Bruce Lear lives in Sioux City and has been connected to Iowa’s public schools for 38 years. He taught for eleven years and represented educators as an Iowa State Education Association regional director for 27 years until retiring. He can be reached at BruceLear2419@gmail.com
Before Republicans gutted Iowa’s 42-year-old public sector bargaining law in 2017, collective bargaining was a lot like a middle school dance. At the start, there was a chasm between wannabe dancers. They huddled with their own group, talking about what might be.
Oh, so gradually they inched closer. One deal was done, then a couple more. Suddenly, the dance floor rocked until deadlines loomed, and the lights blazed on.
It’s never easy. But it worked, and the school district and association owned the results.
Compromise is hard work. A contentious issue in Whiting might not cause heartburn in West Des Moines. But there were always some similarities. One of those similarities was the reduction in force language.
Bargainers on both sides realized it was important to have objective criteria for a layoff, since the termination of an employee’s contract wasn’t because of poor performance. It was about a budget shortfall.
When contracts were first negotiated, both sides voluntarily agreed that staff reduction language should recognize seniority. Those that didn’t have a voluntary agreement had a chosen arbitrator who decide staff reduction language should be objective.
A bill introduced by Iowa House Education Committee chair Skyler Wheeler, now numbered House File 859, has Republican legislators pretending they know more than local bargaining teams. This bill eliminates seniority as a factor in staff reduction. It requires that “practitioner performance” be “the sole factor or a primary factor” in determining who should be laid off.
Yes, everyone wants the most qualified teachers and support staff in the classroom. But this bill attacks public schools, and could bring serious unintended consequences.
Bargainers knew they were negotiating a contract they would live under. Both sides owned it. If we goofed up language and it didn’t work for one side or both, there was discomfort and a whole lot of shouting for change. But we could fix it. House File 859 takes away that local control.
Under Iowa’s 2017 “collective bargaining lite law,” school districts can refuse to negotiate over anything but starting salary. But districts wanting to keep quality educators not only discuss important issues like staff reduction, but add that language to the master contract or the employee handbook. Most of that handbook language was once in a master contract.
Under this bill, a school district could fire a 25-year veteran and keep a first-year educator. Veteran teachers establish the climate in a building. I could always tell when I walked in the building and there was a positive climate. I also could feel the opposite.
Savvy administrators often assign the most difficult kids to veteran educators. It’s a student’s best chance to succeed academically and socially. For that reason, judging performance for staff reduction could be biased against the senior teacher.
Schools need beginning teachers full of unbridled optimism and energy with new ideas, but that shouldn’t happen at the expense of veterans whose wisdom comes from experience. They’ve been in the boiling classroom where multiple kids throw up. They know how to help kids survive and thrive.
Because the legislature has underfunded public schools for more than a decade, inexperienced administrators may look for the easiest path to balance a budget. That means laying off the more experienced educators (with higher salaries) and hoping for the best. Under House File 859, that would be legal—but it should be unacceptable.
I guess it’s not a surprise the Republican majority under the Golden Dome wants to meddle in local collective bargaining. They’ve pretended to be experts on school libraries, public libraries, classroom books, history teaching, and university curriculum. They’ve meddled in the doctor/patient relationship and interfered with parental decision making. They siphoned money from public schools to pay for private school tuition.
I trust local school boards and education associations to negotiate language that meets their local needs. I think most Iowans do too.
Editor’s note from Laura Belin: When the House Education Committee considered this bill, Republican State Representative Tom Moore joined all committee Democrats in opposing it.
Top photo is by fizkes, available via Shutterstock.
6 Comments
Six thoughts.
My six thoughts
1. Too many school boards do not see teaching as a profession where trained and licensed teachers engage students in learning activities based on the objectives and standards of the state. Acquiring seniority, and the perks and protections that come with it, is the only way to attract and retain professionals.
2. As teachers gain seniority, they also have increasing personal aspirations that require money: marriage, family, mortgage, insurances, children, college, etc. If a job can’t guarantee these, people won’t or can’t stay. People desire predictability. Hence “salary schedules,” insurances, leaves, etc. As teachers gain experience, their grasp on these benefits of seniority must be more secure.
3. Republicans have come to believe teaching is merely a warm body following a script, something that any 22-year old can do, maybe better than a 54-year old professional and surely cheaper. In fact with AI, we will only need muscular monitors to discipline slackers.
4. Teaching, with the protections and benefits of seniority, is a reality that challenges parental (M4L) myths about the role of parents. Public schools serve society not individual parents.
5) The number one objective of the public school is the continuity from year-to-year and generation-to-generation of our liberal democracy. Here “liberal” means our Republic with its Constitutional separation of powers and accountability of its checks and balances and respect for the rule of law and free and fair elections are the rule.
6. Schools aren’t colorblind sanctuaries where race, diversity, inclusion should be shunned as evidence of white discrimination that makes children feel anguish over sins of the past. Schools fail if they don’t instruct children 1) to have respect for differences and the values in each culture, 2) the importance of fairness in access and distribution of the goods of society, 3) the importance of including others of differing race, etc. in the school and community. Private schools are an options for parents who want to govern the goals of the school and practices in the classroom.
Gerald Ott Thu 20 Mar 11:58 AM
73% want changes in public education
Teachers union thinks throwing money at a problem would solve it. Heck, I though Ott wasthe “Ireland correspondent” or did he change his mind on to Ireland if Trump won the election?
ModerateDem Thu 20 Mar 12:47 PM
Oh Bruce you truly are a bleeding heart aren’t you? ❤️
You talk as if publicity education was working at a ford plant or a John Deere plant . You know what happens when you base pay and job protection merely on longevity ? You get reduced production and reduced caring facts , been proved time and time again.
I sat a on a school board Bruce , give it a shot! You know what I found ? Older teachers where less likely to keep up with the latest lesson plans and planning time to stay current in education, ,many using the same old lesson plan 6-8 or 10 years old. Leaving schools far earlier at days end than the younger staff. Those are just for starters.
It came time for the budget talks and so called collective bargaining, the older teachers where willing to watch good young motivated teachers lose their jobs so they could pad their last 8 years of retirement income at the expense of young teachers with young families when it came time to make cuts , why? Because the older ones unwilling to budge on the so called collective bargaining agreement. It got the point that they had a mediator come and at that time in Iowa maybe the same today? What ever the mediator said was what was done. Collective bargaining ? Please the older ones had zero issues throwing younger staff under the bus .
With the testing scores in many schools across the United States falling and what some schools did to parents and kids education under Covid? Your words are hollow and mean little. The national survey from parents are you satisfied with public education in the USA today 23% yes and 77% said no!
We have far more issues to worry about in education than longevity pay and longevity rules. . We have seen what happens with teacher unions under COVID , disgusting behavior and put many kids far behind.
Midwestconservative Thu 20 Mar 12:51 PM
A Couple Observations
I want to share some thoughts about Bruce’s commentary as well as ModerateDem’s and Midwest Conservative’s comments:
Bruce . . . thanks for sharing your thoughts based on your many years of working to advance the critical work of public school systems as your life’s work. I’m a product of public schools and still fondly remember so many teachers who encouraged, challenged and motivated me.
ModerateDem . . . To offer some perspective to your Gallup Survey information about public schools, Gallup presents an annual report of public confidence in a wide range of U.S. institutions. Many institutions have experienced increasing declines in recent years, to include organized religion. Public schools are not an outlier.
Midwestconservative . . . I have no basis to challenge your observations as a school board member, other than to wonder if you paint with too broad a brush. There is a bell curve of performance for all professions. My anecdotal observation is about my sister-in-law, a retired public school teacher. She lived in a comfortable suburb of Indianapolis but choose to serve in an intercity school. Her stories of bringing clothes and other items from home to assist marginalized students was eye opening to me, wgattending middle class public schools
Bill Bumgarner Thu 20 Mar 7:39 PM
Ooops . . . Accidently Hit Send
My closing point is that it’s easier to be critical of institutions than building and advancing them. That’s why I respect the work of Bruce, Gerald and so many others who have stood in the fire, performed the hard work and made a positive impact on countless lives.
As I look at Iowa primary and secondary education, public school systems are transparent in their work regarding test score trends and the like. In doing so, they serve the needs of all students. They accept full responsibility along the with tax support that’s received. As they should.
There’s clearly a place for private and religious schools in Iowa. I support that. But once tax dollar support is accepted, they should meet the same obligations as public schools. Accepting all students. Supporting special needs students. Being transparent about student performance outcomes.
The track record for statewide voucher schools in the U.S. is not positive. A simple Google search provides that information. The governor and GOP legislature rushed into the Iowa program without performing responsible due diligence. The negative outcome will become more evident with each passing school year.
Bill Bumgarner Thu 20 Mar 8:00 PM
Midwestconservative
Just a small clarification. Your comment includes this: “The national survey from parents are you satisfied with public education in the USA today 23% yes and 77% said no!”
But when I looked at the Gallup graph box in the previous comment, and I assume that was the survey referred to, it turned out those percentages referred to “adult respondents,” not “parents.” There is a difference, and the percentage of American adults who do not have children is growing every year.
PrairieFan Thu 20 Mar 9:21 PM