Chron won't tell you why teachers unions oppose merit pay programs
The Chronicle's editorial board dislikes Gov. Perry's decision to order a teacher merit pay program that "will use $10 million in discretionary federal funds to reward teachers who succeed in economically disadvantaged schools."
Here's the paragraph that gives away which side the idealists are on:
Teacher union leaders have consistently opposed bonus pay plans linked to tests scores because the criteria for receiving bonuses can be easily manipulated by school principals to reward favorites and punish mavericks. Simply assigning advanced students to particular instructors can rig the system in their favor.
Eh, no. That's their EXCUSE, but it's not the reason. Two paragraphs down, the true reason is hinted at:
Alief school board President Sarah Winkler expressed similar sentiments to the Chronicle's Jason Spencer: "I think we need to get everyone's salary up to an equitable level before we start giving rewards here and there."
Of course, all unions strive for equitable pay. It helps maintain their power.
Here is the real problem with teachers unions and the real reason they oppose merit pay programs:
Peter Brimelow and Leslie Spencer from Forbes Magazine have been studying the rise of teacher unions for the last two decades and believe that the problem lies in the unions' huge monopolistic clout. Economically, the function of a union is to monopolize the labor supply to increase wages. Public education represents another monopoly such that every parent must pay for the schools (in the form of taxes) whether or not they use or want the service. The NEA and AFT also represent the only unions teachers may choose to join. Therefore, the teacher unions are a monopoly on top of a monopoly on top of another monopoly. Or put more elegantly by Brimelow and Spencer, the NEA and AFT represents a "near-monopoly supplier to a government-enforced monopoly consumer."
The results are catastrophic. While per-pupil spending and union activism have significantly risen over the last 30 years, teaching quality has seriously declined. Dr. Myron Lieberman from the Education Policy Institute asks, "How do the NEA and AFT raise the costs while lowering the levels of student achievement?"
[snip]
An even more destructive stance by the teacher unions is their view on teacher compensation. The NEA and AFT alliance insists upon a single-salary structure, which means all teachers get paid the same regardless of the subject they teach or their ability. This causes a barrier in attracting qualified math and science teachers, who can earn more in other professions. The teacher unions adamantly oppose the obvious solution of paying math and science teachers more money. Instead, they use the dearth of math and science teachers as a reason to increase pay for all teachers.
These unions also oppose awarding exceptional teachers with pay increases. Raises are solely based on seniority. This causes a socialistic culture that refuses to award success or punish failure. The teacher unions' opposition to "merit pay" causes an overall decline in teaching quality and student achievement.
The major trouble is unions are strongly against any competition in their market. They value job security and benefits above children, parents and teaching quality. The NEA and AFT's opposition to home schooling, school choice and charter schools is all based on their desire to maintain their monopoly. Even though teacher unions are the biggest setback to improving American education, their unambiguous solution is always to increase spending.
And each spending increase is accompanied by an increase in mandatory dues to local, state and national teacher unions. Most estimates place the annual dues between $400 and $500 per teacher.
The last paragraph is the key: every time an equitable (read: across-the-board) pay increase is achieved, union dues go up, which equals more union power. Merit pay can't be turned into a union raise, which is why teachers unions oppose merit pay programs.
RELATED: Why Merit Pay Will Improve Teaching (Steven Malanga, City-Journal)
Posted by Anne Linehan @ 11/06/05 08:03 AM | Houston Chronicle | Print | Comments (1)
Previous Entry | Home | Next Entry
ADVERTISING
DISCLAIMER
All content © 2004-09, blogHOUSTON and the respective authors.
blogHOUSTON.net is powered by Nucleus.
Site design and Nucleus customization are by Kevin Whited.