Earlier this month, Randi Weingarten, the president of the American Federation of Teachers, criticized the KIPP schools in Baltimore for their alleged unwillingness to work with the union to reach an agreement concerning the temporary deal made last year. KIPP is seeking a ten-year extension of its one-year agreement with the BTU. Under that deal, it can afford to keep its 9 1/2 hour school days because its teachers are paid 20.5 percent extra for the extended day, much less than under the current union contract.
Weingarten expressed frustration that “KIPP is playing by its own set of rules”. She stated that KIPP has been eager to run to the press and criticize the union or try to change Maryland’s state law that requires teachers at charter schools to be represented by unions, instead of working with the union for an agreement that would benefit everyone involved. KIPP Baltimore’s executive director Jason Botel responded that KIPP schools in the city would have to close if they were forced to comply with the unions’ rules, and that he hoped they could reach an agreement soon.
Reading the article, interesting issues are raised between charter schools and unions. Should KIPP be able to “opt out” of union rules by changing the state law? And if so, would this result in a sort of landslide effect in which dozens of other charters would be tempted to do the same? Should teachers trade off their union rights in exchange for working at higher-performing schools, or should they be “forced” to follow the same rules as other teachers, even when they don’t want to? Either way, the tensions resulting from these public altercations is, as the author notes, a blow to the budding relationships between teachers unions and the charter school movement, “one of the most robust developments in American education.”
Source: http://voices.washingtonpost.com/class-struggle/2011/03/randi_weingarten_scolds_kipp.html
1 comment:
I definitely think that the state laws should be changed so that KIPP can continue to operate in Baltimore City. It is not that KIPP purely does not want to pay the extra 33% salary that the union contract mandates, it can't afford to! The school has to close down if the union does not compromise because KIPP does not have the budget to sustain such high salary levels. I believe Marietta English and the BTU are trying to make KIPP out to be the bad guy because they cannot pay the contract mandated 33% by trying to make the public believe that the only reason KIPP isn't complying is because they don't want to. Not wanting to do something and not being able to do something because of budgetary concerns are two very different things. Furthermore, if a teacher is willing and wants to work at a school and get paid 20.5% more for their extra time and work, they should be let to do so. I think it is ridiculous that a good school such as KIPP could be shutdown because of the union failing to compromise. Actions, such as this by the BTU, are yet another example of why there is so much backlash against unions. KIPP is a high performing school providing a positive learning experience to the students that go there. Environments such as this are few and far between in the city, and the union should be doing everything in its power to keep KIPP around and help them expand instead of forcing them to shutdown if they don't pay what the current teacher contract states. I think it will be a true shame if BTU does not back down on this issue and KIPP has to close. The students will be the main ones negatively affected. I don't hear anywhere in the discussion by the BTU what is best for the students, and what is best for the students is to keep KIPP around.
Post a Comment