Politics

Wisconsin Teacher Walkout Reverberates in Florida

Public-employee unions get more aggressive in opposition to reforms
By: Kenric Ward | Posted: February 19, 2011 3:55 AM
Wisconsin Protestors

Protest moves inside the Wisconsin State Capitol | Credit : Suzanne Tucker - Shutterstock

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.

Comments (18)

10:44PM FEB 21ST 2011
9:09PM FEB 21ST 2011
I can't feel sorry for these people. First, they selected this profession and with it comes the ups and downs. However, I didn't see anyone demontrating when the private companies changed our Defined Benefit Program to a 401(a) Money Purchase Pension Plan. Matter-of-fact, I was within 5 years of retirement when the company I represented changed ours with a carrot if I stayed the remaining 5 years they would bonus us. They did just that, but in taxable income whereas, I could have had it deposited to another pension plan as tax free contribution. So sorry teachers, you need to lose your tenure so the State can keep the best and if you have to deposit a little extra, so be it!
Repubtallygirl
9:42AM FEB 21ST 2011
FIRE them all!!
Chuck B.
3:46PM FEB 20TH 2011
The problem with this article is that it fails to point out that the protesters are not protesting pension or benefit reform. They are protesting the complete legal obliteration of unions by the so-called "Budget Repair" bill. Many of the unions have already said they would accept the pension and health insurance reforms. This is about big government infringing on their rights.
Phill
9:16PM FEB 19TH 2011
Many are missing one simple point. We voted to be represented by certain people. Their job is to vote in representation of us. If all show up and all vote(that is what they are paid to do) the result is a majority representaion of us. It is that simple. I show up at my work every day as do the teacher. This is what we are paid to do. Budget's tighten up, taxes go up and someone must figure out a way to balance this. I commend Mr Walker for having the balls to say something politically incorrect.
Sherry Lee
11:39AM FEB 19TH 2011
It's about time. Taxpayers are being fleeced by mediocre workers who are overpaid and underworked and cry cry cry about their pay raises while everyone else is working 3 jobs and losing their homes. The old saying goes, 'pigs get fed and hogs get slaughtered...' Time to slaughter these hogs in government because they have grown very fat, lazy, corrupt, and have a massive sense of entitlement that they weild like a weapon and their mob bosses (union officials) resort so quickly to bully tactics. Well no more! The silent majority is going to rise up and take back control of our taxes and spending and if the government unions and workers don't like it they can quit. I you can read this, THANK A MOTHER!
Ashley Kia
1:21PM FEB 19TH 2011
Sherry- Thank God that you are not a teacher. Your concept of what teachers do and go through is bizarre, to say the least. I have several teachers in my immediate family. They earn only 1/2 -2/3 of what my past 3 supervisors in the private sector earns, and they have a higher level of education and more years of experience. These teachers are going into classrooms on weekends to finish grading papers and develop lesson plans, spending their own money for school supplies and even clothing for their students, and can't afford to insure their family members. The only thing that is has grown fat and lazy are your critical thinking skills.
Richard Riker
8:39AM FEB 20TH 2011
Ashley, you miss this point entirely. Public employees create NO money for their pay as do private sector employees. They get paid because the government takes money from private citizens. In other words the private citizen is the employer. When did you ever hear of an employee making more than the employer?
L Hamm
12:27PM FEB 19TH 2011
What an ignorant statement. First of all, you are addressing teachers as the sort of "government workers" who are "fat, lazy, and corrupt." I am one of those supposedly lazy people to whom you are referring, and I take great offense to your umbrage with my profession. It betrays a certain lack of education, so maybe I should reserve a little bit of criticism for whoever was responsible for educating you. I, for one, am NOT a "mediocre worker" who is "overpaid and underworked." My salary barely covers my modest living expenses, and I often work 60-65 hrs. a week being a teacher (40 hrs in school, 20-25 hrs grading papers, planning, producing lessons, attending meetings, etc.). I have twice the amount of money in student loans as I make in my yearly salary. Those supposedly cushy vacations I get (summer / holidays, etc) are spent working a second job and / or on unpaid teaching related prep. And I am certainly not the exception--I am the rule. Most teachers I know are in the same boat.
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.
A. Moody
9:36AM FEB 20TH 2011
Well said Mr. Hamm!!!!!!! I am also a teacher. I take at least 2 hours of work home on a daily basis. Because I don't sit at my desk all day, I have to grade papers and complete paperwork at home. This takes away from our "family time." The ONLY reason I won't leave is because I love my students. I want them to have the best education possible. Trust me, the pay is not worth it! However, changing the life of a child is worth it.
RepublicanConscience
12:54PM FEB 19TH 2011
Ms Hamm, I don't know if your are lazy or fat, it is not about you. It is about a collective education monopoly that is control of teachers, curriculum, budgets, etc. Monopolies drive costs up and drives quality down. When it is about you, you can defend yourself quite well. But so long as you are within the can of paint you will be applied with a broad brush. How would you personally be hurt by school choice vouchers? You seem to know you are a good teacher so how will you be harmed? Good teachers will be snapped up just like a good baseball player, football coach, salesman, or executive. Try to be more open minded as to your position in the big picture.
L Hamm
1:36PM FEB 19TH 2011
Republican Conscience-- First, it's Mr. Hamm (there was nothing in my post to indicate that). And thank you for not being condescending and offensive. This is the sort of tone / tenor that discussion should take. I am the first to acknowledge that reform is needed. And most good teachers would agree--there is nothing more repugnant than those few unmotivated individuals among us who give the rest a bad name. Yet, isn't it true that there are a few bad apples in any bushel? And that leads me to a point that I know you're wanting to offer: let's implement a system in which it is possible to remove those bad apples. So be it. But instead of talking about dismantling the entire tenure system, let's talk about reforming it. Where we would probably disagree is in regard to what those reforms look like.
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.
RepublicanConscience
2:18PM FEB 19TH 2011
BTW, having poor students will affect silly goals based on rocket science, but success is not just getting to a goal it is moving towards the goal. If a team fumbles a ball in the end zone and the other team recovers the ball for a touchdown, OK the points go on the board, but what was it really? Just a lucky break. Now, if one team takes the ball on their 7-yard line and move play by play advancing the ball and fails to score from the opponent's 6-yard line and settles for a field goal, were they successful or not? It is the direction you move the ball that determines success. Even low performing students can be successful by moving the ball in the right direction. Remember not all people have the same gifts, but all can move the ball. Read "Free to Choose" by Milton Friedman. He devotes a chapter to education vouchers. That was written almost 30 years ago. You will find it informative. You will learn how schools will begin to specialize based on the student and teacher makeup.
RepublicanConscience
2:04PM FEB 19TH 2011
Mr. Hamm, it is not fair to any individual to be judge by their group, however so long as that group is recognized as a group including the members of the group the branding will occur. If the system is flawed, then the failure is inevitable. For success to happen, the system that the entity operates within must be designed for success. I had a teacher who graded on a curve. Usually the highest grade anyone received on any test was about a 65%. That got the "A" grade. If 2 or 3 students got 100% on a test, could he tell how smart they were? Suppose they could have receive 130% but was limited to 100%. With a top limit preset, the real top limit is unknown. Everyone fights to maintain their little fiefdom, good or bad, it doesn't matter, it's theirs. Education has become a Monopoly and that is bad. It is no better than the making of bread becoming a monopoly, or providing health care, or cable TV. Only when competition enters do the incentives for excellence thrive. Under that system everyone wins, that is everyone who deserves to win, wins.

Enthusiasm, hard work, and individualism made this country great, certainly not unions.
L Hamm
5:25PM FEB 19TH 2011
Your talk about moving forward "as a team" and relative measures of success is fine and all, but it is at odds with proposals like vouchers and / or merit pay. You are correct in that it seems that the system, as it is, does not want relative success. It wants all students to perform to the same exact, uniform level--regardless of special needs / circumstances, access to resources, etc. It wishes to subject all kids to a cookie-cutter curriculum, a premise that is as absurd as saying that all human beings have the same exact IQ, talents, and skill sets. The only thing that matters is the pass / fail rate, a standard of such mind-boggling mediocrity that it's anything but inspiring. I'm not saying that this is how it should be, just that this is how it is.
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.
Lloyd Boothe
10:42AM FEB 19TH 2011
In West Virginia they tried to go with the 401K style plan back in the 90s for public employees. It was called the defined contribution plan. What a piece of crap it was. If you are in one of these plans and expect it to grow leaps and bounds you are barking up the wrong tree. Yes it is true that maybe a few people made a good return, but very few. Go or stick with the defined benefit plan. The state of WV gave us the option to buy back into the defined benefit plan and I took advantage of that offer. My retirement plan is going to be great if they don,t take it from me. That can happen to anyone I guess, but I would rather go with a "guarantee" than a 401k style plan that I am sure wall street will rob some day. We get 2% per year for every year worked ...payment is based on average income of last 5 years. Example.....Your income averages out to 40,000.00 at retirement with 30 years....30 x 2% = 60% of 40K = $24000.00 per year or $2000.00 per month. I don't know what world you live in but for me, this combined with Social Security and the wifes retirement will put me in good shape if we continue to live within our means. Just say no to 401K plans.
RepublicanConscience
1:04PM FEB 19TH 2011
Spoken like a true scoundrel. Why should everyone pay for your retirement? Why not just pay into the Social Security System like the rest of the citizens?
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.
Punjabi
6:41PM FEB 19TH 2011
"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

The content of this field is kept private and will not be shown publicly.
To prevent automated spam submissions leave this field empty.