Don't Blame Individual Teachers

Interesting opinion piece today by Kyle Olson of The Education Action Group:

Detroit News: Counter union influence on school boards (11/09/07)

I received an email in response to it, asking, “How do people let teachers get away with this?”

I don’t think that’s really a fair way to frame the question, because I see a clear distinction between teachers, and the union that represents them.

I believe most individual teachers want to be in the classroom, with kids, helping them to learn. I believe most of them, quite frankly, want to be as far away from this firestorm as possible.

They deserve our support.

The MEA, on the other hand, drives issues that have absolutely nothing to do with educating our children. They are all about adult issues, and this type of activity is part of their mission.

They deserve scrutiny.

We need to keep in mind that teachers are citizens too, and have every right to support the candidates of their choice. But the coordinated effort by the MEA PAC to influence – or manipulate – elections goes far beyond that. It’s part of a larger statewide strategy conceived by the union leaders, and not by individual teachers.

Admittedly, there are a few teachers who not only encourage this type of union activity, but also take it even further. For example, some will use class lists to call or write parents at election time, using materials paid for by the union PAC (see the example to the right). It’s a deplorable practice, but one I believe is only practiced by a relatively small number of teachers.

And while a larger number of them may do their part as outlined in the union strategy, I believe many are driven to do so out of fear instilled by the MEA.

I honestly don’t see individual teachers as the problem. If teachers have any responsibility here, it’s simply that they choose their leaders poorly.

It’s the leaders of the MEA who give teachers a black eye with the type of behavior outlined in Mr. Olson’s piece.

Through the power of the internet, and the reporting required through campaign finance laws, people are starting to see who is pulling the strings behind the curtain.

I have pasted the article below in case the link doesn’t work.

------------------------------------------

Counter union influence on school boards
Kyle Olson

Imagine if you had the opportunity to choose your boss -- the person who would set your pay and benefits. You would take advantage of it, right?

The state's largest school employees union, the Michigan Education Association, has been doing that for years through school board elections -- including Tuesday's scattered voting. It has figured out that if the union issues endorsements and hands out contributions, union officials will find its friends sitting at the table come contract negotiation time.

This should worry voters, particularly in these tough economic times when tax dollars need to be stretched. In Rochester Community Schools, for example, the MEA Political Action Committee contributed more than $3,000 each to trustees Michelle Shepherd and Timothy Greimel in 2005 alone. The union PAC also paid nearly $1,000 for mailings to voters, according to campaign documents. Both candidates were elected and were key votes in approving the latest contract.

In Tuesday's elections, reform-minded Steve Kovacs was defeated by union-endorsed Beth Talbert. With Kovacs off the Rochester board, there will be one less voice asking tough questions on spending priorities.

School board elections typically are low-turnout affairs. A 2006 nationwide study by Terry Moe of the Hoover Institution found that in the typical school election, roughly 9 percent of the public shows up to vote. By comparison, 20 percent of teachers who live in the district (but work elsewhere) vote on Election Day. Teachers who live and work in the district are four-and-a-half times more likely to vote.

Add on top of that family members and friends, and it's not difficult to see how the interests of taxpayers get overwhelmed at the polls.

Candidates who earn union endorsements will be the most sympathetic to the union's case and least likely to look for savings through bidding competitively for health care or bidding for noninstructional services. The union has become increasingly sensitive to the plight of the Michigan Educational Special Services Association, its insurance affiliate, and heading that off at the pass -- at the board level -- is the strategy.

The profileration of front groups does not help the situation. A quick search of the Secretary of State's campaign finance search page shows the MEA has more than 20 PACs registered to its name. Keeping track of the money that flows through virtually every county to influence the outcome of school elections is difficult to do.

Our group tracks these things. Union involvement is a clear indication of who it thinks its friends will be in labor talks.

There are several actions Michiganians must take to get better control of public education:

• Know your school board candidates, who has endorsed them and who has contributed to their campaigns.

• Determine whose interests the candidate will represent: taxpayers and parents' or the union's.

• Vote for candidates based on who will stretch dollars as far as possible.

Ultimately, taxpayers hold the power in their hands to demand reform of public education spending in Michigan. But they must know their candidates and vote accordingly to ensure their wishes are granted and more dollars are freed up for students.

Kyle Olson is vice president of Education Action Group Inc., a nonprofit group in Muskegon that works with school boards and taxpayers.