A new contract. An extremely progressive contract. As you probably heard, the BTU released an updated version of this new contract late last night with key adjustments and substantial details added in the section regarding how teachers would actually move up this new four – tiered pay scale. However, the contract is still said to be a bit murky regarding teacher evaluations as the state’s Department of Education has not yet released specific information – just the phrase, “tied to student performance” – a phrase teachers often shy away from due to its ambiguity. The Baltimore Sun highlights the new contracts release, its additions and explanations, but says nothing related to the “AUs” – who will be keeping track of these?
As a young professional, I think the idea of a modern contract where teachers are forced to pursue additional professional development or go back to school once in a while to receive an increase in pay is a great idea. I also think it is awesome that our veteran teachers who have educated our children for more than 20 years are given the opportunity to increase their pay each year as well. But I think that the BTU needs to realize that until they specifically outline all of the “murky” details, a progressive contract like this will not realistically pass. Furthermore, when the BTU presents the tentative agreement to its members, they should be more prepared to explain and explain more. During the last vote, a young teacher paraded up and down the long lines holding a sign that said simply, “Please do not vote if you do not know the specifics.” As Baltimore City Teachers, it is our job to get the specifics.
3 comments:
I know that pf the teachers I have talked to, many of them voted against the new contract because they felt like they did not have enough information about the contract. I also think another factor that contributed to people voting against the new contract was due to the disorganized process for voting. I personally know people who were going to vote for the new contract but when they saw how things were being run and the actual voting process (pencils and paper in a staples paper box), they changed their mind. I think that in order to pass a new contract, it is necessary to display that a lot of time has been spent writing the specifics and informing teachers of those details. Teachers need to feel confident in Baltimore city and trust that they are looking out for their teachers.
I completely agree with the initial post, there needs to be more communication to dispel the contract myths that plague BCPSS. The union did a great job to negotiate a really progressive approach and attach substantial benefits to our new contract. Now they need to educate their members of the benefits and potential of the contract. (In response to the AU question: from what I have learned, there will be two committees with a balanced representation of interests that will ensure that teachers are supported with the new contract. The first committee (both names escape me) will exist to ensure proper implementation of the contract. The second committee will exist to evaluate and track teacher Achievement Units.)
The complaint that the proposed contract does not have enough details explained with the new evaluation procedure has been well lodged. However, it is not enough to vote the contract down under the expectation that these details must be worked out before a vote. In fact, to do so would be a vote against an ideal of progress that BCPSS desperately needs. The argument that we need to wait to vote until all the details are settled is a stall tactic that represents a perspective resistant to change. Realistically if we debated each nuance of the contract, the time the entire package would take to pass would dilute the contract’s progressive potential. The contract needs to be accepted with general language before the spirit of the document is deflated with unproductive long-term bickering over specifics that can be ironed out during the trial years.
That being said, the fact of the matter is that we already trashed an opportunity to take advantage of significant changes in evaluation proceedings that are coming down on us as a district, whether we have a contract that maximizes these changes or not. The proposal is a three year contract that has built in safety nets (union representation on AU boards, a separation of powers between governing and monitoring committees, and union rights to investigation of fraudulent teacher evaluations), that fully protects teacher interests – and theoretically student interests, although that is yet to be proven and is really a separate debate. The Race to the Top funding Maryland received from Obama’s educational reform initiative requires Maryland to restructure their teacher evaluation procedure to include fifty percent student achievement. This is happening and should not be a part of the BCPSS contract debate because it is not a district decision – it will be handed down from the Maryland State Department of Education. Our contract, while not detailed enough for some – due to the fact the state has yet to establish the evaluation process – is a timely meeting of opportunity between new contract negotiations and federal education reform. We need to pass this contract to ensure that we have the working conditions to maximize our place as educators within a new educational movement.
I was with the young teacher and the sign. The sign said "Don't vote if you haven't read the contract". The reactions were interesting. One man yelled that it wasn't even correct grammar. Sure it was phrased in the negative but that doesn't mean it isn't correct. Another women asked the sign holder "What do we do if we have read the contract?" The sign holder responded "Vote!" and the lady asked "Which way?" the response "However you like." There seemed to be a lot of fear of the contract despite people not knowing the specifics of the agreement.
Post a Comment