Ed Reform 101: Teachers Unions

by: Jersey Jazzman

Fri Sep 02, 2011 at 09:15:00 AM EDT

Blue Jersey's Ed Reform 101
Part 4 - Myths about Teachers Unions

Ed Reform 101 Governor Christie's attacks on teachers unions have been simply astonishing. Rather than reach out to unions to work for real educational progress, Christie has instead demonized unions to the point that he would rather give up federal funds than work with the NJEA.

What Christie ignores in all of his bluster, however, are a few important facts. Teacher pay has not kept pace with the average pay for all workers in the state. Teachers do not get "Cadillac" benefits, and they pay for those benefits themselves. And the teachers unions have supported meaningful versions of some of his reforms.

It appears that Chris Christie is more interested in making teachers unions the enemy than working with them. Let's take a look at some of the myths about unions and teacher pay that Christie continues to sell to New Jersey.

What you should know about Teachers Unions:

Teachers are not overpaid in New Jersey.

Teachers unions do not impede student learning in any way.

Teachers unions are for meaningful reforms to tenure and back high-quality charter schools.

Teachers pay their own dues and democratically elect their union leaders.

Jersey Jazzman :: Ed Reform 101: Teachers Unions

Myth: Teachers are very well-paid compared to similar professions.
The Truth: Teachers are underpaid compared to workers in similar careers.
- Teachers are paid about 67% of the annual wage of similarly educated workers.
- In the last 20 years, teacher pay in NJ has risen more slowly than all other workers' pay.
- Teachers in Southern New York counties make considerably more than teachers in Northern New Jersey counties directly adjacent to them.

Myth: Teachers get "Cadillac benefits."
The Truth: The benefits teachers earn are not enough to make up for their lower pay.
- Any difference in the value of benefits between teachers and others does not make up for teachers' lower pay.
- Because benefits are part of total compensation, teachers truly pay 100% of their own benefits, including health care and pensions.

Myth: Teachers are paid a high hourly wage compared to other professions
The Truth: Teacher pay should not be compared to other professions using hourly wages, as not all hours working are counted.
- This comparison runs counter to specific guidelines from the Bureau of Labor Statistics on how to use compensation data.
- Teachers in the United States work longer hours than any other country.

Myth: Teachers unions hold back student learning.
The Truth: States without union negotiated teacher contracts rank lower on the NAEP than the states that have them.
- The ten states that have no legally binding K-12 contracts score significantly lower on average than the states that have collectively bargained contracts.

Myth: Teachers unions are against any reform of tenure.
The Truth: Teachers unions back meaningful and fair tenure reform.
- The NJEA has proposed overhauling tenure so cases can be settled in 90 days or less.
- Both the AFT and the NEA have proposed meaningful reforms to tenure.

Myth: Teachers unions hate charter schools.
The Truth: Teachers unions have no problems with charter schools.
- Both the AFT and the NEA publicly support charter schools.
- Former AFT president Albert Shanker first endorsed charter schools in 1988.

Myth: The public pays teachers' union dues.
The Truth: Teachers pay their own union dues - NOT the public.
- IRS rules state that teachers can deduct their union dues; therefore, the teachers themselves pay them.

Next in our series: Charter Schools & Vouchers

Tuesday, 8/30/11: Standardized Testing
Wednesday, 8/31/11: Teacher Quality
Thursday, 9/1/11: Merit Pay, Seniority & Tenure
Friday, 9/2/11: Teachers Unions
Sunday, 9/4/11: Charter Schools & Vouchers
Tuesday, 9/6/11: Recap

Tags: NJEA, unions, Education, special series, EdReform101, Ed Reform 101, featured, Jersey Jazzman, Schools, (All Tags)

Print Friendly View

Send As Email

Ed Reform 101: Teachers Unions | 3 comments

One item I've often thought about... (0.00 / 0)

Do you believe the union should differentiate between teaching disciplines?

IE. The phys. ed teacher probably does not have nearly the home hours that an english teacher must put in to read/grade papers.

Similiarly, those disciplines in high demand, science/math, wouldn't those positions be easier to fill if they were compensated better than disciplines where we have an abundance of teachers? (english)

Does the union make any such distinctions?

"Where ever you go, there you are." - Buckaroo Bonzai

by: William Weber (WjcW) @ Fri Sep 02, 2011 at 14:35:26 PM UTC

Well... (0.00 / 0)

... first, I wouldn't say "the union" doesn't make those distinctions. Pay scales are based on contracts between two parties. I don't know if any BOEs have ever tried to make distinctions between disciplines in negotiations. And I don't know if unions have particularly fought hard to not have those distinctions.

I think life is made easier for school boards by having everyone on the same pay scale. Once you open it up, things can get dicey: the woodshop teacher wants more than the band director, etc. How do you determine the difference?

So I'm not sure if this a union-driven policy. Never really thought to check, to be honest.

In addition: I wouldn't necessarily say the English teacher automatically puts in more time than the PE teacher. If you're hired to teach PE at a high school, it's pretty much assumed you're going to coach as well. Yes, you'll get a stipend, but it probably doesn't really cover all the time you put in, say, running the football program (a very big job). The band director has to do concerts; the art teacher is dealing with organizing materials. So I'm not sure the issues of "extra time" are that critical - everybody has extra stuff they have to do on the job.

My experience as a teacher is that, while teachers will complain about how much their coworkers work, it's no different than any other workplace. I don't think this is much of an issue for teachers - but teachers here should weigh in.

There is certainly a precedent in other professions. Doctors in different specialities get paid differently.

I'd also say this: if we believe that more pay for math teachers will attract better candidates, shouldn't we raise pay for all teachers, and get better candidates from K to 12?

http://jerseyjazzman.blogspot.com

by: Jersey Jazzman @ Fri Sep 02, 2011 at 15:09:56 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

Hard to fill jobs (4.00 / 1)

Well, on the issue of compensating teachers in "hard to fill" Positions, Math, Science, and Special Education, teachers in Title 1 schools, we used to get student loan forgiveness as an incentive. Unfortunately that program has been discontinued I believe. Bummer too, I just hit year five as a special needs teachers in a Title 1 school and that money would have really come in handy.

Like Jazzman said, everybody in on the same pay scale really because it's easier for management. There has been a lot of talk about differentiating people, and I think it's an interesting conversation to have. Creating a position of "Master Teacher", as discussed in yesterday's blog, and paying them accordingly is one idea. Some schools do offer a stipend for department/grade level chairs. Frankly, with the all of the pay freezes, low/no raises, and benefit cuts, it's going to become even more difficult to fill those "hard to fill" positions.

by: teachermomnj @ Fri Sep 02, 2011 at 16:59:17 PM UTC

[ Parent ]