Teacher Layoffs and Unions

New York City schools are planning to lay off 8,500 teachers. According to union rules, senior teachers keep their jobs and newbies get the boot.

Facing the likelihood of the largest number of layoffs in more than a generation, [schools chancellor] Mr. Klein and his counterparts around the country say that the rules, which require that the most recently hired teachers be the first to lose their jobs, are an anachronism in the era of accountability that will upend their efforts of the last few years to recruit new teachers, improve teacher performance and reward those who do best.

“Nobody I’ve talked to thinks seniority is a rational way to go,” Mr. Klein said. “Obviously there are some senior teachers who are extraordinary. You recruit young talent you think is good for the future, and to just get rid of that by the numbers seems to me to be a nonsensical approach.”

This month city officials persuaded lawmakers in Albany to introduce a bill that would allow the city to decide which teachers to let go, although its chances of passing are slim.

I find it strange that school administrators are not allowed to decide which teachers they want to let go. It seems that an administrator would need to have control of their personnel to properly administrate. Am I wrong here?

Seniority-based layoffs will prevent young, talented teachers from infusing the system with new life and new ideas. It also prevents administrators from laying off teachers who are senior but past their prime. Finally, it discourages new teachers from even entering the profession:

Mr. Borock, the Bronx teacher, said that the layoffs would discourage newer graduates from entering the profession. “If you have a number of job opportunities, as many of us did, and you have a nagging feeling in the back of your mind that you could lose this job really quickly,” he asked, “why would anyone want to go into that?”

Why indeed.

While a Times study has shown that teachers with 6-10 years experience usually outperform 1st and 2nd year teachers, it is important that young teachers are given the opportunity to grow.

Without fresh blood, our public education system will continue to decline. Without the ability to say who stays and who gos, our school administrators cannot be expected to revive our ailing education system.

Unionized Teachers Get What They Deserve

Unionized Rhode Island teachers refuse to work 25 minutes more per day, so town fires all of them.

Central Falls is one of the poorest towns in the state. It looks like the pictures everyone's seen of Detroit or Flint. There are lots of boarded up windows, abandoned buildings, decrepit factories with broken windows, etc. It's an absolutely depressed community. According to Wikipedia, the median income in the town is $22k.

Teacher salaries at the high school average $72-78k. Apparently 50% of the students at the school are failing all of their classes, and the graduation rate is also under 50%. In an effort to turn the school around, the superintendent requested some changes be made whereby the school day would be slightly extended, teachers would perform some extra tutoring, etc.

The union balked and refused the terms, so now she is firing the entire teaching staff of the high school and replacing them. This is yet another example of unions digging their own graves by refusing to negotiate or accept reasonable terms. Sentiment is on the side of the superintendent, at least among the folks I have discussed the issue with.

While private sector workers are losing their jobs, public employees are doing better than ever. Luckily this Rhode Island town decided to fight back.

Some things are best dealt with on the local level, where average people still have a voice.

[Mish via BusinessInsider via Instapundit]

The Problem is Teacher's Unions

Despite measurable success, a federally funded school voucher program in Washington D.C. is about to die.

"Effectively, Congress's failure to act to reauthorize this program will send well over 1,000 children to failing and, too often, unsafe schools," the letter states. "That result would, in our view, constitute a moral failing of the highest order on all of our parts."

Children in the short lived program are more advanced in reading than their public school peers by an average of 3 months, according to the Department of Education. Yet this program is being cut. Who could possibly be against a program that increases student achievement? It could only be a teacher's union.

"The National Education Association strongly opposes any extension of the District of Columbia private school voucher ('DC Opportunity Scholarship') program," Van Roekel wrote in a March 5, 2009 letter. "We expect that Members of Congress who support public education, and whom we have supported, will stand firm against any proposal to extend the pilot program. Actions associated with these issues WILL be included in the NEA Legislative Report Card for the 111th Congress."

The Center for Responsive Politics and the National Institute on Money in State Politics recently released data showing that the NEA topped the chart as the number one national donor during the 2007-08 election cycle, shelling out $57.6 million in combined federal and state contributions. The American Federation of Teachers was number 25, with more than $13 million in contributions.

Mike Antonucci of the Education Intelligence Agency put this in perspective, writing that the NEA's and AFT's 2007-08 contributions meant that "America's two teachers' unions outspent AT&T, Goldman Sachs, Wal-Mart, Microsoft, General Electric, Chevron, Pfizer, Morgan Stanley, Lockheed Martin, FedEx, Boeing, Merrill Lynch, Exxon Mobil, Lehman Brothers, and the Walt Disney Corporation, combined."

Vouchers are the best things going in public education, yet the teachers unions oppose them. Sorry kids, we failed you.

[thanks Pat]