The LAUSD Board meeting on Tuesday was lively with UTLA, the teachers union, staging a demonstration in opposition to the budget-driven plans for teacher layoffs. I heard union president, A.J. Duffy, in a clip that was a good one to get the tone of yesterday’s actions. His speech was all about not accepting any layoffs of teachers and the comparisons he made to justify his union's actions, as well as get tons of points with members (and that's always good for a dues-collecting union) is very distorted.
Duffy said that this was a civil rights matter now. I disagree.
The “civil rights” label has now turned into anything anybody complains about- if so, then Octo-mom is on her own civil rights crusade. One big reason that I have for denying that the cause presented by A.J. Duffy is not a civil rights issue is that the TEACHER'S WERE NOT BORN with the teaching job, and that is not the only employment they are suited for. This is where drawing any parallel to the civil rights movement fails.
The teachers are not like Blacks or any ethnic groups that are stuck with who they are as a matter clearly beyond their personal control. The teachers specifically chose to be teachers, going into this career with their eyes open, as they are supposedly educated (and that's a stretch for some) and they were warned by so many before entering the teaching path- I know I was by many- of the pitfalls that they would be facing.
You don't do it for the money- at least it's not there for about 8 years of salary scale steps, but the health benefits were unbeatable, a big consolation. But teaching can make you feel so much better about what you do with your time and what you leave behind in the education of individuals than a lot of other jobs could ever do.
You cannot honestly equate civil rights struggles with the current economic realities. There is not any hate or disdain for the group, the teachers- here that you have seen for the real civil rights predecessors in history. You cannot honestly say that there is such a feeling present, either. If so, you really are ignorant of principles of business and economy, maybe even government administration, but especially you are bad at math if you think there should be no firings when the money needed comes up short.
In Federal Government service, where I spent many years- the layoffs were called "Reductions in Force" or “RIFs” and we were always aware of it as a hazard of the budgetary formulations. It has a better ring to it and captures the meaning more accurately than "lay-off." The case with the LAUSD jobs will be controlled by “Seniority” as the operative factor. One’s PERFORMANCE level has nothing to do with determining which teachers are getting cut, otherwise you might have some cause for complaint.
In the end, you're out of a job, and that's the bottom line from the teacher's side. And that's the side that the UNION is FIRST concerned with. How can you justify KEEPING ALL for teaching if (1.) enrollment is downs about half a million over 5 or so years? (2.) How can you say no layoffs should happen if there is less money to go around? (3.) You see in the news that jobs are getting wiped out and companies are closing all over the country. You have to see that it is going to affect you in some way if you are a teacher in the LAUSD, or are teachers that insulated from current events?
The budget deficit is really what controls. Superintendent Ramon Cortines said that if there were personnel cuts, he would first get out the non-classroom personnel (but he didn't say ALL of them would be let go; they DO have a few there to operate the District, even though sloppily), and those ex-teachers among them will bump classroom teachers by the seniority rules that Duffy’s very same union follows, and likely created.
SOMEBODY has to go but it's not ALL- and the pink slipping has to be done at this time as a mandatory notice prerequisite to any layoff. Should it not be done properly, LAUSD has itself painted into a corner- AGAIN. Everyone receiving notice is not getting cut, but that's the pool from which to select and they have to have a margin that will give with the budget numbers.
To say that it's a civil rights cause is to defile the notion of civil rights, as very similarly neutering the magnitude of horror when someone makes a comparison and says that somebody "is like Hitler." It’s like comparing by saying a firefly is like the sun. That image comparison might better illustrate the disparity between what you have and what is truly a civil rights issue. This will never approach the level of a civil rights matter if there is no immutable characteristic involved, and being a teacher does not satisfy that element. I would say simply, “Get real.”
It's all grandstanding, and it's that demagoguery they in ordinary politics use when the tax dollars are going low, that causes them they trot out the cops and firefighters to say "We might not be there when you need us," to let the people cough up the money like some kind of ransom to end the takeover of public safety. That is distorting the picture but then this IS a political process.
However, with teachers- there's not too much sympathy for them coming from those people who are losing jobs and may be without good benefits even if they still are working. The only leverage there is that the teachers have "your kids" and that's the whole key to ANY STRATEGY for gathering support.
If something affects your kids, you are probably going to be very interested. BUT you already see that LAUSD has only pockets of unified parent involvement to begin with- in lots of other areas many are not carrying their own responsibility as a parent, and THAT'S a large, if not the largest, reason for poor student performance (and behavior) in LAUSD schools.
A word to the wise: IF A UNION'S INVOLVED - like the variation on politicians that they really are- you have to be vigilant and dig deeper into the facts. DUFFY'S speech, as loaded as it was with images of history and the personalities of the civil rights movement of the last century, is still just too cheap a pitch to buy. But because many teachers (an important job, of course) are too carried away with themselves in the moment and with a few who are too full of themselves regularly, they rally behind him.
Did you hear Monica Garcia trying to cope with this disruption? She's the recipient now, but being the "cause" person that she is, had to comment to validate the union's "civil disobedience." This "demonstration" of dozens was nearly the leading story in television news. It is a significant event but not enormous or even very big in terms of numbers participating. Compare coverage with that given the anti-tax protest hosted by KFI radio’s John & Ken team this past weekend. There were estimates of thousands, at least 15,000, there in Fullerton. Some estimated lower but they either were there very early, or have just tried to play down the impact to balance against their own reasons for not giving it proper coverage as a news story. It was virtually - no, actually- ignored by the L.A. TIMES, and covered more briefly by other newspapers, while it is unquestionably a topic that will hit most Californians dramatically.
In this poor economic time, trying to make the teachers’ ranks “layoff-proof” is not a practical expectation and further, if a teachers strike goes beyond only discussion, besides battling the public’s indifference or inattention, the union will have to contend with hostility of the those who have no jobs and on the brink of financial ruin.
Some layoffs are inevitable, and some readjustment of the structure of the LAUSD administration is needed but it will not be seen in the short term. Converting to smaller districts with better accountability would be an improvement, but that, too, is not going to happen in the immediate future. Meanwhile, everyone suffers and the student performance is unlikely to improve.
Posts
