Teacher union strategy towards RttT is becoming clearer. Will it work?
A strategy at the state level of both national unions when it comes to the Race to the Top appears to be to be emerging. Rather than opposition, it is, as IEA Executive Director Audrey Soglin put it, sitting at the table. But not just sitting there. The union representatives appear to be be using their seat and going after Arne Duncan’s requirements for receiving the RttT funds. In some cases it appears to have had some limited success.
Examples of the strategy can be found in Leo Casey’s post today on EdWize. He attacks the NY State Charter School Association for trying to sabotage NY getting a share of RttT funding.
At EdWeek, columnist Stephen Sawchuck describes how Massachusetts, Colorado and Kansas have produced Memoranda of Understanding, which are required for RttT state applications. These MOUs emphasize preserving language in existing collective bargaining agreements.
Then there’s Massachusetts’ MOU, which adds this language:
“Nothing in this MOU shall be construed to override any rights or duties as provided by collective bargaining law or collective bargaining agreements. The LEA and the local collective bargaining agent agree to negotiate in good faith, and those portions subject to collective bargaining shall be implemented only upon the agreement of the LEA and local collective bargaining agent.”That would in effect mean that a district wouldn’t, for instance, have to implement a teacher-effectiveness plan if the district and union reached impasse on pay or evaluation.
Is this the union strategy for undercutting the anti-teacher components of Race to the Top? Will the “at-the-table” strategy work?
The leadership might have some explaining to do if it doesn’t.
