To: MulhollandDrive who wrote (49589 ) 5/25/1999 3:01:00 PM From: DMaA Read Replies (2) | Respond to of 67261
At the risk of having her poor head spin right off into the bay, may I point out that Jerry [Moonbeam] Brown is now fighting the teacher's union: WSJMay 25, 1999 Jerry's Kids When Jerry Brown was governor of California he expanded the power of unions to organize public employees. But as mayor of Oakland, he now has declared war on those bent on unionizing independent charter schools he believes necessary for Oakland to turn around its dismal record on education. Yesterday Mr. Brown turned out to join parents and teachers who were lobbying the solidly Democratic legislature to kill a bill requiring charter school employees to belong to the same union that represents the regular public schools in their areas. Ironically, the measure would make charter schools the only public schools in California absolutely required to have union contracts. "If it passes, we're dead," says Yvonne Chan, principal of the Vaughn charter school in Los Angeles. "It will be the districts and the unions that run charter schools." Backed by the state teachers union, the bill has already passed the Assembly Education Committee and is scheduled for another committee hearing tomorrow. In response, Mayor Brown and his allies have penned a stinging manifesto that reads as if Tom Paine had taken up residence in the Bay Area. Addressed to Assemblywoman Carole Migden, the bill's author, the letter notes that Oakland's charter schools educate poor children of all races: black, Latino, American Indian, etc. "I assure you that we will not back down or cravenly accept the sellout of our right to determine our educational destiny," Mr. Brown wrote. "As we all learned from the sorry experience of state-sanctioned bureaucracies in Eastern Europe and the Soviet Union, decentralization is crucial to both freedom and excellence." Though publicly funded, what makes charters different is that they are run by parents and teachers, not bureaucrats. Some 34 states allow them, and last year California raised the statewide cap on charters to 250. Even though he's not in charge of the schools, Mayor Brown is helping parents with zoning and permit problems and has invited the for-profit Edison Project and the Fisher family foundation in to advise on management. Local officials have been supportive. "We have not delivered," admits Noel Gallo, president of Oakland's School Board. "A charter is a poor man's access to private education." It is precisely this fact--that charters are popular with low-income parents--which prompted the California Teachers Association to push for mandatory unionization. Indeed, in hearings thus far the question whether charters have been good for education hasn't even come up. "This shouldn't be about good or bad," says Assemblyman Scott Wildman, a former teacher union organizer. "This is about whether teachers [in charters] should be granted the same rights as teachers in other public schools." Not surprisingly, teachers in charter schools don't see it that way. Many charters have chosen union contracts, but many haven't. "We choose class assignments based on what's best for the kids, not seniority," says Susan Cornell, a teacher at the Fenton charter school. And the CTA has not been able to produce examples of charter teachers being abused. Indeed, when the National Education Association started its own charter schools in Connecticut and Colorado, it chose to operate them under flexible labor agreements the Migden bill seeks to ban. Back in March, NEA President Bob Chase admitted that his union "needs to get out of the way. We can't allow union sacred cows to block the path of members who want to pursue their own vision of school quality and reform." Maybe he should call his California affiliate and ask why it is trying to strangle the very reform he claims to embrace.