Showing posts with label attack on teachers. Show all posts
Showing posts with label attack on teachers. Show all posts

Saturday, August 22, 2020

Setting Up Public Schools to Fail - The Virus

The “Great” Reopening Or Setting America’s Schools Up to Fail By Belle Chesler 

 Seventeen years ago, against the advice of my parents, I decided to become a public school teacher. Once I did, both my mother and father, educators themselves, warned me that choosing to teach was to invite attacks from those who viewed the profession with derision and contempt. They advised me to stay strong and push through when budgets were cut, my intellect questioned, or my dedication to my students exploited. 

Nobody, however, warned me that someday I might have to defend myself against those who asked me to step back into my classroom and risk my own life, the lives of my students and their families, of my friends, my husband, and my child in the middle of a global pandemic. And nobody told me that I’d be worrying about whether or not our nation’s public schools, already under siege, would survive the chaos of Covid-19. 

 Pushing students back into school buildings right now simply telegraphs an even larger desire in this society to return to business as usual. We want our schools to open because we want a sense of normalcy in a time of the deepest uncertainty. We want to pretend that schools (like bars) will deliver us from the stresses created by a massive public health crisis. We want to believe that if we simply put our children back in their classrooms, the economy will recover and life as we used to know it will resume. 

In reality, the coronavirus is -- or at least should be -- teaching us that there can be no going back to that past. As the first students and teachers start to return to school buildings, images of crowded hallways, unmasked kids, and reports of school-induced Covid-19 outbreaks have already revealed the depths to which we seem willing to plunge when it comes to the safety and well-being of our children. 

So let’s just call the situation what it is: a misguided attempt to prop up an economy failing at near Great Depression levels because federal, state, and local governments have been remarkably unwilling to make public policy grounded in evidence-based science. In other words, we’re living in a nation struggling to come to terms with the deadly repercussions of a social safety net gutted even before the virus reached our shores and decisions guided by the most self-interested kind of politics rather than the public good. 

 A Return to School? For teachers like me, with the privilege of not having to work a second or third job, summer can be a time to reflect on the previous school year and prepare for the next. I take classes, read, develop new curriculum, and spend time with family and friends. Summer has been a time to catch up with all the pieces of my life I’ve neglected during the school year and recharge my physical and emotional batteries. Like many other public school teachers I know, I step away in order to step back in. Not this summer, though. In these months, there’s been no reprieve. In Portland, Oregon, where I live, the confluence of the historic Black Lives Matter uprising, a subsequent invasion by the president’s federal agents, the hovering menace and tragic devastation of the coronavirus, and rising rates of homelessness and joblessness have contributed to a seismic disruption of the routines and structures of our community. 

A feeling of uncertainty and anxiety now permeates every facet of daily life. Like so many, I’ve been parenting full time without relief since March, acutely aware of the absence of the usual indispensable web of teachers, caregivers, coaches, camp counselors, family, and friends who have helped me raise my child so that I can help raise the children of others. The dislocation from my community and the isolation caused by the breakdown of normal social ties, as well as my daughter’s and my lack of access to school, has had a profound effect on our lives. 

And yet, knowing all that, feeling it all so deeply, I would still never advocate sending our children back to school in person as Covid-19 still rages out of control. Without a concerted effort to stop the spread of the virus -- as cases in this country soar past five million and deaths top 170,000 -- including masking mandates, widespread testing, effective contact tracing, enough funding to change the physical layout of classrooms and school buildings, a radical reduction in class sizes, and proper personal protective equipment for all school employees, returning to school becomes folly on a grand scale. Of course, an effort like that would require a kind of social cohesion, innovation, and focused allocation of resources that, by definition, is nonexistent in the age of Trump. 

 Sacrificing the Vulnerable 

Wednesday, March 30, 2016

Teachers' Unions Survive Another Attack

Teachers and our unions in California, along with the rest of organized labor dodged a bullet (maybe a nuclear missile is a more appropriate metaphor) in yesterday's split decision in Friedrichs v. California Teachers Association.  But I would caution against getting too happy about it or viewing the decision as a victory for organized labor on this issue.  

For one thing, the ruling will not stop anti-union cases that are already in the pipeline or the filing of new cases that aren't in the courts yet. Because of the split decision, no new precedents have been set, so labor remains just as legally vulnerable as it was before. Also, labor's enemies have been racking up major victories at the state level. 26 states are now right to work, and it's not outside the realm of possibility that public sector unions could see their collective bargaining rights curtailed further in more states.
(see below)
What now? "The plaintiffs in the case, led by the Center for Individual Rights, a conservative nonprofit, will file a motion for rehearing and pray that a Republican gets elected president in November."
(from Politico’s Morning Report)
Leaders of major public sector unions, meanwhile, say the case created a lasting resolve to organize and strategize together. SEIU's Mary Kay Henry, NEA's Lily Eskelsen Garcia, AFT's Randi Weingarten, and AFSCME's Lee Saunders all held a joint press call after Tuesday's decision, and "all four of us understand the importance of working together and combining our resources, working on a political agenda, legislative agenda," Saunders said. "We were doing that before Friedrichs but obviously Friedrichs pushed us to do more."

Wednesday, December 23, 2015

Anti Teacher Union Case Before Court in January

U.S. Supreme Court to hear Freidrichs case in January
What you need to know about who’s behind this anti-union lawsuit
THE SUPREME COURT is scheduled to hear arguments in Friedrichs v. CTA on January 11. Reflecting the high stakes for all unions, the AFT and more than 70 labor organizations led briefs with the court opposing this right-wing attack on union membership and bargaining power.
The court is considering whether to overrule its 1977 decision allowing states to require public employees to join a union or pay a fee to cover collective bargaining costs. These fees cover the worker’s share of the re- sources the union spends on negotiating contracts, representing workers in grievance procedures, and other services that benefit the entire workforce.
Depending on how a particular union operates, the cost of representation for each agency fee payer may range from a small fraction of the membership cost to almost as much as membership. The right of unions to collect fair share fees was settled by the court’s unanimous 1977 decision Abood v. Detroit Board of Education.

Sunday, July 26, 2015

Another Attack on Teachers' Unions


Harold Meyerson.
About a month ago, the Supreme Court closed out its term in a blaze of nonpartisan glory. Or nonpartisan obloquy, depending on one’s reaction to the court’s legalization of same-sex marriage and its upholding of Obamacare — but nonpartisan either way. A court with a Republican-appointed majority upheld a Democratic president’s health insurance program and a marital policy that most Republican officeholders felt obliged to oppose (even if most Republican political consultants felt relieved to see gay marriage rendered a fait accompli).
But that was then. In the term that will begin this fall, the court has a splendid opportunity to deliver the most partisan decision it has rendered since Bush v. Gore. When the court rules in Friedrichs v. California Teachers Association , which will be argued in the coming months, the Republican-appointed justices will be able, if they so choose, to create a long-term advantage for their party over the Democrats.
Friedrichs is a case brought by a California teacher who objects to paying dues to the union that has bargained the contract that secures her pay and benefits. The union does not collect any money from her to support its political activities, but, by virtue of the court’s 1977 Abood decision, and hundreds of later decisions based on Abood, she is obliged to pay that portion of her dues that goes to bargaining and administering her contract. That obligation, the court ruled in Abood, is essential if public employees are to have an effective right to collective bargaining. If employees can benefit from union representation without funding the union, the court reasoned, the union could be weakened to the point that it couldn’t represent those employees adequately, if, indeed, at all.

Wednesday, October 01, 2014

Torlakson V Tuck Debate - Public Schools

Torlakson v. Tuck Debate – State Superintendent of Public Instruction

Marshall Tuck
The two candidates for state superintendent of public instruction disagreed on the condition of K-12 education in California, the influence of teachers unions and which of them is best qualified for the job at a forum Saturday in Burlingame, the last scheduled joint appearance before the Nov. 4 election.
Incumbent Tom Torlakson cited “real progress” in restoring money to schools, shifting to new academic standards and increasing high school graduation rates to a record level as indications that schools are headed in the right direction. “This is not the time to put progress at risk,” he said at an hour-long head-to-head debate.
His challenger, Marshall Tuck, cited the need for “fundamental, comprehensive change” to improve academic performance that he said has been stagnant for 20 years – a reference to the state’s performance on the National Assessment of Educational Progress – and has left 2.5 million students failing to read and write  at grade level. He cast blame on “the same Sacramento leadership” of  “insiders,  politicians and business as usual” that he identified with Torlakson.
Recording by EdSource .



Sunday, May 04, 2014

 
Creative Commons License
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 3.0 Unported License.