Akron Education Association newsletter: School boards, administrators and SB 5

AKRON EDUCATION ASSOCIATION
Random Notes
March 28, 2011

Jeff Moats, President jeff@akronteach.org
Michael Rusnak, Vice President mike@akronteach.org
Visit our Website at www.akronteach.org

School Boards, Administrators AWOL in the Fight Against Five

The list of those who have spoken in opposition to SB 5 before the Senate Insurance, Commerce and Labor Committee and its sister committee in the Ohio House is completely devoid of administrators and school board members. That shouldn’t surprise—the bill liberates both from the interference, restrictions and obstructions they’ve suffered at the hand of employees armed with the right to negotiate. Individually, they’ve maintained silence, opting for the easy way out by allowing their respective state organizations [Buckeye Association of School Administrators (BASA), Ohio Association of School Business Officials (OASBO), Ohio School Boards Association (OSBA)] to serve as their collective (no pun intended) mouthpieces in Columbus.

OASBO and OSBA issued joint testimony on Senate Bill 5. Describing themselves as, “one of the oldest and most basic forms of American public service and democracy,” they support removing health care from the bargaining process and capping their share of premium costs. They favor the “flexibility” that being their own judge and jury allows them in contract impasses; they appreciate the broad authority they’ve been granted to fire and layoff teachers. They blame the bargaining law for “a significant erosion of management rights” that has made it “extremely difficult for local boards of education to effectively manage schools,” but in the same breath they vow support for collective bargaining, boasting that how, since 1983, “…boards of education and their administrative staff (sic) have negotiated literally thousands of contracts.”

BASA’s testimony is not posted on their website and they declined our request for a copy. It’s a safe bet their position is as supportive of 5 as OASBO’s and OSBA’s, if not more so.

The disconnect between what these groups and their members have said in the past, and the position they’ve taken on 5 is hypocrisy at its finest. They’ve talked about the importance of partnering and collaborating with their teachers toward reaching our common goal of improving student achievement. They’ve acknowledged how critical teacher buy-in is to experimenting with promising reform initiatives designed to improve teaching and learning. Districts across the state have praised their teachers’ organizations for showing restraint at the bargaining table in cash strapped districts, applauding unions for settling for no pay increases and taking on more of the cost of health care. Nowhere is the hypocrisy more evident than in the praise management espoused for Race to the Top state guidance that requires labor and management to “negotiate in good faith to continue to achieve the overall goals of the State’s Race to the Top grant.” To our knowledge, not one school board member and not one school administrator has questioned lawmakers about how Race to the Top objectives can be met under the draconian bargaining restrictions in SB 5.

Given their stance on the bill, all of management’s expressions of allegiance to their teachers appear to be nothing more than lip service, unsupported by real conviction or action.