Evidence:
Facts:
http://www.cato.org/sites/cato.org/files/serials/files/cato-journal/2010/1/cj30n1-8.pdf
Coulsen, Andrew J. “The Effects of Teacher Unions on American Education.” Cato Journal. http://www.cato.org/sites/cato.org/files/serials/files/cato journal/2010/1/cj30n1-8.pdf (accessed May 7, 2013).
-“According to the latest Schools and Staffing Survey published by the National Center for Education Statistics, private school teachers received an average base salary of $38,200 in 2007–08, while the comparable figure for teachers in traditional public schools was $52,100 (Coopersmith 2009: Table 7). This understates the difference in compensation between the sectors, however, due to the superior retirement benefits enjoyed by public sector teachers.” (pg. 157)
-“The most widely cited effort to investigate this issue is Caroline Hoxby’s (1996), which used a large, nationwide sample and a panel regression model with instrumental variables to conclude that unionization raises a public school district’s per pupil spending between 4.3 percent and 9 percent, relative to nonunionized districts.” (pg. 159)
– “42 percent compensation premium that divides public from private sector teachers” (pg. 159)
– “In the past half century, public school union membership has sextupled, and the share of union members within the public school sector has doubled (Figure 2). Clearly, the past 40 years have been good to the unions on this front.” (pg. 160)
– “Teachers unions became an institutional player in public education with the advent of mandated collective bargaining throughout much of the United States in the 1960s and 1970s. Through this process they acquired considerable influence not only over wages, benefits, and conditions of employment but over the educational program of school districts as well.” (pg. 163)
Kirkpatrick, David W. “Teacher Unions.” Encyclopedia of Education. http://ic.galegroup.com/ic/whic/ReferenceDetailsPage/ReferenceDetailsWindow?failOverType=&query=&prodId=WHIC&windowstate=normal&contentModules=&mode=view&displayGroupName=Reference&limiter=&currPage=&disableHighlighting=false&displayGroups=&sortBy=&source=&search_within_results=&action=e&catId=&activityType=&scanId=&documentId=GALE%7CCX3403200614 (accessed May 13, 2013)
-NEA had more than 2.3 million members in 2001
-NEA has a budget of nearly $250 million dollars
Blocks Education Reform:
http://www.cato.org/sites/cato.org/files/serials/files/cato-journal/2010/1/cj30n1-8.pdf
-“Victor Lavy argues that teachers union lobbying in particular ‘has often halted efforts to legislate performance-based rewards.’” (pg. 161)
-“Since public schools already enjoy a monopoly on nearly $600 billion in annual government education spending, the chief way in which the NEA and AFT minimize competition is by lobbying elected officials to maintain that monopoly—opposing policies such as charter schools, vouchers, and education tax credits that give families easier access to nonunion schooling.” (pg. 162)
-“The aim of these generous lobbying expenditures is frequently to minimize competition. In early 2009, for example, the NYSUT lob- bied for the elimination from the state budget of a planned $51 mil- lion increase in charter school funding, and for the inclusion of a significant increase in funding for traditional public school districts. The legislature followed this recommendation, freezing charter school spending at the previous year’s level.” (pg. 162)
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/rob-furman/teacher-unions-_b_1937032.html
Furman, Rob. “Unions: Good or Bad for Education?” Huffington Post. http://www.huffingtonpost.com/rob-furman/teacher-unions-_b_1937032.html (accessed May 4, 2013).
-“Contracts may be so specific that teachers are only allowed to do an after school activity once a year. Even though teachers would be willing to go the extra mile for their students, they are too intimidated by their union to try”
– “Our nation has been trying to reform the schools since the early 1980s, and the whole time the teachers unions have used their political power to block it.
Tenure:
http://www.cato.org/sites/cato.org/files/serials/files/cato-journal/2010/1/cj30n1-8.pdf
-“Hoxby and Leigh (2004: 239) conclude that between 1963 and 2000, ‘Pay compression increased the share of the lowest- aptitude female college graduates who became teachers by about 9 percentage points and decreased the share of the highest-aptitude female college graduates who become teachers by about 12 percent- age points.’ To this, Neal (2002: 34) adds that, ‘The rigid wage struc- tures among public schools also raise questions about teacher retention.’ In particular, he points to studies by Murnane and Olsen (1989, 1990) and Stinebrickner (2001), which examine separation rates for public school teachers, and concludes that ‘teachers with higher test scores and better college records leave their jobs at higher rates.’” (pg. 161)
http://news.yahoo.com/former-teacher-unions-bad-teachers-152100130.html (FIRST PERSON RESOURCE)
Farnham, Kristie. “Former Teacher: Unions are Bad for Teachers.” Yahoo News. http://news.yahoo.com/former-teacher-unions-bad-teachers-152100130.html (accessed May 13, 2013).
-“It’s sad to see teachers lose their motivation and passion because their pay is not in direct correlation to how hard they work.”
-“While these salary scales might be efficient, they force public schools to pay teachers based on seniority and degree-level regardless of merit.”
-“The NEA says that single salary schedules are advantageous because they ‘mitigate any subjective criteria or biases that might influence compensation, and they have predictable operating costs as well as built in efficiencies due to their easy administration.’”
-“Without single salary schedules, tremendous teachers could rise to the top and less dedicated teachers could be faced with the challenge to do better.”
http://www.foxbusiness.com/on-air/stossel/blog/2011/11/06/unions-good-bad-teachers-bad-kids
Stossel, John. “Unions: Good for Bad Teachers, Bad for Kids,” Fox Business, http://www.foxbusiness.com/on-air/stossel/blog/2011/11/06/unions-good-bad-teachers-bad-kids (accessed May 11, 2013).
– “He (ex-police detective Jim Smith’s job to investigate claims against bad teachers) says it’s so hard to fire anyone that it took years to fire a teacher who hit kids. ‘It took me four years and $283,000. $127,000 in legal fees plus what it cost to have a substitute fill in, all the while he’s sitting home having popcorn,’ said Smith.”
Guzman-Lopez, Adolfo. “State’s Largest Teacher Unions Want to Join Pending Lawsuit on Teacher Tenure.” Southern California Public Radio. http://www.scpr.org/blogs/education/2013/03/28/13090/california-s-two-largest-public-school-teachers-un/ (accessed May 10, 2013).
-Vergara vs. California, was filed in May, 2012 by Students Matter and a top constitutional law firm. The suit seeks to change five laws governing the teaching profession, namely the tenure provisions that give teachers wide job protections after 18 months on the job.
-“This case is really about protecting the rights of children in the state of California to equal opportunity to access to quality education, which the California Supreme Court has recognized is a fundamental right guaranteed by the California constitution,” he (Marcellus McRae, one of the lawyers representing plaintiffs in the lawsuit) said.
Uses Teacher’s Money for Political Campaigns:
http://www.cato.org/sites/cato.org/files/serials/files/cato-journal/2010/1/cj30n1-8.pdf
– “In the vast majority of states, unions are free to use members’ dues for any political activity so long as the member has not submitted a formal request asking not to have their contributions used for that purpose.” (pg. 163)
-“So, regardless of their political beliefs, unionized teachers (and all other taxpayers) end up donating money to candidates who are backed by unions.”
Lucas, Fred. “California Non-Union Teachers Sue Unions Over Coercive Political Funding.” CNS News. http://cnsnews.com/news/article/california-non-union-teachers-sue-unions-over-coercive-political-funding (accessed May 10, 2013).
-California teachers who say they are tired of paying for political causes they do not support – such as Democratic campaigns and gay and lesbian conferences — are suing the National Education Association, the California Teachers Association, and 10 local union affiliate organizations.
-One of the key issues of the legal action is the state’s “agency shop” policy, which requires every public school teacher – including non-union members – to pay up to $1,000 per year for the union’s collective bargaining efforts
-Under the law, unions can collect from teachers a base fee for services they provide, whether the teachers choose to join the union or not. The law also includes a process by which a union reduces the fees to exclude the cost of political activities from those such as negotiating for wages and benefits. Teachers who don’t want to belong to the union must “opt out” every year. A separate process allows them to challenge the amount of remaining fees they still pay as nonmembers
-Teachers’ unions are not pro student, not pro teacher, and not pro education–they’re pro Union.
jmccarthypotter 