- Posted by David on September 17, 2009
Yet another "here's the problem" letter [oops, "guest column" ] completely devoid of any solutions designed, apparently, to stir up anti-teacher sentiment [and take another cheap shot at yours truly]. The author claims to want fairness towards staff yet he sat at Monday's Board meeting quite obviously reading a newspaper while a teacher was receiving what she stated as one of the most important recognitions of her life, with family members who traveled from out of state to see her receive the award. That's fair? That's respect?
The author in the column below which I have included, in fairness, in its entirety fails predictably, and again, to offer any solution, or, if you can find one in there, any realistic solution, to the problem he so clearly delights in describing. Why? Because there isn't one that he can propose that will work, it is easy to Monday morning quarterback, much harder to show leadership and actually make decisions [easier just to criticize the decisions that are made].
At a recent Board work session in which the author was in attendance, I called upon him to offer comment - he just shook his head and refused to make any statement. At that, or other, work sessions, the author could have dazzled all with his brilliant insight into solutions to the problems identified, solutions that surely no one else in this District has ever thought of. The author had the opportunity to run for a Board seat, 3 are up for re-election in November [including me] , he could have circulated a petition and run for office on his solutions, whatever they may be, and had the populace vote him in and me out, or not. Instead, the author's agenda appears to be one of simple, straightforward, union-busting which would likely have become clear in a general election. Better to sit on the sidelines and ridicule others than to have the courage to come forward and run on whatever platform the author espouses.
The fact that the author wants to bust the teacher's union is a fair goal for some but the author should not hide his goal behind a cloak of claiming to be reasonable and logical. I believe it perfectly reasonable and logical to NOT want to bust the teacher's union. The author could have chosen to walk his talk, run for office, become part of the district leadership and lead it toward his solution to the problem, yet he chose not to do so. Interesting and very revealing.
It's hard to shoot the messenger when there is no message other than bust the Union. I am sure the author will have many agree with him in that goal. God Save Us All.
For some facts about the return on investment this community gets from its investment in high-quality teachers and the benefits our children receive from having such teachers, click http://www.worthington.k12.oh.us/news_detail.php?rec=928
David A. Bressman
Union is the key to fundamental change
Wednesday, September 16, 2009 3:05 PM
John Herrington is co-founder of Educate Worthington
"Don't shoot the messenger." This is wise counsel, and most of us can understand and agree with the logic in this simple statement.
Unfortunately, recent letters, articles and columns on the proposed school levy suggest that many levy supporters might prefer to "shoot" any messenger that brings a message they don't like; even if that message is vitally important to the future of our community, and is based on simple, verifiable mathematics.
While some have labeled Educate Worthington as the problem, this is simply a distraction from the real issue: the rapidly rising expenses in the district's five-year forecast. And unfortunately, those rising expenses make it clear that the proposed November levy will need to be followed by similar levies in 2012 and 2013/2014 for a total of three new levies in just five years.
The critical question is "Why?"
Employee costs, which comprise 88-percent of the budget, are projected to increase from $97-million per year in 2009, to over $120-million per year in 2014 (up nearly 24%) in this mature (not growing) district.
To further understand why these costs are rising so dramatically, the union contracts contain both base raises each year, plus large automatic step raises for the first 14 years of every teacher's career. As The Columbus Dispatch pointed out in an analysis of "newly hired" teacher salaries: "Last school year, the average of those combined raises in Franklin County districts ranged from 5.9 percent to 8.8 percent, while the average raise for private-sector employees in the U.S. was 1.8 percent. That's not going to fly for long."
Apparently The Dispatch recognized that if all districts raise the salaries that rapidly, for all new teachers, someday the residents who pay for it will simply be unable to keep up. That "someday" may be today.
Not surprisingly, even if the Worthington teachers union follows our administrators' generous gesture and "give back" a year's worth of base raises, it would only slightly delay the inevitable: that spending will eventually outpace the ability to levy new taxes on our residents.
In 2008, some suggested that signing a new three-year union contract would leave little, if any, room for necessary spending adjustments should costs spiral out of control. Unfortunately, this appears to be our current circumstance, and the board is now choosing to propose "massive cuts" as we move toward a November levy vote, despite a projected budget surplus for the next 2.5 years.
What this ultimately means is that student educational and extracurricular opportunities, along with many younger district staff, may be lost in exchange for the continuation of 5-percent average raises and generous insurance and retirement benefits for the union and its remaining membersÉwith no end in sight.
If we ignore the facts and let emotions get in the way, we could someday face a very hard-landing like South-Western City Schools. This is unfair to the students who lose opportunities, unfair to the teachers and staff who lose jobs, unfair to the school district, which slowly loses its reputation, and unfair to the residents who slowly pay more and more in an effort to keep up with costs that simply cannot be sustained.
Nobody wants that except, apparently, the union, which would prefer "business as usual." In case you have not noticed yet, the union is the key to any fundamental change, and without its involvement, there can be no "soft-landing." Many in the community are asking the union to step up.
Fundamental change won't be easy, but instead of spending time building "cut lists" and then throwing up our hands and saying "God save us all," our district leadership could a take a cue from Captain "Sully" Sullenberger. You might remember that with courage and leadership, he safely landed a plane on the Hudson River after losing both engines. If, like him, they stay calm and use clear thinking, we may lose some luggage, but no one will get hurt.
John Herrington