3 ms·

Every time I point out that educational outcomes in right to work states aren't any better than outcomes in states where teachers unions have collectively barga

Every time I point out that educational outcomes in right to work states aren't any better than outcomes in states where teachers unions have collectively bargained contracts, I get downvoted. People just really want to believe that it's about the unions instead of poor pay, the entrance of talented women into the rest of the workforce, and other harder-to-solve-in-a-vacuum socioeconomic factors. But again: educational outcomes in right to work states aren't any better than outcomes in states where teachers unions have collectively bargained contracts. 34 states and DC have laws mandating collective bargaining with teachers. Now, it is true that in the other 16 states, there are other laws that can serve to protect teachers. But these states certainly have the ability to engage in ruthless combat with the unions, and they don't. I blame the voters and the legislators - unions exist to protect their members. The best freely available overview of this problem I've found is here: http://www.hks.harvard.edu/pepg/PDF/Papers/BetterBargain.pdf http://www.hks.harvard.edu/pepg/PDF/Papers/BetterBargain.pdf

yummyfajitas 16y ago
18 days ago, I pointed out that there are teachers unions in right to work states. I also pointed out that right to work laws simply allow employees to work without joining the union. They do not prohibit unionization or collective bargaining.
- sachinag 16y ago
  Yes, that's how unionization works in the U.S. However, you've said nothing about educational outcomes, which is what I'm concerned with. In addition, you're a bit off on the facts. There actually are three states that expressly prohibit collective bargaining with teachers unions: North Carolina, Texas, and Virginia. In a lot of these right-to-work states, the unions have been able to get work rules and the like codified in state law as opposed to within collective bargaining. Again, the PDF I linked to has a lot off good data and cites, and yes, it does comes down pretty harshly on the unions. Look, I've been actively engaged on this subject for the last six years of my life. It's clear that I'll never convince you that simply eliminating public sector unions won't magically solve our education woes. But I can show you the facts that the circumstances that would allow for that to happen haven't happened.
  - yummyfajitas 16y ago
    I'm not claiming right to work laws are a magic bullet - I'm only claiming that your original argument proves virtually nothing about whether or not unions are the problem. If, as you assert, unions can influence outcomes via state law and collective bargaining even in right to work states, then we would not expect right to work laws to have much effect. Thus, the fact that educational outcomes are similar provides no evidence about whether or not unions are the culprit. Your argument is simply incorrect.
  - gojomo 16y ago
    So you're saying that in the states where the public teachers' unions haven't messed things up through collective bargaining, the generic public teachers' lobby has messed things up through legislation instead? That seems a rather fine and mostly moot point. If it's still public school teachers' interests and campaigning that torpedoes necessary reforms, then it doesn't matter if that's effected through a mandatory-membership union or collective bargaining or legislation. The same interests need to be confronted in any case, and I don't know anyone who's suggested that "simply eliminating public sector unions" would "magically solve our education woes". There's no magic bullet, just a bunch of necessary reforms. And teacher's unions in both right-to-work and mandatory-union states oppose most of the necessary steps.
    - sachinag 16y ago
      I think that's a fair characterization of my point in your first three paragraphs. There's just not a history of being able to take on the unions and "win", regardless of the labor laws. So let's stop trying to fight the unions and characterize them as devil spawn since that isn't going to work. I'd rather focus on the areas where there aren't necessarily entrenched interests so we can focus on experimentation and trying to change the anti-education sentiment[1]. Schools like the KIPP Academies have exceptional outcomes over and over again. We need to find a way to get their techniques wider distribution. I believe that fighting a war of words with the teachers unions is both a waste of time and counterproductive from a policy/results perspective. Public sector unions just aren't going anywhere. Furthermore, we're going to have a shortage of teachers - estimated to be as high as a million teachers [2] - once the Boomer generation retires. Demeaning the remaining teachers (who are generally union-affiliated) strikes me as ridiculously counterproductive. The experiences in NYC and DC are proof that there are ways to make teachers more accountable, reward better teachers, remove crappier teachers, and generally change the culture in our schools without taking tactical nukes to the NEA and AFT. [1] Read Bissinger's Friday Night Lights for the best-written example of what I'm talking about. [2] http://www.nytimes.com/2009/04/07/education/07teacher.html http://www.nytimes.com/2009/04/07/education/07teacher.html
gojomo 16y ago
"educational outcomes in right to work states aren't any better than outcomes in states where teachers unions have collectively bargained contracts" Do you have a reference that compares states and controls for outcomes with respect to income, general educational levels, and other confounding factors? Using state-level averages for comparisons can be misleading, due to Simpson's Paradox. For example, people in wealthier states are more likely to vote Democratic. But if you used that to determine that wealthier people are more likely to vote Democratic, you'd be wrong. In each state individually, and nationwide, wealthier people are less likely to vote Democratic than poorer people (until you get to a small number of the very-rich). Also, I don't think any reformer is obsessed with collective bargaining and right-to-work laws as the root of the problem. Rather, reformers want accountability, choice, experimentation, and competition. Public teachers' unions consistently and effectively oppose those, even in right-to-work states. Unless their power is reduced, even in right-to-work states, many of the most promising reforms and experiments can't even be tried.
- sachinag 16y ago
  Sadly, there's very little research controlling for these factors. http://www.hepg.org/hep/Book/5 http://www.hepg.org/hep/Book/5 has a collection of papers that addresses some of this on the periphery.

yummyfajitas 16y ago

18 days ago, I pointed out that there are teachers unions in right to work states. I also pointed out that right to work laws simply allow employees to work without joining the union. They do not prohibit unionization or collective bargaining.

sachinag 16y ago
Yes, that's how unionization works in the U.S. However, you've said nothing about educational outcomes, which is what I'm concerned with. In addition, you're a bit off on the facts. There actually are three states that expressly prohibit collective bargaining with teachers unions: North Carolina, Texas, and Virginia. In a lot of these right-to-work states, the unions have been able to get work rules and the like codified in state law as opposed to within collective bargaining. Again, the PDF I linked to has a lot off good data and cites, and yes, it does comes down pretty harshly on the unions. Look, I've been actively engaged on this subject for the last six years of my life. It's clear that I'll never convince you that simply eliminating public sector unions won't magically solve our education woes. But I can show you the facts that the circumstances that would allow for that to happen haven't happened.
- yummyfajitas 16y ago
  I'm not claiming right to work laws are a magic bullet - I'm only claiming that your original argument proves virtually nothing about whether or not unions are the problem. If, as you assert, unions can influence outcomes via state law and collective bargaining even in right to work states, then we would not expect right to work laws to have much effect. Thus, the fact that educational outcomes are similar provides no evidence about whether or not unions are the culprit. Your argument is simply incorrect.
- gojomo 16y ago
  So you're saying that in the states where the public teachers' unions haven't messed things up through collective bargaining, the generic public teachers' lobby has messed things up through legislation instead? That seems a rather fine and mostly moot point. If it's still public school teachers' interests and campaigning that torpedoes necessary reforms, then it doesn't matter if that's effected through a mandatory-membership union or collective bargaining or legislation. The same interests need to be confronted in any case, and I don't know anyone who's suggested that "simply eliminating public sector unions" would "magically solve our education woes". There's no magic bullet, just a bunch of necessary reforms. And teacher's unions in both right-to-work and mandatory-union states oppose most of the necessary steps.
  - sachinag 16y ago
    I think that's a fair characterization of my point in your first three paragraphs. There's just not a history of being able to take on the unions and "win", regardless of the labor laws. So let's stop trying to fight the unions and characterize them as devil spawn since that isn't going to work. I'd rather focus on the areas where there aren't necessarily entrenched interests so we can focus on experimentation and trying to change the anti-education sentiment[1]. Schools like the KIPP Academies have exceptional outcomes over and over again. We need to find a way to get their techniques wider distribution. I believe that fighting a war of words with the teachers unions is both a waste of time and counterproductive from a policy/results perspective. Public sector unions just aren't going anywhere. Furthermore, we're going to have a shortage of teachers - estimated to be as high as a million teachers [2] - once the Boomer generation retires. Demeaning the remaining teachers (who are generally union-affiliated) strikes me as ridiculously counterproductive. The experiences in NYC and DC are proof that there are ways to make teachers more accountable, reward better teachers, remove crappier teachers, and generally change the culture in our schools without taking tactical nukes to the NEA and AFT. [1] Read Bissinger's Friday Night Lights for the best-written example of what I'm talking about. [2] http://www.nytimes.com/2009/04/07/education/07teacher.html http://www.nytimes.com/2009/04/07/education/07teacher.html

gojomo 16y ago

"educational outcomes in right to work states aren't any better than outcomes in states where teachers unions have collectively bargained contracts" Do you have a reference that compares states and controls for outcomes with respect to income, general educational levels, and other confounding factors? Using state-level averages for comparisons can be misleading, due to Simpson's Paradox. For example, people in wealthier states are more likely to vote Democratic. But if you used that to determine that wealthier people are more likely to vote Democratic, you'd be wrong. In each state individually, and nationwide, wealthier people are less likely to vote Democratic than poorer people (until you get to a small number of the very-rich). Also, I don't think any reformer is obsessed with collective bargaining and right-to-work laws as the root of the problem. Rather, reformers want accountability, choice, experimentation, and competition. Public teachers' unions consistently and effectively oppose those, even in right-to-work states. Unless their power is reduced, even in right-to-work states, many of the most promising reforms and experiments can't even be tried.

sachinag 16y ago
Sadly, there's very little research controlling for these factors. http://www.hepg.org/hep/Book/5 http://www.hepg.org/hep/Book/5 has a collection of papers that addresses some of this on the periphery.