.
Teachers Union are Bad for Teachers
The primary objective of teachers unions in the Tri-Valley and throughout the United States is to protect bad teachers at the expense of good teachers. Modeled after labor arrangements in factories, a typical teachers union contract is loaded with provisions that raise costs, thwart meaningful reform, and do nothing for education. Many of the best teachers in our public schools would prefer to see their teachers unions eliminated, but they are afraid to voice their concerns for fear of retaliation.
In most states, teachers are required to pay hundreds of dollars annually to unions, even if they are not members. The constant stream of income from this automatic payroll deduction does little to encourage teachers unions to be responsible stewards of the money they control. Additionally, local teachers unions are generally exempt from the government’s financial oversight. The lack of accountability and transparency to members makes it all too easy for teachers union leadership to raid the union treasury for personal gain.
Our Students Deserve Better
Freedom from teachers unions has played an integral role in the success of many charter schools. Charter schools such as Pacific Collegiate in Santa Cruz, CA, and Livermore Valley Charter School in Livermore, CA, have performed incredibly well in part because they are staffed with non-union teachers. Livermore Valley Charter Prep and Tassajara Prep will follow the model established by these successful schools, because their founders, administrators, and teachers believe our students deserve better.
Special thanks to Teacher Union Facts for their contribution to this article.
1:00 AM on May 5th, 2010
Organized crime can learn a thing or two from Teachers Union it seems.
John Stossel did a segment called Stupid in America:
http://abcnews.go.com/2020/Stossel/story?id=1500338
He also wrote an article about a school district that dares to do something about Teachers Union:
http://abcnews.go.com/2020/Stossel/story?id=1500338
I doubt our superintendent has the same kind of courage as Superintendent Gallo.
2:59 AM on May 5th, 2010
thanks for the link. Here’s the video version of it. it’s a bit long but worth the time.
7:18 AM on May 5th, 2010
Thanks anonymous. You were right. The video is worth the time. Here is the classic 20/20 segment in its entirety.
5:51 PM on May 5th, 2010
Hi Anonymous – thank you for sharing this story and video of the “Stupid in America” segment by John Stossel. This piece fully addresses the challenges of traditional district-run public education.
Thx, John Z.
3:27 AM on May 5th, 2010
Its not just the teachers, its pretty much every public entity – be it BART, Muni, CalTrans you name it. Just like the third world countries.
7:12 AM on May 5th, 2010
If we want to move beyond this OVERLY SIMPLISTIC opinion piece and cliched, “blame unions” discussions:
http://www.newyorker.com/reporting/2008/12/15/081215fa_fact_gladwell?printable=true
A great article written by Gladwell about the challenge of hiring quality teachers.
7:46 AM on May 5th, 2010
So much for that erroneous statement that it costs to much to get rid of teachers. If it cost too much why is it being done in the hundreds of thousands nationwide? http://www.globalresearch.ca/index.php?context=va&aid=18816
11:11 AM on May 5th, 2010
Maybe most of these teachers laid off are non-tenured teachers? I know for a fact that new teachers are always first in the line to be cut when it comes to layoff.
11:50 AM on May 5th, 2010
I am going to venture out on a limb and say that the teachers union probably had a lot to do with killing James’s earlier attempt at bringing a second high school to East Dublin. James and the other parents all had kids in the school system back in 2005, so their kids were vulnerable. The union representatives probably made it perfectly clear that there’d be dire consequences for the kids, if these activist parents didn’t drop what they were doing.
I am curious about the identities of the board members whose children were harassed by Dublin’s teachers. James’s attempt at boycotting local businesses featured on this blog seems to fit right in the union’s playbook on intimidation, so I wouldn’t be surprised if the teachers union is somehow involved with OneDublin. As John pointed out, there is no transparency to the union’s books. Things tend to fester when there is no sunlight.
12:04 PM on May 5th, 2010
“James’s earlier attempt at bringing a second high school to East Dublin……”
Is it true? What a surprise! You could not even imagine that if you see what he is doing to the charter school now.
10:50 PM on May 5th, 2010
It is easy to blame the teachers for our failed educational system but the real blame should go to the parents of these unruly students. Our schools are failing compared to other nations because we do not take time to discipline and care for our own kids to behave and the teachers are stuck with dealing with them (and I am glad I am not a teacher). If the parents themselves cannot even control their own kids, why should we expect the teachers to do the impossible? Sure there may exist few super individuals who can draw out the best even from these undisciplined kids but there are not enough of them to go around. John Stossel wouldn’t last a week at these schools.
11:06 PM on May 5th, 2010
Without tenure, there’s going to be greater shortage of fully credential teachers.
11:35 AM on May 6th, 2010
Boys and girls, this statement is what we call wild speculation with no supporting data. Looking at what Chancellor Rhee is able to do in her district and the Stossel piece from 20/20, I no longer believe tenure is the only way to recruit qualified teachers. AD Team, it would be very helpful if you can come in with some hard numbers about the average number of qualified candidates who apply whenever a new position is posted at Pacific Collegiate or LVCS.
6:57 PM on May 6th, 2010
Please post data to support the effectiveness of Charter schools. You fail to list those that are shutting down and have misused school funds. In the past, this blog has listed a couple of examples of good Charters, and their are good Charter schools out their, but data on a larger scale is needed. Also, please list data on schools that do not have tenure. Most schools in our country, good and bad, have teacher tenure. What we should focus on is how an ineffective teacher is able to stay in the profession for 10 or more year and earn tenure. Ineffective teachers should not be allowed to earn tenure. Maybe the solution is to increase the tenuring period from a couple of years to 7-10 years. If a teacher makes it to 10 years they should be effective in the classroom.
9:43 PM on May 6th, 2010
Oh please. No one ever claimed there aren’t bad charter schools out there, and guess what, they do get shut down. John Z. does not need to waste time reporting on failed charter schools. He just needs to make sure he can get a good one going in Dublin, so parents can choose for themselves what’s best for their kids. What I find offensive is parents being forced to send their kids to DHS, simply because others have deluded themselves into beleving that DHS is sufficient. If DHS is so amazing, they should not be afraid of a little competition. If they are worried that the teachers union is going to make them less competitive, get rid of it.
10:40 PM on May 6th, 2010
I follow this blog frequently for information and I would find it helpful if more resources about charter schools (pro’s and con’s) were posted, such as a reference list. I also support a second Dublin High School. This is why it is important to focus more specifically on areas to improve education in Dublin. Focusing on tenure and taking away tenure does not solve the problem, but it should help us look at what the real problem is; why are ineffective teachers earning tenure. I like the college tenure structure stated an hour or so ago. If a teacher is evaluated every year for 5-10 year and earns tenure, chances are they are a good teacher. I also like the idea of rewarding performance and teachers that have taught for a long time. Maybe the introductory salary is average to recruit good teachers, but once a teacher has taught for 10 years and gained tenure he/she could begin to earn pay that is comparable with the higher paying schools. This is the same incentive used in the business and sports world; if you perform you get paid, if you do not you do not have a job. You could pay for this by having less administration and being efficient with school funds. I think one advantaged stated in an early article on this blog is that a charter school has more control over their finances. Also, Dublin pays a higher percentage of their budget to admin costs, so this is another area for improvement. Pay less on admin, leaving more money to reward good teachers and to spend on the students.
9:55 PM on May 6th, 2010
What you said about tenure makes sense to me. For college professors, typically you will be evaluated whether to be issued tenure after 5-7 years. Why shouldn’t they at least do the same for high school teachers?
10:12 AM on May 6th, 2010
Tenure is what keeps the best teachers in your school district. The best teachers always go to school districts with the highest pay and the best tenure guarantee. They shun those that don’t pay well or don’t have adequate tenure policies. This is regardless if there is a union or not. Those districts without those two items will always get second-rate teachers. Equating unions with bad tenure policies is equating apples to oranges. We can eliminate tenure and we can eliminate unions and in the process we can eliminate quality teachers in our school district. They WILL go elsewhere.
6:42 PM on May 6th, 2010
The schools that you have discussed in earlier articles on this blog that have offer a high quality education all have strong tenure and pay. For example, Mission San Jose and Pleasanton teachers receive salaries that are close to the highest in the area. If a teacher is allowed to earn tenure it is the fault of their evaluators (principals, vice principles, etc.). Compared to the time teachers work and level of education they earn, most make less teaching than entering into another career field. If you do not believe me shadow a teacher for a week and then try to speak about the problems facing our system. The probably of ineffective teaching should be addressed, but taking away tenure and negatively labeled all teachers is not a viable solution. Looking back at your previous article about qualities of good teachers, teacher skill and content knowledge is what is needed. Since effective teachers typically go through many administrators and district directives, it is important for a teacher to do what is best for the students without fear of getting fired because they are not following a new and unproven program by their district. In previous articles you have criticized the DUSD for lack of leadership and effectiveness of their decisions. If you take away tenure, teachers will have to follow poor district policies rather than do what is best for their students. Now attaching student improvement and test scores as a criteria for evaluation may be a better use of our time. Try focusing on getting rid of poor teachers rather than attack all teachers.
9:15 PM on May 6th, 2010
How exactly is this article attacking all teachers, when it made it perfectly clear the tenure system is protecting the bad teachers at the expense of the good? Thanks to the tenure system, the District has to eliminate promising young teachers over mediocre tenured teachers. The fact that schools like MSJ and Pleasanton do well is not reason enough to keep this antiquated system. These schools are succeeding in spite of the tenure system, not because of it.
10:29 PM on May 6th, 2010
You are still failing to prove that tenure is the problem. I am not fan of unions, but I think the focus should be placed on the real blame and that is the people that hire and continue to hire ineffective teachers. Getting rid of the tenure structure means that a teacher every year needs to be worried about losing their job. At first glance this looks great, but what worries me is that ineffective principals and district managers/leaders can also fire an effective teacher if they do not follow their policies. As we have seen in many districts, many new policies are not good policies. It is like the Supreme Court, there job is to interpret the Constitution, not follow public opinion. Since district leadership change every 4-6 years, effective teachers should be allowed to do what works, and not be forced the newest fad. My point is that we should focus on holding principles and district managers accountable 1st, which will then trickle down to teachers and support staff
9:05 AM on May 7th, 2010
If a little knowlegde is dangerous, some of you are down right lethal. Listen carefully, THERE IS NO TEACHER TENURE IN CALIFORNIA. After 2-3 years of positive, intense evaluations performed by principals and a new teacher coach, a teacher is granted permanent status. They are still evaluated after that point on a regular basis and can still be removed if found ineffective. If it’s so expensive to get rid of a teacher, why were 26,000 let go last year? Some of these teachers with over 7 years of experience (5 years of permanent status). Believe it or not teachers union do not want ineffective teachers in the classroom. But they do want the legal process followed for getting rid of them.
9:27 AM on May 7th, 2010
Hi Anonymous – out of curiosity, does the legal process for firing incompetent teachers in California look anything like the New York process:
http://reason.com/assets/db/12639308918768.pdf
Thx, John Z.
9:28 AM on May 7th, 2010
What is the DUSD policy on teachers and staff commenting on blogs during the time they’re supposed to be working for the taxpayers? Perhaps that is why they’re thinking about raising the parcel tax, so they can afford to give teachers and staff more time on blogs and facebook.
You guys are local heroes in my book for educating the public about teachers union. Please check out this article:
http://educatedguess.org/blog/2010/04/19/bill-would-end-layoffs-by-seniority/
Our legislators are trying to change things for the better, but of course, the teachers union will be fighting it every step of the way as the article says.
9:51 AM on May 7th, 2010
Hi Anonymous – it is disheartening to see that proponents of the teachers unions are making inaccurate statements to try and confuse the issue. Let’s be clear – teacher tenure is an unfortunate reality in California and it is one of the reasons why teacher unions are horrible for public education, skilled teachers, and most importantly students.
Thx, John Z.
10:15 AM on May 7th, 2010
at last, constructive commentary on the state of the influence of Teachers union/political organization. I am dumbfounded by teachers who claim to be overworked and then blame the parents. Blame the parents? These are my firsthand experiences within the Dublin school district:
1. PARENTS frequently grade homework. yes that’s right, and they do get marked wrong.
2. Children are not supervised by teachers until school day starts. That’s right, parents are ones watching
3. Teachers are not present during recess. Parent volunteers with Principals trying to help
4. Teachers are not present during lunch. They have their own lunch area and are separate from students. – again parent and sometimes the janitorial staff help the students
5. Day starts at 8:30, go visit the teacher parking lot at local elementary at 4pm, 4-5 cars typical.
6. Parent volunteers in classrooms, encouraged, and frequently present
7. Papers graded by teachers are not given back for days, sometimes several weeks.
And yes, this is considered a good school. And no, this is not _every_ teacher, but definitely in the majority.
Overworked???
I’m not that old, and I recall 30 child classrooms, teachers working shifts to watch early arriving children, present during recess and no parents grading papers or within classrooms.
Wait, another request for funding on the ballot? Sorry but it’s become obvious to me that within California the teachers union/education system is more experienced at marketing teachers… at the expense of our children.
10:45 AM on May 7th, 2010
Cannot agree with you more. The problem with these parcel taxes is that everyone has to pay, not just the people with kids. The anti-charter school folks made a big deal about how much families at Pacific Collegiate have to contribute, but you know what, those families happily do so because they see results. Those contributions are no more mandatory than the countless fundraising drives DPIE sponsors (and then redistributes the wealth of the East side to the West side).
Instead of blaming the State, let’s hear how they actually used the Measure L tax dollars before raising EVERYONE’s taxes again. As John Z. pointed out, the City made a deal about how the big bad State took its funding, when in reality it got all of it back through the California Communities Prop 1A financing program. Where I come from, that’s called intentionally misleading. I see the same tired ploy being used now for the school tax, so we will be hit with not just one, but TWO, taxes this election season. I guess the city and the school district now see election seasons as another fundraising drive as well.
4:29 PM on May 7th, 2010
Oh, i should have mentioned that items 2,3,4 were negotiated by the union and within the teachers union contract.
Do keep in mind that teachers are ultimately responsible for what is negotiated on their behalf between the district and union.
2:04 PM on May 7th, 2010
Gotta love it when they play the “time they should be working for the taxpayers” card. For the record – I’m a retired teacher who spent 35 years working for the school children of Dublin, not the taxpayers.
Mr. Zukoski, shame on you, if anyone is making inaccurate statements to try and confuse the issue it is you sir. But by all means, explain to the legal process for firing incompetent teachers in California. This should be interesting.
As far as, “Our legislators are trying to change things for the better”??? Really??? Are these same legislators that cut $17 billion from education?
2:29 PM on May 7th, 2010
Get off your high horse grandma, but do it safely, so you don’t end up breaking a hip, and we taxpayers have to pay your medical bills. Are the kids making money themselves to pay for your services as a teacher? Like it or not, you worked for the taxpayers and your pension and benefits are being funded by taxpayer money. The fact that you don’t acknowledge the true source of your salary speaks volume about you as a person. Stop using the State as a scapegoat, because from where the taxpayers are standing, there is plenty of blame to go around. If you really want to do something about how schools are underfunded, here is a thought — pay your fair share of property taxes. Given how you are neck deep in the grave already, you probably pay almost nothing for your property tax bills, while newer home owners like me have to carry most of the tax burden, EXCLUDING all the parcel taxes that are slapped on my bill.
John Z., please do a write-up on how difficult it is to fire bad teachers in California when you get the chance. If you can find examples in Dublin, even better. I would love to see grandma’s blood pressure go up as a result. I doubt it’d take much.
3:02 PM on May 7th, 2010
Funny how you indirectly mention Prop 13 and the unfair way property taxes are collected. Teacher unions were against Prop 13 from the start.
You try to insult me and instead you support my very argument about why schools are underfunding school.
btw – I’m not on medical, I’m not a grandma (or even a woman for that matter) and I do pay my fair share of taxes. But thank-you for proving my other point about people making wild, false and completely inaccurate statements and assumptions this blog without any facts or data.
3:18 PM on May 7th, 2010
Whatever grandma, grandpa, or something in-betweeen. It really doesn’t matter, because it doesn’t change the fact that you are still on public dough. Of course, if you’re something in-between, you owe your gender reassignment procedures to the taxpayers. If teachers unions are truly against prop 13, why aren’t they pushing to have that repealed? I don’t hear much movement on that front. Instead, you are simply perpetuating an already unfair system by pushing for more and more parcel tax. It is quite easy to say that California is underfunding education. Regurgitating the headlines is not the same thing as basing your arguments in facts. The more likely scenario is that the districts themselves don’t know how to keep cost down, but I will wait to see what John Z. writes, because he’s got the most credibility on this blog — not you and certainly not me.
3:33 PM on May 7th, 2010
So you aren’t only prejudice against the elderly but you’re homophobic too? Please sir, keep relying to my posts. You are doing more to show the type of people and their irresponsible assumptions responding to this blog than I ever could. Keep up the good work.
4:01 PM on May 7th, 2010
Hi Retired Teacher and OD’d on OD – let’s focus our passion on the merit of (or lack thereof) teacher unions.
Thx, John Z.
10:12 AM on May 8th, 2010
OD’ed on OD,
Why the personal attack on the poster? What purpose does it serve to call somebody a name? Once you start engaging in personal name calling, neither you nor anybody can engage in civil discussion and turns it into attack session. If you strongly disagree then say it but dont cross the line and start making personal attacks.
John Z,
I know you don’t like to edit comments but this kind of personal attack should be eliminated from this site. Otherwise this is turning into an attack forum rather than a discussion forum
2:22 PM on May 8th, 2010
OD’ed on OD sucks up to John. John is just happy to have a die hard fan.