An angry response to District contract proposals
by Ron Whitehorne on Aug 17 2009 Posted in Social justice unionism
According to a letter to PFT members from President Jerry Jordan, the School District has presented a 16-page list of new contract proposals that, in Jordan’s words would “weaken your voices in your schools…, limit your professional opportunities and leave many of you without the most basic protections our union contract now affords.”
The letter cites a longer school day without additional compensation, performance pay based on student test scores, and the elimination of the traditional seniority based transfer policy as key elements of the District’s proposal.
“District proposals,” Jordan reports, “do not address salaries, health care or funding the PFT Health & Welfare Fund.…Not surprisingly, district proposals fail to address the issues that you've identified as having the greatest impact on achievement - safety and discipline, class size and classroom resources, to name a few.”
Additionally Jordan highlights ways in which the contract proposals further concentrate power in the hands of administration rather than seeking out collaborative approaches. The letter cites administrative control of prep time, terms and benefits for teachers in "high needs" schools set by administration, and arbitrary assignment of teachers by administration as cases in point.
If the District is in fact pursuing these proposals, and if Superintendent Ackerman is serious about her threats to impose her proposals using the never-used provisions of the State takeover law, we have the prospect of a contract that will ride roughshod over many teacher concerns and cause further teacher demoralization.
Many education activists, myself included, believe the traditional seniority-based transfer policy has not served low-achieving schools well and needs reform.The Cross City Campaign for School Reform’s “Effective Teaching for All” platform, with its call for site selection that involves teachers exercising equal power with principals, is a progressive alternative.
But this, like other elements of the contract, needs to be negotiated, not imposed from above. The administration, instead of assuming it has an exclusive franchise on what children and schools need, should seek to engage teachers in the work of reform, listening to their views and concerns. Among other things this means a commitment to negotiate with the union and a repudiation of earlier threats to impose an agreement.
If the District does use the “nuclear option” we can expect legal challenges and possibly job actions, as the school year gets underway.. The divisions and resentment that an imposed contract will produce threatens the concentration on student learning that all agree is needed if our public school system is to go forward.
Comments (5)
Submitted by Anonymous (not verified) on Tue, 08/18/2009 - 12:13.
It appears that our new superintendent has no intention to negotiate in good faith with the Philadelphia Teachers Union. The tone of the negotiations and her respect for the teachers and their representatives was evident when individual employment contracts were sent to all teachers demanding to return it signed or face consequences.
Whether the superintendent had the right to ask for such signature, which had not been done in years, is not the point. The point is that the tone of the letter and the fact that it was first sent without any warning to our union representatives showed the apparent disdain that the school district appears to have for us and our union.
Now, when reading the latest update from Jerry Jordan, it appears that the school district is trying to weaken our union and erode the rights and benefits of teachers and other district personnel.
These rights and benefits that teachers and all school employees enjoy today are the results of the sacrifices of those who came before us. Let's show our resolve to not let anyone erode those rights.
It is paramount that teachers and school emplyees come out in large numbers for our march that will start from the Sheet Metal Workers' Union Hall, 1301 S. Columbus Boulevard at 9 a.m., Monday, September 7.
Let's all show support for our union representatives and our readiness to do all we can to get a fair contract for all school employees.
Submitted by Anonymous (not verified) on Tue, 08/18/2009 - 13:20.
It's interesting to read Heather Knight's piece in Nov. 10, 2004 San Francisco Chronicle about all the stuff Ackerman pulled on teachers out there (it is available online). She wanted teachers to reapply for their jobs to "guarantee their commitment and enthusiasm"! Who the hell is she to question any teacher's commitment given the number of towns she's skipped out of after alienating just about everyone (outside of her corporate/political sponsors)? Ackerman even stooped to playing the race card when she couldn't get her way out in San Fran.
In the San Francisco Bay Guardian News piece by Tali Woodward and Steven T. Jones (also online) details how she stopped talking practically everyone connected to the district. Teachers evidently don't even come into her radar. She "simply shuts down in the face of dissent". The classic example of her arrogance is when Ackerman had a meeting with Deniis Kelly, president of the teachers' union. She shows up an hour late and then tell Kelly that she was being disrespected by the union. Kelly requested that she give them an example and also mentioned that the union resented her targeting attacks on them as "racially based". After this first meeting Ackerman was unwilling to meet with them any longer. She displays the classic control-freak tactics. Luckily for San Francisco they weren't scared to fight her and eventually send her packing. I wonder if Philadelphia will be as brace?
Submitted by Anonymous (not verified) on Tue, 08/18/2009 - 23:54.
Brave, not "brace" is what I meant.
Submitted by Anonymous (not verified) on Fri, 08/21/2009 - 00:02.
It appears that Heidi Ramirez, a member of the Philadelphia School Reform Commission (SRC), could no longer deal with Arlene Ackerman... See the article whose link is below.
http://www.philly.com/inquirer/local/20090820_Outspoken_Ramirez_quits_sc...
I hope that Ms. Gym, a community activist, was wrong when she stated that, "It seems as though the people who appointed her gave her no backup as concerns became evident," and that "It's a serious issue about accountability for the district and whether the SRC is a body of five rubber stamps or not."
How depressing!!!
I can't imagine what Jerry Jordan and his negotiators must be going through. It does not seem that there is much room for negotiations with our new superintendent.
Submitted by anonymous (not verified) on Fri, 08/21/2009 - 07:03.
anonymous...
Maybe the SRC will appoint Gym...
As far as Jordan....he is sympathetic to the machinations of the district...he is part of the problem...
Post new comment