In its current
contract talks, the Philadelphia Federation of Teachers has brought the pot,
water, the stone, and the first vegetable in the form of not asking for a raise
and agreeing to some health benefit changes. That will mean the members of the
union will actually see their take-home pay decrease if nothing else changes.
The union agreeing to this is a big deal for the members, who will then be
contributing a part of their salaries to stem the deficit of the School
District of Philadelphia (SDP). This proposal was made before the contract ran
out at the end of August. September arrived without a contract between the
School District of Philadelphia and the teachers’ union.
The state-run
School Reform Commission and Dr. William Hite had prepared a doomsday budget
for the 2013-14 school year which saw 4000 workers laid off, including
assistant principals, counselors, nurses, teachers, classroom assistants and
others. Laying off all those people still didn’t save enough money to begin the
school year. Dr. Hite was asking for $300 million to get rid of the district's deficit and
have enough to open school in September. The city coughed up about $100 million
in loans and tax revenue. The state put up a whopping $14 million of the $100
million requested and the teachers’ union was called upon to make up the rest
with salary cuts, increased benefit contributions, and work rule changes. The
union instead put forth the proposal above. Our congressmen got the federal
government to forgive a loan owed by the state so Governor Corbett could apply
it towards the state’s contribution. He decided to hold it hostage instead, preventing
the rehiring of counselors and nurses. The death of an asthmatic child at on
the schools was the only reason he finally released SOME of the $45 million
which was supposed to be earmarked for the Philly schools, in order for some of
the laid off workers to be rehired.
Union detractors
and the so-called “school
reformers” are fond of stating that the
teachers’ union hasn’t contributed a cent towards the deficit. I beg to differ. Even without contributing a
proposed salary freeze and benefits change, the first ingredients for the soup,
teachers have contributed the pot, water and stone in the form of extra hours
spent tutoring students, planning curricula, buying supplies and personal items
for their students, attending unpaid meetings, working tirelessly, unpaid, after-hours
and on weekends to make certain that their students have the best education
they can get with the resources provided by the teachers.
For the past
several years, Philadelphia Federation of Teachers (PFT) members have met for
countless hours with parents, students, and community members to propose
sensible “reforms” for the public schools here in the city. Our salary is already
$19,000 less than the well-paid high-income suburbs in the surrounding
counties, who clearly have an easier job. We are not reimbursed for getting our
Master’s, Doctorate, or additional certificates, as are many suburban teachers.
So we’re on our own to become truly highly-qualified teachers sought by the
district. People are fond of stating
that we get paid for summers off. Not true! We get paid from September through
June. Any money we collect during the summer is money we have taken out of each
paycheck during the school year, so we can have money throughout the summer.
Doing it this way actually saves the School District money by allowing our
summer money to collect interest during the year.
Now, instead of
contributing needed ingredients to the stone soup in the form of equitable
funding, the State has begun taking things out of the soup.
Governor Corbett appointed William Green as head of the SRC and he has stated,
in no uncertain terms, that the state will not give Philadelphia any more money
until the union agrees to changes in work rules. The state wants to require a
longer day, longer year, Saturday classes. They have already eliminated
seniority in rehiring teachers, and also expect the union to agree to the
dissolution of tenure for teachers. They want the teachers to take a 13% cut in
pay in addition to the increased contribution toward benefits. The state’s whole
premise is untenable for the teachers.
A study by the
Pew Foundation determined that the SDP was underfunded by the state to the tune
of $1 billion. The state took over the district in 2001 because of deficits and
poor performance on tests. But during the 13 years it has been on charge of the
district, our funding has decreased every year, while teachers are expected to
do more. In 1975, the state of Pennsylvania contributed 55 percent of school
funding statewide, but by the time they took over the district in 2001 it ‘s
share was less than 36 percent.
Pennsylvania ranks 49th out of 50 states in public school
funding. The decrease in state funds was expected to be raised by each
district’s property taxes. A state system which relies heavily on property
taxes for local school funding is one of gross inequities. Wealthier school
districts with more property owners and more expensive real estate have more
funds for schools. Expenditures for students vary widely, with comfortable
suburbs spending up to $10,000 more per student than poorer rural and urban
districts. In addition, Corbett has put a property tax increase cap on the
districts.
Now that we are
back to the pot, water, and stone, with no vegetables (additional funds), the
School District continues to be under the gun to increase test scores. Of
course, there are no school counselors in the elementary schools under 600
students, there are no extra-curricular activities, no music or sports, no
small class sizes, and reduced supplies
and books. With the Common Core Standards being introduced, there is little
time to prepare, adapt, and learn the things that are new in the curricula. The
new district proposals for next year will have the effect of taking away the
water and the pot, and all we are left with is the stone around our necks –
pulling us into the abyss of low test scores, decreased funding, closed
schools, and low test scores, etc.
We need a fair
funding formula for Philadelphia and the other districts on the brink –
Reading, Allentown, Harrisburg, etc. Poorer districts that cannot raise enough
revenue from property taxes, need a different way to have the increased funds
that it takes to raise high poverty districts from the threat of failure to a
the stone soup of success, a high quality education.
It’s not the
teachers union that is preventing this from happening. But the state is more concerned with breaking
the union than educating the children, and has gone so far as to threaten
shutting down the district if they can’t get their way. Throwing out tenure and
seniority is not going to make me a better teacher, because they have nothing to
do with making the children in my class score better on a test. As PFT president Jerry Jordan says, "Work-rule changes don't put textbooks in our children's hands, computers in their classrooms, restore their counseling and nursing services or return music and art to their curriculum."
work-rule changes don't put textbooks in our children's hands, computers in their classrooms, restore their counseling and nursing services or return music and art to their curriculum
Read more at http://www.philly.com/philly/living/20140225_Funding_formula__not_work_rules__should_be_district_s_No__1_priority.html#6T4J7JUldwGPKF37.99
Which school
district will do better? The one that spends $10,000 per student or the one
that spends $20,000+? Which one will score better, the district whose parents
make $200,000 or the one where the average income is $30,000? The one with 60% low-income or the one with 10% low income? Read more at http://www.philly.com/philly/living/20140225_Funding_formula__not_work_rules__should_be_district_s_No__1_priority.html#6T4J7JUldwGPKF37.99
We already know the answer and it has nothing to do with seniority or tenure. It has to do with the difference between stone soup and lobster bisque.
Still learning!
No comments:
Post a Comment