A union-teacher gap

As the first debate got underway, 16 candidates sat at the front of the multipurpose room at Grover Cleveland High School. Facing them were 16 audience members scattered among 240 chairs set in neat rows.

Right there, that could be the biggest challenge confronting United Teachers Los Angeles, which has seven officer positions open. Who can blame teachers who’ve stood in front of a classroom all day for deciding against an evening jaunt to Reseda to attend the debate? But the longtime lack of involvement in union affairs means that many teachers are not getting leadership that represents their viewpoints.

Among the themes that came up at the Monday night forum were the desire to kill the No Child Left Behind Act, lingering resentment over the backroom deal that union leaders cut with Mayor Antonio Villaraigosa over control of local schools, the importance of not having to do yard duty and anger that union campaign contributions failed, for once, to buy it a majority on the school board. Perhaps the most telling complaint was that UTLA does not, despite its name, unite all its teachers, acting instead on the decisions of insiders. Only 25% of members voted in the last union election. Younger teachers, especially, appear disaffected.

A split is growing among the teaching ranks. Some stick to the union line that seniority should command greater pay, job security regardless of performance, and the ability to pick classroom assignments. Others, many newer to the profession, seek higher pay in return for excelling at their jobs and affordable housing over tenure and lifetime retirement benefits.

The union’s first priority has to be its teachers’ well-being. The question is, which teachers’ interests is it protecting? And when will it realize that, in an era of reform, teachers’ interests are inextricably tied to those of students?

At Monday night’s meeting, UTLA President A.J. Duffy accused the Los Angeles Times of being anti-union. Not true. We appreciate the vitality of strong employee representation and admire the work of many Southern California unions. But we’re frustrated by the UTLA leadership’s failure to understand that serving teachers doesn’t have to mean pining for the good old days that weren’t so good for disadvantaged students. The New York City teachers union gets this and has embraced mayoral control, more flexible work rules and the introduction of charter schools. Why can’t UTLA?

One candidate mentioned that, more important than voting for her, it was vital for more teachers to get involved and vote. That’s a statement everyone should find true. The next candidate debate is tonight in Carson.