PFT seeking a fair contract
By Jerry T. Jordan School Reform Commission Chairman Bill Green is not telling the truth. As we've learned, the SRC has been planning its ambush of Philadelphia's educators since the beginning of the summer. Part of the SRC's strategy was to promote a major lie about the Philadelphia Federation of Teachers' unwillingness to accept proposals that would ease the School District's budget crisis. In fact, the PFT has been - and remains - the only party interested in negotiating a fair contract.
By Jerry T. Jordan
School Reform Commission Chairman Bill Green is not telling the truth.
As we've learned, the SRC has been planning its ambush of Philadelphia's educators since the beginning of the summer. Part of the SRC's strategy was to promote a major lie about the Philadelphia Federation of Teachers' unwillingness to accept proposals that would ease the School District's budget crisis. In fact, the PFT has been - and remains - the only party interested in negotiating a fair contract.
The last proposals put on the table were from the PFT in July. The district canceled our next scheduled meeting and has yet to reschedule negotiations with the PFT. These are not the actions of an SRC that wants to negotiate in good faith.
Here's the truth: The PFT put $24 million in savings on the table last year. The PFT also offered to forgo wage increases for one year, which would have saved an additional $10 million. The district saved $17 million last year when it took step and lane increases away from PFT members, another sacrifice foisted on Philly's educators by the SRC.
The SRC's suggestion that its proposals will cost PFT members a maximum of $200 per month is another disingenuous assertion. The truth is that PFT members who wish to provide coverage for their children and families would see premiums as high as $626 per month if they choose to keep their existing coverage.
The district also seeks to take over PFT's Health and Welfare Fund. This takeover would prevent PFT retirees from receiving prescription benefits - which they pay for - from the fund. This could cost retired members as much as $10,000 per year.
Though nothing close to the draconian terms the SRC is seeking to impose, the concessions offered by the union last year would have required further sacrifice of PFT members, who are already paid 10 to 20 percent less than teachers in surrounding school districts. Unfortunately, the district is less interested in settling a contract than in getting its way and discrediting the union.
We offered our proposals last year in response to one of the worst financial crises we've ever seen. But simply squeezing more money from educators is no way to fund public education.
Lost in the story of yet another Philly labor-management conflict is the real issue of Gov. Corbett's public education budgets, which have had the greatest impact on Philadelphia's schoolchildren. This is not anecdotal rhetoric. In an address to the Philadelphia Bar Association on Oct. 9, Michael Masch, a former state budget secretary, pointed out that in 2011-12, funding for the School District of Philadelphia - the largest district in Pennsylvania - was cut by 20 percent, even as the other 499 districts in the commonwealth received an increase of 4 percent.
Clearly, the SRC, which is controlled by Corbett, will not highlight these facts. Parents, educators, and taxpayers should be outraged that SRC Chairman Green and Superintendent William R. Hite Jr. are willing to allow Corbett to shirk his duty to adequately fund public schools, while continuing to point the finger at and demand more from the educators who already spend thousands of their own dollars every year to buy classroom supplies that the district doesn't provide. Meanwhile, the district creates more educator turnover and increases the costs that come with a lack of stability in our schools.
The SRC's actions against educators, and the lies used to justify them, confirm another truth: After 14 years of failure, the SRC must be abolished.