Op-Ed: Response to Nick Kettle's Take on Public Education and Teacher Unions

Representative Nicholas Kettle ends his disjointed op-ed “Break the union grip on RI education,” with one salient point on which he and I will agree: teachers need a voice. After 40 years in the classroom (21 in South Kingstown) and 15 years as a teacher union leader – and, perhaps most importantly, many hours in my leadership capacity sitting across from the school committee in collective bargaining– I know that the voice of the teacher is critical to maintaining positive student outcomes.

The problem with Mr. Kettle’s position is that the steps he recommends will effectively diminish – not enhance – the teacher’s voice. His reason for the recommendation? The recent dust-up outside a Providence courtroom. That gem of logical gymnastics reveals his real motivation: teacher unions are too potent for his taste.

Mr. Kettle’s goal and the results he is convinced it will yield, however, are more troubling than his disjointed logic. To believe that by weakening our collective voices we will somehow end up in a happier state of affairs educationally only makes sense if you believe in the myth of the benevolent and wise school committee.

It doesn’t exist. South Kingstown’s newest contract evidences the myth.

Our School Committee chair said her committee was “true to its commitment to support student learning.” If that were so, the Committee would not have sought – over union protests – to eliminate those contract provisions that enhanced student learning.

Forced to contend with a significant hit in state educational aid, the teachers quickly made economics a non-issue. On day one of negotiations the Committee informed us that they needed nearly $1 million in concessions. On day two of negotiations we agreed. Thereafter, the Committee sought to gouge the teachers and remove many meaningful provisions (under the pretext that they wanted to “restore management rights”), successfully eliminating two:  professional development and common planning.

Our job-embedded professional development – crafted in conjunction with the previous superintendent – ensured that teachers remained current with innovative classroom concepts and best practices, raising expectations of both teacher performance and student achievement. The Committee jettisoned the program.

Gone, too, was elementary common planning time, sacrificed for naught since the program was, effectively, without cost. Lost for the duration of the contract was that productive setting built into the schedule wherein teachers met at grade level or across grade level to ensure their shared students would find transitions from class-to-class and grade-to-grade seamless and consistent.

Fortunately, the teachers fended off further evisceration of meaningful provisions.

The reality of school committees is that they are populated by politicians subject to the same biases and influences of other politicians. Some are very good advocates for education. Some are not.

The president of one local shared with me, other local presidents, and Commissioner Gist the story of her committee chair who unabashedly told teachers, “I have no stake in education. I’m only here because of the taxes.”

Only Mr. Kettle’s mythical school committee would never seek to decimate arts programs or raise class sizes or eliminate literacy and math coaches.

Mr. Kettle’s beliefs about the benevolent school committee extend beyond the elimination of good programs to include hiring. Here he borders on the fantastic by assuming that without the legal restrictions that prohibit individual bargaining, committees would begin to offer salaries above those bargained for in the hopes of attracting the best people. More likely is that pressured by the statewide anti-tax coalition, they would begin to ratchet down salaries and award teaching positions to the low bidder.

In a way I’m sure he never intended, Mr. Kettle is right. Teachers need a voice.  And the only voice that will advocate for students when the school committee abdicates its responsibilities is that of the teacher’s union. The issues that really matter to my members are the terms and conditions we negotiate into our collective bargaining agreements. Our working conditions are our students’ learning conditions. Both have to be good for either to be great.