I heard this debate on WCBU tonight. It’s from the program “Intelligence Squared U.S.,” which features an Oxford-style debate. There’s a different topic, or “motion,” each week. The motion for this debate was “Don’t Blame Teachers Unions For Our Failing Schools.” Three people spoke in favor of the motion, and three spoke against the motion. Here’s the debate — which side do you think won?
In a word, yes.
How can anyone watch this?
The first speaker (although personally slimier than a earthworm in bacon grease) made some good points about poverty, and the second guy was just all over the place pointing fingers at teachers’ unions to blame them for everything from the earthquake in Chile to and the plague in the 14th century.
Trying to reform school since the 80s he claimed? Since the the public mandate began, there have been calls for reform. He points to charter schools and other modern initiatives as being blocked by the unions… as if charter schools worked any better…
I will suffer through this taking notes as a I go…
Trolling for hits… why? So he can boost up his advertising revenues?
Partly to blame, for sure. Look at all the other failing industry in the US, and what do they have in common! Bad management and (formerly) powerful unions!
Look, it is the Administration’s job to be responsible. They hire everyone. They approve every contract and/or agreement. They set standards of teacher training and student learning.
Are we supposed to believe that The Administration can’t or won’t stand up to the unions?
Charlie makes some good points. The rot started at the top, and it’s still the biggest problem. If the School Board didn’t meet and the Administration honchos didn’t show up for work for a month, the schools would function just as good, if not better.
Unions are generally a positive as long as they remain reasonable and concerned with helping the organization, and thus their members, succeed. Once they become solely abou helping their members at all costs, then they become a hindrance.
“as long as they remain reasonable and concerned with helping the organization, and thus their members, succeed. Once they become solely abou helping their members at all costs”
I don’t understand what the contradiction is… “helping the organization” (their members) vs “helping their members” (at all costs). What does their cost have to do with it?
But, THAT is their function. Just as The Administration’s function is formulate and execute policy. The Union doesn’t represent the Administration’s interests or the parent’s interests or the student’s interest. WHY would it?
The Union represents a specific group of employees against an employer whose concern is everything (mainly money) other than their employees. (An employer who considers their employees no more important than a desk or textbook. They are merely another resource, in fact, a “Human Resource”)
Why not blame the Electric union or the Teamster’s union? It is called collective bargaining, something Corporations have always hated because they can’t play the divide and conquer game, or the don’t tell anyone what you make game, or shhhh… don’t look as we make certain people (and problems) fade away into the night game…
VERRRRRY surprised by the final vote.
When you said “The Union represents a specific group of employees against an employer” you illustrated the problem with unions and why they are declining in such vast numbers.
I don’t understand. Should a union of a specific group of employees represent some other specific group of people’s interests?
Personally, I believe complaints against teachers’ unions have more to do with money than quality of education, etc. People just think teachers make too much money. So we really have two separate questions. Do teachers get paid too much because of union representation, negotiations, etc.? or Do unions protect incompetent teachers? Health benefits and retirement play a big part in the complaints against teachers–more than salary, I believe. I just wanted to clarify the question, but I won’t engage in any more discussion than I have already contributed over and over again on this blog. It is what it is–and the two sides probably aren’t going to change their minds any time soon. Also, I do believe that talking about local and national union influence, also, creates a different set of questions.
The philosophy that unions should take a position “against the employer” is counterproductive for everybody involved, IMO.
I don’t buy the bit about teachers making low salaries anymore. Years ago, it was probably true. Today, teachers enjoy very competitive pay, excellent retirement and health care benefits and little risk of being fired for poor performance. Try finding that in the general workplace.
There is a local grade school with a Physical Education teacher who is making $67k year and numerous other teachers making between $60k to $80k.
Many of the local school districts have been publishing salary info on the internet, so yes, you can look it up.
For what other reason do unions exist, or have they ever existed? They were created because of the unfair practices of employers.
Unions exist primarily to negotiate wages and benefits for a group of employees and to represent their needs to management. The old ways of wars and animosity between unions and management is not productive for either party. There has been abuses by both parties.
I have been involved in ugly union situations and very productive union situations. The attitudes of these unions was instrumental in productive environments or ones that were not so much.
“There has been abuses by both parties.”
Let me be perfectly clear. The Administration has ALL the power. The Union can threaten to stop work. THAT IS ALL THEY CAN DO. Everything else is bluster. The Administration gives in or concedes power at it’s will. Whether or not the Union argues about wages or benefits is irrelevant. The point of the Union is collective bargaining. If there are abuses on the part of the Union and the Administration doesn’t just fire everyone, then it’s is still Administration’s fault.
This may not ALWAYS be true with public institutions like Education, but it is CERTAINLY true in private business. The reason, of course, Administration gives in is because they can do no business, make no profits without labor. When Administration gives in TOO MUCH, it is because those in charge of Administration deem their personal interests (jobs, salaries, bonuses, etc)greater than the interests of their company, employees, their customers or society.
You can’t accuse a slave of abusing his master.
There are plenty of abuses by both sides in many union-management relationships. You don’t think so. We disagree. Have a great day.
I do believe in teacher-management relations that the abuses are fewer due to the educational level of both parties.
The history of management/union interaction is a classic example of the prisoner’s dilemma.
“The prisoner’s dilemma is a fundamental problem in game theory that demonstrates why two people might not cooperate even if it is in both their best interests to do so.”
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Prisoner%27s_dilemma
Society loses.
“The Art of Lively Conversation” as the famed Irv Kupcinet(Chicago Sun Times)used to always say…that’s what my take was upon listening to the NPR forum…good points on both sides(not trying to be wishy-washy) My general problem with teachers is, unless they use summers or spend time employed in the regular job market, where most of us are, they really are naive about what the general population puts up with in their jobs. Most of us have no lengthy vacations(and summers), and nearly as many days off, or don’t have the benefit of the nation’s strongest collective bargaining unit behind us and the general unified support one finds within school systems. It’s as if they never left college. Don’t get me wrong, more power to them, they choose their profession correctly. I screwed up by not majoring in education in college. My sister and brother-in-law are lifelong teachers, one retired, one about to be and their retirement pension is unbeliveable. One finished their last year teaching in the six figure income bracket. The other is close. But, when they try to invite me up to their Minnesota or Arizona vacation homes(the original home still in Illinois)they can’t figure out why I don’t have the time in my 65 hour 6 day a week career with two weeks vacation which I’m not allowed to take concurrently. That’s how most of the real world lives. Again, I’m the one who made the wrong choices, but I never feel sorry for teachers. They are just fine. Many just don’t know of the struggles of many others who don’t enjoy the same benefits.
Outsidethebox – you nailed it. Charlie, you better go back and re-read what you said. The IFT constanly states that they have the students best interest at heart. Also, they state sympathy for the taxpayer. And they fight competiton like private schools tooth and nail.
School boards set the policies and describe the missions. Hired Administration puts these policies to work. How can you have good board memers when they do not receive any pay, work part time, no paid vacations, insurance benefits and and serve five year terms and if they would like to serve a couple more years, they must serve FIVE more years?
Or resign mid-term.
The system is wrong as I’ve stated many times on my blogs, letters to the editors and at meetings. For 22 years, Teamsters Union and I worked together at Widmers. Eighteen years later they are still working together at Widmer Interiors, the new name of my old company. But the business manager’s, Archie and Charlie Gauwitz , knew I ran the business.
The unions do not permit ANY firing of a union member without a long taxpayer costly legal battle unless the case against an employee is “cut and dried” SUCH as in rape, theft or murder. Has anyone ever seen the size of the legal bills at #150?
“they really are naive about what the general population puts up with in their jobs”
Because you do not have collective bargaining… duh… I get that.
“The IFT constanly states”
Yeah, and The Democratic Party isn’t what they claim, either. So? The union exists because it represents the TEACHERS’ interests, which in some cases reflects the interest of the children and therefor the community. any claims to the contrary are just that… claims.
Did you, as management, agree to the Teamsters’ demands? Why? … BECAUSE it benefited you and your bottom line.
150 observer… “We disagree.” yeah, but my side as reality on it.
Jon: The prisoners’ dilemma presumes participants are equal; equal in potential gain and loss. That is not true with management and employee.
Sorry, Charlie, but participants need not be equal for the prisoner’s dilemma game to apply. It has been used to explain why car companies get into discount wars with each other, cigarette companies spent so much advertising against each other (such that once television advertising by cigarette companies was banned, their profits went UP) and the U.S. and U.S.S.R. spent so much on an arms race. The car companies weren’t the equal of each other, nor were the cigarette companies, nor the U.S. and U.S.S.R. (or Pepsi vs Coke or… you name it).
The point is each has the ability to essentially hurt the other – the fear that the other party is going to do something that makes you worse off. Yet, if they worked together instead of against each other, the payoff for both would be better.
The only bright side, is that the more you play the game, the more you realize the shortcomings of your decisions – the more likely you are to begin working together.
Until recently, the school and district administrators came up through the ranks–they were once teachers. The business model doesn’t draw its CEOs from the ranks. The new idea is to draw educational “CEOs” from the business field and to have companies run schools. In business, the profits go mostly to those at the top. Since there is no product and, thus, no profit in education, the CEOs and the companies are going to have to take the lion’s share of taxpayer money for themselves–because they are businessmen; they are in it for the money. They will do everything to lie and cheat about test scores, etc., in order to draw people to their schools–that’s the only way they can make a profit. Also, the businessmen won’t be in the classrooms doing the “educating.” I’m not sure how they will convince teachers to work 12 hour days and Saturdays so that they (the CEOS) can reap all the benefits. That is the Vallas way.
Sharon Crews asks the question “do unions protect incompetent teachers?” The answer is obvious. Remember when the Cat secretary’s went into the shop during the strike and production picked up. It is true that unions exist to bargain and protect their members,but if you spend most of your time defending the incompetent, it is bad for those who really are putting forth 100%
Point of Order, Ah, but you forget–the unions protect the competent teachers, also, and I believe they are the majority. I went to a meeting today with some Whittier parents and teachers–and was so impressed with the teachers who do such a good job there every day (and their willingness to stay until 5:30 to meet with parents for no extra pay). District 150 has many great teachers–and they are protected by the union and anyone with children should be extremely grateful. All of us who went through the school system (public or private–tenured or untenured teachers–union or non-union) had both kinds of teachers–but the majority guided us and gave us the education we needed. As a teacher, I know that no “bad” teacher ever kept me from putting forth 100% effort–that’s hogwash! And as a student, no bad teacher ever kept me from putting forth 100% effort.
What a monotonous subject. Talk about whistling in the dark. Of course there are some bad teachers in District 150. There are bad teachers in any school district, and in any occupation you find some that excel and some that give the industry a bad rap. Why should the teaching profession be anything different? Anyone who blames the circumstances that exist in District 150 today on “bad teachers” is an idiot.
Outsidethebox – what a great commentary.
My biggest issue with unions in a school setting is the inflexibility it creates. Every issue for change becomes a big deal — a negotiation.
Also, I think it hampers teacher input into important school initiatives. Teachers should be the front line management of the school. They should be an extension of administration, working in a collaborative fashion to carry out the mission of the school. Unionized teaching staff creates a barrier to the development of what should be a seamless delivery system of quality education.
And Sharon, the good teachers don’t need the protection of a union, they create their own job security by performing at a high level. And what about good teachers with lesser senority — how are they protected?? As the speaker from Stanford stated, lesser tenured high performing teachers are the 1st to go in a layoff even though parents and administration would prefer to retain their services. How can that be a right result?
Frustrated: you are obviously NOT a teacher in D150. Let me tell you, I have always had excellent evaluations, consider myself a very good teacher, yet, I was singled out by a BAD administrator to be her emotional punching bag, tormented and YES, picked on for things that never happened….yes I documented it all. Without the union, I would still be under this abhorent administrator being verbally abused on a DAILY basis. Now that I am gone, she has found SEVERAL replacements, so please do not say that good teachers don’t need union support (I started out by going to HER boss, who did NOTHING).
Teach150 – I am sorry to hear about your experiences. IMO there are other ways to “protect” and fairly develop/evaulate teachers that does not require union representation.
Jon..”Jon: The prisoners’ dilemma presumes participants are equal; equal in potential gain and loss. That is not true with management and employee.”
read what YOU just wrote car companies, cigarette manufacturers, National Governments… they are PEERS. There isn’t a government and a citizen, a cigarette manufacturer and a consumer…
That is what I meant by equals… no master / slave relationships.
Frustrated: “IMO there are other ways to “protect” and fairly develop/evaulate teachers”
Well, IMO YOUR opinion is ignorant.
Why is everyone AGAINST unions and pro management? You sound like a bunch of house slaves. “Oh, the master treats us good enough, if you don’t cause no trouble.”
If you give all the power to administrators, and put all the responsibility on teachers, you are going to have a problem. In fact, you are going to get what we got in nearly every school district in the country… Peoria School District 150 financial, personal and public disasters.
Let me give you a little psychological insight into administrators… (sorry Steve)
People go into teaching for one of three reasons…
1) There is nothing more important in the whole world
2) You only have to work 9 months and get summers off
3) Those who can’t do, teach.. it looks really easy and you get to wield a lot of power in your classroom over little kids
Why do people go into administration…
1) I can be the Commandant of one class, or Emperor of a whole school or school district!!!
2) Holy crap! Those administrators make twice as money as teachers do and work 1/2 as much!
3) Those who can’t do, supervise… I’m a lousy teacher, but hey, no one will see what I do there at Wisconsin Ave…
or sadly,
4) Some one has got to fix this [bleepin’] mess and extraordinary waste of money and resources… and of course one can’t do anything about it because the real power isn’t in the administration and the money is too intoxicating…
Frustrated, you really don’t understand if you believe that good teachers don’t need protection. Have you “patented” your system that doesn’t require union representation yet is fair? We just saw a perfect example of how that fairness without representation would work with the secretaries on Wisconsin Avenue. Do you really believe administrators would always give raises on the basis of job performance. There are many other reasons–to the administrators’ advantage having nothing to do with education–for which pet teachers would be rewarded. I know it would be futile to call to your attention the lack of fairness in a District 150 school that fired a principal (without union protection) and protected a former principal who quite possibly was stealing from the district–but did favors for the right people and badmouthed (officially) the person who was her accuser. As for Outofthebox’s comments–he is right; teachers today are getting a much fairer salary than we did during most of my career. However, with or without union protection that might be a very shortlived “catching up;” it seems people want teachers to return to “volunteer” status. Paul Vallas’s plan of keeping teachers for only 10 years is a perfect example of what happens without union protection.
“Paul Vallas’s plan of keeping teachers for only 10 years”
Well, obviously, that would work if your teachers weren’t professional teachers but instead professional business people who take time off to teach for awhile. You know, because teaching is so easy…
Sharon – you will have to explain to me why the teaching profession is such a unique animal as compared to other professions. There are workers in an array of jobs in the private sector that are not “protected” from similar examples of poor management that you describe occurs at the District, and yet these unrepresented employees still survive, retain their jobs and are fairly compensated.
I should have added, the prisoner’s dilemma game requires rational thought.
Frustrated, maybe the problem is that the business model doesn’t treat (or pay) lower level employees (or middle management) fairly. Maybe that’s why the CEOs of companies make such obscene salaries. Education is a “people” undertaking–I expect people to be treated better in a “business” where profit is not the incentive. Frustrated, I know that we aren’t ever going to agree on this subject–and you did skirt an explanation of my two examples. Also, you state that the unrepresented employees retain their jobs inspite of poor management and that they are fairly compensated (what does “fairly” mean?)–am I just to take your word for that or are there studies that prove your point?
“the prisoner’s dilemma game requires rational thought”
Enough said.
Sharon, I agree. The fact that other employees are NOT ORGANIZED, is a problem for the other employees, not with those that are. Why shouldn’t all employees have the same rights conceded (apparently these “rights” are not inalienable in the workplace) to those who have the ability to organize and present their grievances as a whole?
1) Do workers have a right to fair compensation?
2) Do workers have a right to be treated with dignity and respect?
3) Do workers have a right to face their accusers?
4) Do workers have a right to a redress of grievances?
5) Do workers have a right to vacation and health care?
6) Do workers have a right to a retirement and investment program?
Or are these just “rights” reserved for administration and management?
Look at how differently management is “fired” for incompetence compared to workers… Management gets their compensation packages “paid off” and often even receive bonuses for being terminated. Workers are often escorted to the door by a (armed) guard and tossed into the street (metaphorically speaking), or just informed that they no longer have a job.
I wouldn’t be surprised to hear Hinton, Royster, and Oliver are still being compensated by Peoria taxpayers… or that Palin is still being compensated by Alaskan taxpayers. How long will Durflinger remain on the Peoria payroll, and yet, his “temporary” position has been filled by a full time Superintendent?
kcdad–stop that irrational thinking! Joking, of course. It makes sense to me. In fact, I have come to the conclusion that those who complain most about current teachers’ salaries, benefits, and retirements are not treated as fairly in their workplaces. The correct should be made in their workplaces.
Godfathers on Sunday at 6 p.m. for those who want to discuss 150 stuff. It is Mother’s Day, but some of us will still be there–just to keep things going. By the way, how many secretaries and/or teachers could be instead of sending the money away to companies in the business of education for the money. Yesterday Whittier teachers were telling me about class sizes of 30–worse for next year with the loss of teachers. Those are the kinds of decisions made by “management” with regard to the education of children.
just to keep things going.” Oh Sharon, how telling.
Admitedly, (I know, Freud and all that) a poor choice of words, but, Jim, don’t you have some work to do! Maybe ask payroll if anyone else has received unauthorized raises. Our group must pick up the slack when board members aren’t diligent or kept in the loop. (Jim or someone of the same mindset!)
Fair would be correct but often thats not what the unions are after. The UAW really helped out all those workers in Detroit didnt they? Kcdad does it ever cross your mind that without a profitable employer there would be no union workers because there would be no jobs? Notice the lack of union representation in the residential trades? Thats because people cant afford, or are not willing, to pay what the union has decided are “fair compensation, retirement etc.”
“That is what I meant by equals… no master / slave relationships”
Do you really view yourself as a slave to your employer? Maybe you should look at different employment options?
Yes, Scanlan-Yerly – that is what I was attemptiing to convey with “fair” — what the market will bear. Thankfully the UAW and CAT were able to come to terms so many Peoria jobs did not go the way of Detroit.
“profitable employer”
Profits have nothing to do with running a successful business, and you know it. You have heard of non-profit businesses haven’t you?
I find it difficult not to see the anti-union gentleman’s claims as an effort to undermine the American educational system, not simple dissatisfaction with the performance of teacher’s unions. This has “culture wars” smeared all over it. It’s no accident that he threw plenty of support behind charter schools.
On that note, it’s worth mentioning that according to the NAGB, on average, children who attend public schools outperform children who attend charter schools. Keep in mind that, combined, there is a sufficient sample to draw from among charter school students to make such a comparison.
did you mean insufficient?