So What Needs To Get Done?

[austin]

I never said it couldn't be done. I said it couldn't be done now. Are you aware that the BOE cannot even formally request concessions of SWEA (or SWAA or OAPSE)? They just signed an agreement with SWEA (and SWAA and OAPSE) a couple of months ago, agreeing to role over ALL elements of the contract - the entire contract - until June of 2010. That includes wages - at present levels - with no negotiated increases. That cannot be opened up again unless SWEA chooses to open it up.

I agree that SWEA represents ALL teachers, and you are saying you know "several" teachers who are willing to take cuts. Yes, I have heard them, too. Several teachers (or teachers' spouses) do not a majority make. Many, many teachers do not even live in this district. Why on earth would they pressure their union to voluntarily take further cuts? SWEA's job, just like SWAA's job and OAPSE's job, is to look out for their employees. The majority of their employees.

As far as some teachers losing their jobs, that has ALWAYS been the way it is. I have never seen the community so supposedly upset that some newer teachers might lose their jobs before. That stinks, but the truth is that every teacher that enters the profession must face that gauntlet for a period of years before they are through it. Every teacher that will probably not lose their job through cuts went through several years of economic instability until they made it through that period of time.

You and I agree on the benefits thing. It just won't happen now.

You say that you don't agree that it CAN'T be done. Okay, good luck to you, then. I would be happy to have you prove me wrong.

[tlg]

I think we need to change the thread title to "what can't get done". There is nothing left to cut but staff positions, salary and benefits. It is a new paradigm, and the world of cut a few programs and replace after the third levy passes is gone.

If SWEA or the other unions believe that they can wait this out, they are mistaken. We are in a deepest economic downturn in 70 years and it is not going to turn around soon and it will never turn around for the folks in the bottom third of the economy. Half the voters don't even have skin in the game enough to come out and vote.

It is proven over and over and over again that a committed 10-15% of the voting community does have the power to keep levys from passing.

The cost of education at all levels has risen at twice the rate of inflation for the last thirty years. Teachers are no longer underpaid and overworked and underappreciated, now they are just like the rest of us: overworked and underappreciated.

If the unions are not willing to consider across the board cuts or more staff reductions the levys will not be passed without extraordinaire effort. The taxpayers keep saying do more with less, just like the rest of us, and we keep ignoring them.

[austin]

tlg, I understand that you are frustrated. But surely you don't think this is the ONLY possible action that will net any positive results, do you?

Let's take a look at what actually happened. Back in February, at a public forum, Dr. Wise and Hugh Garside agreed to take a pay freeze. SWAA got on board within a matter of time, and OAPSE then followed suit. Discussions began within SWEA to do the same thing.

The community, upon learning of SWAA's and then OAPSE's offer of a pay freeze, began demanding and clammoring that SWEA take one, too. I read many, many posts in various venues where people said that it would show a good faith effort if teachers took a freeze, too.

The SWEA ship is a bit larger, representing over 1400 employees, and the larger the ship, the longer the time it takes to turn, but soon, SWEA offered the BOE the same pay freeze that SWAA and OAPSE did, which is exactly what many in the community said they wanted. Then all was fairly quiet on that front - until the May levy didn't pass.

Then what was a freeze should have been a cut, according to a lot of arm-chair quarterbacks. SWAA didn't take a cut; neither did OAPSE. Many in the community seemed very satisfied that the unions were offering up freezes - well, until the May levy didn't pass.

When the May levy didn't pass, it quickly became "not enough" - not surprisingly at all to those of us who consider ourselves "district watchers". I had made numerous predictions to friends that, "Just watch, heaven forbid if the May levy doesn't pass, the community will start complaining that the very freeze they clammored for would no longer be adequate". And that's exactly what happened.

Two things: 1) by accepting the freeze that the unions offered before the May levy, the BOE made an agreement with those unions. Those agreements run through June of 2010. That agreement cannot now be broken simply because there are those in the community who believe that the financial woes in the district should be reconciled on the backs of its educators, and 2) this goes to the larger point that many of us believe that there is no paycut percentage/amount that will ever satisfy the community. I firmly believe that if 1% was offered, the community would demand 5%, and if 5% was offered - and so on.

I know of many teachers who are probably willing to take paycuts. Most teachers would do anything to support their students, in my experience. However, none of that addresses why this district has rarely supported education, even in boom times. You refer to the economic downturn - and it is agreed that we are indeed experiencing a particularly bad one, but what about all of the prior opportunities to support schools when the country was not experiencing an economic downturn and the community chose over and over again not to support its schools? I am not opposed to cuts philosophically, except that I don't know why any union would trust this community to fulfill its obligation at some later date when financial times better. Trust is a two-way street.

The bottom line is that while the unions may not be able to wait this out forever, they can wait this out until next June.

So the question is really, then: what needs to get done? I'm not willing to waste a lot of time looking at things that are probably not going to work; I'd rather focus my energy on things that can work. Lots of people now say they're going to try to get their own school district, to which I say, "Good luck, and let us know how that works out", because in the meantime, too many students have been deprived of opportunities and they are real people in need of real solutions, and I can't waste a bunch of time working towards something the state will very likely deny in the end anyway.

Let's not give up. Let's press forward with multiple fronts of attack on ignorance and fear. The millage is less, the BOE is considering pay to participate and should have some answers for us on that soon. These are things the community said it wanted, so there have to be some ways forward now.

[tlg]

This is the first time that I have heard that the unions have the same lack of trust in the community that many in the community have in the unions.

Neither is monolithic

A pay freeze was good enough for me to see that the unions were making an effort, but was it good enough to get a levy passed? No. Was it the only issue people considered when they voted? No.

Did we do a scientific poll to understand if a pay freeze would be enough to convince enough voters? No. We simply assumed the sacrifice would work because we were being told that it would help. It did help. The levy nearly passed in August. Was the pay freeze the only reason we nearly passed the levy? No, but it had an effect. We just have no idea what that was.

Are we going to do a survey now to determine what cuts would convince enough voters to vote yes to pass a levy? Precedent says no. We'll listen to some loud, angry voices or quiet, thoughtful ones and then project that the entire body politic will behave in a certain manner without testing the theory.

When it fails we'll come back to the voters in a reactive manner and try to listen to what they want all over again. Constantly being behind the curve and reacting to the latest failure will not get a levy passed.

Taking options off the table without understanding whether those options would be a benefit or not to getting a levy passed is also counterproductive.

[austin]

Okay, tlg - I'm really trying to understand here. . . did you not want the unions to offer up the payfreeze?

Because by the very act of doing so - and the BOE accepting the offer, the agreement was sealed for a year. THAT's how that option got "taken off the table".

How would it have worked otherwise? Should the unions have said, "Well, the community is clammoring for a payfreeze, and here it is, but we'll wait around before we make any agreement regarding a freeze to see if 'it's enough' for the community, and we'll just happily keep 'eating it' until the community is satisfied"

I'm really asking: what should the unions have done? Not offered the freeze? I don't get what you really want here.

[tlg]

I want a needs assessment of the community of voters to determine what it is that they want to vote yes on a levy.

We keep guessing what they want. Will a pay freeze work? A pay cut? Close some schools? Cut some staff? Will P2P work? Will threatening to or taking away all the extra-curriculars work? Will 8.3 mills work? Or is it 7.4 or is it 3.4 this year and and additional +1.5 mills over the next two years?

Who knows? We need to find out what the people that are going to the polls and voting want. Not just for their education system, but to say yes to a levy in enough numbers to get it passed. This requires surveys and scientific method, not guessing.

It is not what I want, except as one voter among 100,000 in the district. I am not making proposals, I am saying we need to find out for sure. I am also saying, everything should be open to discussion. If we take these surveys and it turns out a 3% cut will be seen as the right thing to do to get a levy passed, we should do it. If it turns out no amount of salary cuts or benefits cuts will convince voters to vote yes, than it is pointless to do it.

[austin]

Okay, now I understand. Thanks. Unfortunately, I'm not sure we can afford the costs associated with scientific surveys (not saying we can't - just know that such things are expensive and I'm just saying I don't know). We have tried unscientific surveys in the past, such as polls on the district website, etc., or passing out surveys at meetings and we all know those are not representative, that's for sure.

I also think we are extremely challenged by how very diverse our district is, in income, in education level, in age, ethnicity, etc. - in all sorts of indicators.

It would certainly be great if we could figure out what the answers are to those questions, I agree.