Editor’s note: This op-ed is by Jim Rademacher of Pittsford.
It was my pleasure to serve on the Lothrop Elementary School Board for 10 years and I have now been on the Otter Valley Union High School board for six years. My thoughts are limited to the agency fee bill as it relates to public school teachers. I am currently involved in negotiations with the local teachers’ association. This is the fifth time I have had the pleasure and the fourth time as lead spokesperson for the boards. Agency fee is an issue that has come forward from time to time as it has for many school boards across the state. Because the details of such negotiations are confidential, I cannot share those with you but in general a board’s approach might be:
These negotiations are meant to address issues of mutual concern. The provision of teacher health insurance is an issue of mutual concern and therefore will be discussed as part of these negotiations. Fuel is used to heat school buildings and for student bus transportation. From whom a school purchases such fuel, how much fuel is purchased and how much it costs are not issues to the associations. Therefore fuel will not be up for discussion during these negotiations. Whether a teacher chooses to belong to the association is not a concern of the boards. The boards believe the associations provide a valuable service to all teachers. You have convinced us of that without even trying. Surely with some type of effort you should be able to convince your colleagues of that. Convince them to join the association or convince them to volunteer an agency fee. Unfortunately, in all walks of life there are some who will not join or support something they should. This is your problem, it is not our problem, it is not a shared problem. It is not our problem to solve your problem.
My understanding is that some 90 percent of public school teachers belong to the Vermont-NEA. The Vermont-NEA and its local associations have done a good job of convincing teachers to join. Why have the other 10 percent not joined? Some teachers feel they cannot join a union that takes positions that they do not agree with. There are teachers that believe in pay-for-performance and that do not believe in layoffs based strictly upon seniority. To those teachers the Vermont-NEA could suggest: “We have a few issues we disagree upon but many that we do agree upon. The union does good work on your behalf. The union believes you should consider a voluntary agency contribution.” To my knowledge the Vermont-NEA has never taken such an approach.
At this point the best I can tell is that this bill grants the Vermont-NEA something they want and we are getting nothing in return. That is not a very good tactic. We should be getting something in return. Now maybe there is something going on behind the scenes. I hope so.
There are some teachers who just can’t afford it. We have suggested to the association “financial hardship dues” or reduced dues for two or three years for new teachers. To my knowledge no efforts along those lines have been made either. The association has not used all efforts available to them to solve their problem. Instead the Vermont-NEA has chosen to ask boards to solve its problem by mandating an agency fee. Now they are asking the Vermont Legislature to solve its problem.
There are school boards that have association contracts that do allow for an agency fee. I am confident that such a school board received something in return for this as a concession from the association. I can’t tell you what but they got something. At this point the best I can tell is that this bill grants the Vermont-NEA something they want and we are getting nothing in return. That is not a very good tactic. We should be getting something in return. Now maybe there is something going on behind the scenes. I hope so.
If the Vermont-NEA has indicated they will support a Vermont legislative effort to mandate teacher merit pay, or to have teacher layoffs based upon teacher performance evaluation rather than seniority, or to have teacher health insurance provided through the state with teachers paying 20 percent of premiums, or to convert the teacher retirement fund from a defined benefit to a defined contribution plan, then maybe the legislators got something. If someone has it in writing that the Vermont-NEA will support one of those efforts then someone did good. Otherwise, not so much.
Just as a Vermont citizen is separate from the school board, the Vermont Legislature does need to get the public employees off the defined benefit retirement system. In the rest of the U.S. employment world the defined benefit plan has gone the way of the dodo bird. Many municipalities and some states are on the brink of financial collapse because of it. The Vermont-NEA has dressed up their agency fee request by calling it a fair share fee. I think it would be only fair if all public employees were to join the rest of the country and have a defined contribution retirement plan. With the agency fee issue the Vermont Legislature may be setting the precedent that the way around a contract negotiations issue is to legislate it.
If the Vermont-NEA should be successful with this legislative issue a lesson will be learned by school board members. Many school boards have made efforts through negotiations with the association to move toward pay-for-performance and away from tenure. Completely unsuccessful efforts. The message will be clear. If you cannot get the association to discuss something with you then go to the Legislature. The Vermont-NEA should have figured this as a possible consequence to this move on their part.
It is hard to believe that an agency fee from 10 percent of teachers is worth a legislative effort to institute pay-for-performance while doing away with tenure. If the Vermont-NEA does not believe they should work out the agency fee issue through negotiation then school boards will likely feel they can now use the legislative process to solve many of its labor problems. I wonder if the Vermont-NEA really wants to go there. Did they really think this through? The Legislature needs to think this through. Do they really want to go there?
Many school board members believe teachers should have the choice to join or not join the union and it they chose not to the teacher should have the choice to donate an agency fee or not.
