Politics
Wisconsin Teacher Walkout Reverberates in Florida
Public-employee unions get more aggressive in opposition to reforms
Around the State
Teachers and Democratic legislators fired a shot across the bow of government reformers when they walked off their jobs last week in Wisconsin.
Public-employee unions and their Democratic Party allies are enraged at Republican Gov. Scott Walker's proposals to curb collective bargaining and to require that workers shoulder a larger share of their pension and health-care costs.
Florida Gov. Rick Scott also is calling for pension reform -- requiring a 5 percent employee contribution and introducing 401(k)-style plans for new workers.
Alarmed that such reforms are sprouting up across the country, public-employee unions and their Democratic allies are spoiling for a fight. The disruption in Wisconsin is part of a national strategy to halt unfavorable legislation -- apparently by any means necessary.
Though Florida is officially a "right-to-work" state, one union has demonstrated the ability to organize sizable protests by members.
Last year, the Florida Education Association mobilized teachers to pack legislative hearings and jam phone lines to protest Senate Bill 6, which would have abolished tenure in the K-12 system and tied pay to performance. Their efforts paid off when Gov. Charlie Crist vetoed the measure.
Last week's walkout by Wisconsin teachers might re-stoke the FEA's fires as GOP lawmakers resurrect education reform legislation here. Gov. Scott's pension initiatives upped the ante by including tens of thousands of additional government workers.
But union power in Florida pales in comparison to Wisconsin, where organized labor is more deeply and broadly entrenched. Indeed, Wisconsin was the first state to authorize collective bargaining for public employees in 1959.
Though collective bargaining is widespread in the Sunshine State's public sector -- as it is in virtually every state -- a much smaller percentage of Florida government workers formally belong to unions or pay union dues. Non-members are still covered by collective-bargaining agreements, however.
Government workers in Wisconsin also benefit from a competitive state Democratic Party. Fourteen Democrats were able to halt consideration of Gov. Walker's bill last week by simply walking out.
Florida's union-supported Democratic lawmakers could leave Tallahassee and no one would much notice because Republicans hold supermajorities in both the state House and Senate. Democrats do not have enough members to block bills or override gubernatorial vetoes.
Still, workplace disruptions and Capitol rallies cannot be ruled out. Teachers, the largest public-employee group, remain especially restive. Many school districts have not approved pay raises in recent years, and a mandatory 5 percent pension contribution is seen as a 5 percent pay cut.
On the other side, taxpayer groups and tea parties strongly support Gov. Scott's effort to rein in employee benefits. Florida is the only state in the nation that does not require its government workers to contribute to their retirement fund. Increasingly, public-sector benefits outstrip those received by workers in private industry.
Since 2001, the U.S. Department of Labor found that public-sector benefits climbed 60 percent compared with 40 percent in the private sector.
Robert Sanchez, policy director at the conservative James Madison Institute in Tallahassee, says Floridians pay a steep price under the state's collective-bargaining rules.
"Collective-bargaining sessions -- often conducted out of the public’s view -- lock in the salaries and benefits that typically form the largest portion of most government budgets. By the time the average taxpayer has a chance to be heard, there is little left to discuss," Sanchez said.
James Sherk, senior policy analyst for labor and economics at the Washington, D.C.-based Heritage Foundation, said it's "too bad" that Scott is not tackling collective bargaining as part of his reform agenda.
"Up to the 1950s, even union leaders didn't believe there was any right to collective bargaining in the public sector," because government does not turn profits and does not have market competition, Sherk said.
"But through bipartisan complicity, public officials just kick the can down the road. Well, we're at the end of the road," he said.
Nevertheless, Florida AFL-CIO legislative and political director Rich Templin has branded Scott's call for modest pension reforms "political rhetoric" and "ideological posturing."
In the same vein, National Education Association president Dennis Van Roekel called Walker's public-employee initiatives "a politically motivated attack."
Such broadsides appear to signal future disruptions by government workers.
Though politicians, including Republicans, prefer to avoid protests by public employees, Florida's taxpayers may be spoiling for a fight. Voters who increased the GOP's majorities in Tallahassee last fall aren't likely to sympathize with teachers and other government workers who go AWOL in search of more tax money.
"The message of voters last November was clear: Government spending had grown much too fast," Sanchez said.
"Reining in excesses such as those inflicted upon Wisconsin’s taxpayers -- and the taxpayers in some of Florida’s largest cities -- is not 'union bashing.'"
--
Contact Kenric Ward at kward@sunshinestatenews.com or at (772) 801-5341.
Public-employee unions and their Democratic Party allies are enraged at Republican Gov. Scott Walker's proposals to curb collective bargaining and to require that workers shoulder a larger share of their pension and health-care costs.
Florida Gov. Rick Scott also is calling for pension reform -- requiring a 5 percent employee contribution and introducing 401(k)-style plans for new workers.
Alarmed that such reforms are sprouting up across the country, public-employee unions and their Democratic allies are spoiling for a fight. The disruption in Wisconsin is part of a national strategy to halt unfavorable legislation -- apparently by any means necessary.
Though Florida is officially a "right-to-work" state, one union has demonstrated the ability to organize sizable protests by members.
Last year, the Florida Education Association mobilized teachers to pack legislative hearings and jam phone lines to protest Senate Bill 6, which would have abolished tenure in the K-12 system and tied pay to performance. Their efforts paid off when Gov. Charlie Crist vetoed the measure.
Last week's walkout by Wisconsin teachers might re-stoke the FEA's fires as GOP lawmakers resurrect education reform legislation here. Gov. Scott's pension initiatives upped the ante by including tens of thousands of additional government workers.
But union power in Florida pales in comparison to Wisconsin, where organized labor is more deeply and broadly entrenched. Indeed, Wisconsin was the first state to authorize collective bargaining for public employees in 1959.
Though collective bargaining is widespread in the Sunshine State's public sector -- as it is in virtually every state -- a much smaller percentage of Florida government workers formally belong to unions or pay union dues. Non-members are still covered by collective-bargaining agreements, however.
Government workers in Wisconsin also benefit from a competitive state Democratic Party. Fourteen Democrats were able to halt consideration of Gov. Walker's bill last week by simply walking out.
Florida's union-supported Democratic lawmakers could leave Tallahassee and no one would much notice because Republicans hold supermajorities in both the state House and Senate. Democrats do not have enough members to block bills or override gubernatorial vetoes.
Still, workplace disruptions and Capitol rallies cannot be ruled out. Teachers, the largest public-employee group, remain especially restive. Many school districts have not approved pay raises in recent years, and a mandatory 5 percent pension contribution is seen as a 5 percent pay cut.
On the other side, taxpayer groups and tea parties strongly support Gov. Scott's effort to rein in employee benefits. Florida is the only state in the nation that does not require its government workers to contribute to their retirement fund. Increasingly, public-sector benefits outstrip those received by workers in private industry.
Since 2001, the U.S. Department of Labor found that public-sector benefits climbed 60 percent compared with 40 percent in the private sector.
Robert Sanchez, policy director at the conservative James Madison Institute in Tallahassee, says Floridians pay a steep price under the state's collective-bargaining rules.
"Collective-bargaining sessions -- often conducted out of the public’s view -- lock in the salaries and benefits that typically form the largest portion of most government budgets. By the time the average taxpayer has a chance to be heard, there is little left to discuss," Sanchez said.
James Sherk, senior policy analyst for labor and economics at the Washington, D.C.-based Heritage Foundation, said it's "too bad" that Scott is not tackling collective bargaining as part of his reform agenda.
"Up to the 1950s, even union leaders didn't believe there was any right to collective bargaining in the public sector," because government does not turn profits and does not have market competition, Sherk said.
"But through bipartisan complicity, public officials just kick the can down the road. Well, we're at the end of the road," he said.
Nevertheless, Florida AFL-CIO legislative and political director Rich Templin has branded Scott's call for modest pension reforms "political rhetoric" and "ideological posturing."
In the same vein, National Education Association president Dennis Van Roekel called Walker's public-employee initiatives "a politically motivated attack."
Such broadsides appear to signal future disruptions by government workers.
Though politicians, including Republicans, prefer to avoid protests by public employees, Florida's taxpayers may be spoiling for a fight. Voters who increased the GOP's majorities in Tallahassee last fall aren't likely to sympathize with teachers and other government workers who go AWOL in search of more tax money.
"The message of voters last November was clear: Government spending had grown much too fast," Sanchez said.
"Reining in excesses such as those inflicted upon Wisconsin’s taxpayers -- and the taxpayers in some of Florida’s largest cities -- is not 'union bashing.'"
--
Contact Kenric Ward at kward@sunshinestatenews.com or at (772) 801-5341.


Comments (18)
http://davemontrose.blogspot.com/2011/02/florida-teachers-might-follow.html
I honestly don't know where the vitriol and hatred for teachers comes from, but it is pervasive. What is frightening is that you may soon get your wish--many teachers are losing their jobs, and benefits / salaries for those who remain will be reduced. That means you will lose a higher caliber of future candidates for teaching, as they will seek other professions. The outcome is terrifying: districts such as mine might have class sizes of 35:1 (student to teacher ratio) being taught by underqualified, inexperienced individuals. And since you've done such an admirable job teaching your own kids how to read (as you claim), maybe you want to put your money where your mouth is and become a teacher yourself. I would give an hour before you change your tune.
The problem with measures like school choice vouchers and / or merit pay is that it equates public education to business models that have little, if any correlation to the profession. For instance, the concept of class vouchers opens schools up to a variety of conundrums like the amount of resources at their disposal, the socioeconomic status of its student body, and would force schools into a veritable popularity contest with other districts. Often the factors that make one school more "attractive" to other schools, have little to do with instructional quality, and more to do with the amenities. And measures like merit pay sound great on paper, but have zero practical application in education. For instance, if you take two teachers--one with a high concentration of Advanced Placement level kids, and the other with many more at-risk, learning disable kids--on paper, who do you think is going to look more successful? The AP level teacher will enjoy a 100% rate with most students in the A or B range, while the other will be faced with a 30% rate of failures, with many kids being in the C or D range. Does that make the AP teacher better? From experience, I can tell you that the kids in the AP classes will succeed no matter who is teaching them, where the other teacher may be working twice as hard even to get the most meager of results. How do you now attach a salary to "success" rate?
If those who are opposed to education as it is want to come in and see how the normal school day operates in the average public school, please, by all means drop in. What is frustrating, however, is that many who claim to have the answers are out there pontificating as if they know the situation, when really, they haven't the slightest clue.
Enthusiasm, hard work, and individualism made this country great, certainly not unions.
Therefore, I agree with you in that this is an ineffective, horribly inefficient approach that does not promote success. Yet, it doesn't mean that we should throw the baby out with the bathwater (pardon the cliche) and move toward the Darwinian approach you propose. Although the system IS in need of drastic change, that doesn't mean we should necessarily equate the most drastic of changes with the most promising. In your opinion, a system featuring vouchers is "designed for success," but the conversion to this approach, or others such as merit pay, has little to do with the promotion of success, and much more to do with the inherent profit of privatization. Kids are not "products" that can be forged or manipulated in order to fulfill a "rate of success" that is little more than a euphemism for profit. Your notions seem a bit contradictory--on the one hand, you speak of resisting any model that "judges" or "labels," (kudos to that), but you endorse a system that will do exactly that. Children will be reduced to a quantifiable product that can be measured on a spreadsheet. Also, it is a proposal that will invariably lead to many false positives. Have you thought of the implications of making a teacher someone who essentially works on commission? Of making them into people who are monetarily rewarded based on the outcome of assessments? I'm not sure you've pondered the dishonesty and ulterior motives such a model would invite.
I don't fault you for putting stock in such ideas. It's a "blame the teacher" mentality out there, and these measures feed into that popular lie by putting the onus on instructors, as if they're the sole reason why our children are under-performing. I agree with you re: what made this country great: "enthusiasm, hard work, and individualism." But what you are endorsing is at odds with individualism (in terms of how we treat and measure student performance), and it is deeply demoralizing to those teachers who approach their jobs with great enthusiasm and a sound work ethic. The only winners under a privatized model, or in an educational system founded upon competition between districts, are those that a survival-of-the-fittest mentality has always served-- the few at the top. Surely, you must not be so simplistic as to believe that ALL aspects of our society should be subject to a capitalist, laissez faire mindset, are you? That sort of theory may be practical in a business world that eats the competition alive (and sometimes, its own), but what are the moral ramifications of pitting school districts against one another? All schools should have the common aim of creating an environment that should be concerned with instilling mutual respect and fostering character development. I'm afraid you have your wires crossed. As long as you keep formulating your conclusions regarding education on economic ideals and parallels of "monopolies" and economic jargon, you'll keep missing the point.
Would you buy a gun, and hold up your neighbor to give to you their retirement savings? No. So why do you ask the Government to do it for you.
Personally, your attitude is offensive and you are nothing more than a parasite. Your kind of parasite has been killing the host and the host is now going to rid themselves of these parasites to stay alive.
Conscience?
RepublicanConscience=Oxymoron, moron.
Leave a Comment on This Story