I don't want to present myself as some sort of singular figure. I think
part of what's different are the times. I do think that for example the
1980 was different. I think Ronald Reagan changed the trajectory of
America in a way that Richard Nixon did not and in a way that Bill
Clinton did not. He put us on a fundamentally different path because
the country was ready for it. I think they felt like with all the
excesses of the 1960s and 1970s and government had grown and grown but
there wasn't much sense of accountability in terms of how it was
operating. I think people, he just tapped into what people were already
feeling, which was we want clarity we want optimism, we want a return to
that sense of dynamism and entrepreneurship that had been missing.
--Barack Obama
On August 3, 1981 the union [PATCO] declared a strike, seeking better
working conditions, better pay and a 32-hour workweek. In doing so, the
union violated a law {5 U.S.C. (Supp. III 1956) 118p.} that banned
strikes by government unions. However, several government unions
(including one representing employees of the Postal Service) had
declared strikes in the intervening period without penalties.[citation
needed] Ronald Reagan, however, declared the PATCO strike a "peril to
national safety" and ordered them back to work under the terms of the
Taft-Hartley Act of 1947. Only 1,300 of the nearly 13,000 controllers
returned to work.[4] Subsequently, Reagan demanded those remaining on
strike return to work within 48 hours, otherwise their jobs would be
forfeited. At the same time Transportation Secretary Drew Lewis
organized for replacements and started contingency plans. By
prioritizing and cutting flights severely, and even adopting methods of
air traffic management PATCO had previously lobbied for, the government
was initially able to have 50% of flights available.[4]
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Professional_Air_Traffic_Controllers_Organization_%281968%29
NY Times March 6, 2010
School’s Shake-Up Is Embraced by the President
By STEVEN GREENHOUSE and SAM DILLON
A Rhode Island school board’s decision to fire the entire faculty of a
poorly performing school, and President Obama’s endorsement of the
action, has stirred a storm of reaction nationwide, with teachers
condemning it as an insult and conservatives hailing it as a watershed
moment of school accountability.
The decision by school authorities in Central Falls to fire the 93
teachers and staff members has assumed special significance because
hundreds of other school districts across the nation could face
similarly hard choices in coming weeks, as a $3.5 billion federal school
turnaround program kicks into gear.
While there is fierce disagreement over whether the firings were good or
bad, there is widespread agreement that the decision would have lasting
ripples on the nation’s education debate — especially because Mr. Obama
seized on the move to show his eagerness to take bold action to improve
failing schools filled with poor students.
“This is the first example of tough love under the Obama regime, and
that’s what makes it significant,” said Michael J. Petrilli, a vice
president at the Thomas B. Fordham Institute in Washington, an
educational research and advocacy organization.
“I think it’s going to give some cover to other school boards and school
superintendents around the country that want to do something similar,”
Mr. Petrilli said. “They can say the president of the United States,
Barack Obama, someone the teachers voted for, supports us here to take
some radical actions to shake up our schools.”
In Boston on Thursday, another city moving to carry out the
administration’s school-turnaround policy, officials announced that
staff members at six underperforming schools would have to reapply for
their jobs. Carol R. Johnson, the schools superintendent, said staff
members were not being fired, but were being asked to “recommit”
themselves. This move angered the teachers’ union, which said it was
exploring legal action.
Mr. Obama’s endorsement of the Rhode Island board’s tough action
infuriated many of the four million members of the two national
teachers’ unions, thousands of whom campaigned vigorously for him in 2008.
“I ripped the Obama sticker off of my truck,” said Zeph Capo, a midlevel
official at the Houston Federation of Teachers who trains classroom
teachers. “We worked hard for this man, we talked to our neighbors and
our fellow teachers about why we should support him, and we’re having to
dig the knife out of our back.”
Officials at the two unions, the National Education Association and the
American Federation of Teachers, were so angry in the hours after Mr.
Obama first endorsed the firings that an irreconcilable break with the
administration seemed possible, perhaps bruising Democrats’ electoral
chances in November. Recognizing how a permanent breach could hurt
everyone, however, both sides sought to lower tensions, partly by
encouraging a negotiated settlement in Central Falls, administration and
union officials said in interviews.
But neither the president nor Education Secretary Arne Duncan backed off
his support for tough action, including dismissing teachers en masse, to
improve learning conditions in chronically failing schools. At the high
school in Central Falls, a poor community with a large immigrant
population, only 7 percent of 11th graders passed state math tests last
fall. And if the administration’s posture was undermining its support
among teachers, it was earning unusual praise from conservatives, as
well as from supporters of an overhaul of the nation’s schools.
“The administration is putting down a real marker here,” said Alex
Johnston, chief executive of the Connecticut Coalition for Achievement
Now, a business-backed education advocacy group.
The decision by the Central Falls school board came under the terms of a
new Obama administration policy intended to spur interventions in
thousands of failing schools nationwide.
To get a share of the $3.5 billion in what are known as School
Improvement Grants, school officials can choose to transform the
learning environments in failing schools by extending instructional
hours and making other changes, converting them to charter schools,
closing them entirely or replacing the principal and at least half the
staff.
The Central Falls superintendent, Frances Gallo, initially chose the
first option this year, but after a dispute arose with the union over
extra pay for adding 25 minutes to the school day, she broke off
negotiations. Backed by the local school board, she announced the
firings on Feb. 23. Last Monday, Mr. Obama supported the board’s action
in a speech to a dropout prevention group.
“If a school continues to fail its students year after year after year,
if it doesn’t show signs of improvement, then there’s got to be a sense
of accountability,” Mr. Obama said. “And that’s what happened in Rhode
Island last week.”
National union officials were shocked.
“Teachers were taken aback — and profoundly disappointed,” said Randi
Weingarten, president of the American Federation of Teachers. “Teachers
will watch carefully whether Washington, the states and local districts
will be partners that help us do our job or whether they’ll be
scapegoating and demonizing.”
In Central Falls, community protests erupted against the firings. Marcia
Reback, president of the Rhode Island Federation of Teachers, said
members of the state’s Congressional delegation had urged the parties in
Central Falls to return to the negotiating table.
On Wednesday, Dr. Gallo agreed to resume contract talks, raising the
possibility that at least some of the firings would be rescinded.
Nonetheless, at week’s end, the two sides said animosity remained strong
and negotiations were unlikely over the next few days.
Dr. Gallo said she had invited the union to participate in a meeting of
parents, district officials and other parties on Thursday to help plan
the school’s future.
Meanwhile in Washington, the Obama administration was bracing for
similar controversies in other communities as more states identify
failing schools.
“This is not a political strategy; this is about reforming the
lowest-performing schools,” said Tommy Vietor, a White House spokesman.
“It’s not always painless, it’s not easy. But what’s critical is taking
action in these places.”
Union officials said the administration’s stance on the Rhode Island
firings seemed to put it on the side of management in what unions see as
basically a labor dispute.
Mr. Obama’s position “set us back in how we work together,” said Dennis
Van Roekel, president of the National Education Association. “I think
the worst thing that can happen would be for President Obama to be seen
as antiteacher. I think that would harm him.”
Teachers nationwide, including many who had once campaigned for Mr.
Obama, said the events in Rhode Island had left a bitter taste.
Anthony J. Mullen, an instructor at the Arch School in Greenwich, Conn.,
who is the national teacher of the year, said he supported the notion of
establishing more accountability in schools. “But what kind of
accountability are we talking about?”
“This ‘off with their heads’ mentality,” he said, “it’s a bloodthirsty
mentality.”
Katie Zezima and Liz Robbins contributed reporting.
_______________________________________________
pen-l mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.csuchico.edu/mailman/listinfo/pen-l
