WTU rallies for new contract

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I am new to DCPS (first year was last year) so new this particular issue. Has Bowser not been willing to sit at the table because their demands have been un-meetable?

This is how contract negotiations have happened for years. Contract expires, lots of negotiation but no one actually knows what the demands are because it’s all behind closed doors, eventually a contract is agreed to with not much change except a pay increase and teachers get back pay for the years the contract was expired.

Thank you. It's hard to rally support (at least for me) when we don't know what they're fighting for. I find it hard to believe that if they are making reasonable demands that Bowser would just ignore them, but again I'm new so....

This is my 4th year in DCPS so it’s not like I’ve been here forever but I’m not sure how you can be so naive? You must work in a non title 1 school. Teachers in the very general sense love what we do and just want to feel respected, valuable, and have enough resources to teach ALL of our students. And by resources I do not mean paper and pencils, I mean social workers, paraprofessionals, etc. And better building conditions.

Of course we also want an evaluation system that is not punitive, this is coming from an HE teacher.



I suggest you do research past covid 19 as well. Money is nice of course, I can’t lie. But I think and hope we are past just accepting money for ourselves and nothing that is going to actually attract and KEEP excellent teachers.

I am a parent and I am telling you what it looks like for someone new to the system. Granted, I became a parent of a DCPS student during Covid and was not at all convinced that based on their demands, the WTU had the students best interests at heart, because the WTU was NOT making reasonable demands (as a PP pointed out). You're asking me to give the WTU the benefit of the doubt now after that and it's not easy to do is all I'm saying.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:They are absolutely evil to be threatening to strike.

Could you provide some examples of other ways you would like them to advocate for a new contract?

Pretty much any way except that? But sure, you can keep on asserting that teacher’s unions can do whatever they want to advance their interests, and that the interests of children are irrelevant to the union. And if you say that, I will assert that the union is evil because they are using their power to hurt children. Even the threat of hurting children is unconscionable. The sad part is, most DC parents would actually support teachers getting a good contract - but when you make clear you don’t GAF about hurting kids, you lose your natural allies.

Would you mind building on your first sentence? What are some other ways?

NP but teachers could work to the contract:
Only at school during contracted hours (no after school extra help, club meetings, etc.)
Only cover classes under the contractual way (I don’t remember what it is but there’s something where you don’t have to give up your planning every day for class coverage)
Don’t write any college recommendation or scholarship recommendation letters because it’s not in the contract (HS mostly, and this one most teachers won’t actually do but it’s effective)

The problem is that all of these things would hurt kids too. Working to the rule would get some parents what they wanted, for sure, but it would most definitely hurt kids. Lessons wouldn't be planned, and certainly not planned well. Bowser knows this. She has all the leverage because the bulk of UMC white parents would balk at any attempt by teachers to push back.

Strikes are meant to hurt management, not the vulnerable. It's not a good look to hurt kids because of your beef with management. The WTU is completely awful at strategy here. You DO want a sympathetic public when you're negotiating in a political space. This is why it is illegal for teachers to strike. What could they do? Stop fulfilling administrative requirements--stop taking formal attendance, stop administering mandated tests, stop data gathering, stop performing any (non-safety related) reporting to admin. All of this while continuing to hold high standards for education in the classroom--in fact educational quality may improve when teachers don't have to waste time on these sorts of things. However, admin depends on this kind of information to meet funding and reporting requirements.

I know you’re trying to be helpful but this is a literal impossibility for some teachers. Doing extra is literally part of our evaluation. And if you do not score well on this eval system for 1.5 years admin can fire you and they will certainly fire a teacher who will not do extra.

We are not protected, please understand this. Your teachers are unprotected employees, who if admin doesn’t like can be given an illegal lower score. Even when we file a grievance it take so many years it’s better just to get out of DCPS.

Great. Then tell your union leadership to stop insinuating that you are going to close schools again, and we’ll support all of your no doubt reasonable demands.

Ha, no actual suggestions. You just want us to keep breaking our necks doing extra and just take the money.

Guess a strike it is!

Like, do you see how antagonistic this is? Do you want parents on your side or no? Perhaps you're a troll, because I can't imagine any well-educated union member wanting to go this route when drumming up support for a strike. I have been part of a union before, and helped organize a strike. You need allies, not opponents.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:They are absolutely evil to be threatening to strike.

Could you provide some examples of other ways you would like them to advocate for a new contract?

Pretty much any way except that? But sure, you can keep on asserting that teacher’s unions can do whatever they want to advance their interests, and that the interests of children are irrelevant to the union. And if you say that, I will assert that the union is evil because they are using their power to hurt children. Even the threat of hurting children is unconscionable. The sad part is, most DC parents would actually support teachers getting a good contract - but when you make clear you don’t GAF about hurting kids, you lose your natural allies.

Would you mind building on your first sentence? What are some other ways?

NP but teachers could work to the contract:
Only at school during contracted hours (no after school extra help, club meetings, etc.)
Only cover classes under the contractual way (I don’t remember what it is but there’s something where you don’t have to give up your planning every day for class coverage)
Don’t write any college recommendation or scholarship recommendation letters because it’s not in the contract (HS mostly, and this one most teachers won’t actually do but it’s effective)

Guess what? Teachers aren’t going to strike. You know it, and so do we. Also, your ideas are great. If I did any of them my Impact rating would be abysmally low. That’s right, part of our evaluation is based on what we do outside of our contracted requirements. How fair is that?

Seems pretty sensible to me. I am a public servant, and we all understand that our contract is the bare minimum. If we work to that standard, we meet expectations. If we do more, that is how we achieve exceeds expectations or outstanding.

So your fired when you only meet the requirements?

Oh wait, I do think you're a troll. I am not one to pick at spelling errors, but I simply don't believe there are teachers here who would make this error.

[Anonymous]

I am the OP.

So far we had one poster who says there are many things we could do besides strike, but then when pressed on other options, claimed that “they don’t really care”

We’ve had others who think we should do work to rule type strategies, which doesn’t really work bc the management we are in negotiations with is not the admin that directly evaluate and manage us.

So, I’m still feeling at an impasse

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:They are absolutely evil to be threatening to strike.

Could you provide some examples of other ways you would like them to advocate for a new contract?

Pretty much any way except that? But sure, you can keep on asserting that teacher’s unions can do whatever they want to advance their interests, and that the interests of children are irrelevant to the union. And if you say that, I will assert that the union is evil because they are using their power to hurt children. Even the threat of hurting children is unconscionable. The sad part is, most DC parents would actually support teachers getting a good contract - but when you make clear you don’t GAF about hurting kids, you lose your natural allies.

Ok, can you elaborate? If your employer is unwilling to negotiate in good faith and just wants to give you a little money instead of better working conditions what would you do? The option is wait until Bowser is no longer mayor?
I’m seriously asking.

Your premise that Bowser is refusing to negotiate in good faith is totally unsupported and incorrect afaik. In my job I don’t have the right to strike so I don’t think teachers should either.

We don’t just want MONEY! So you’re saying you want us all to quit instead? Because isn’t that what you’d do if your employer was corrupt? Great plan.

Real talk here. You're a teacher, presumably on this board to rally support. I don't think this argument is going the way you want it to. It is making the parents worried and mad. That can't possibly be how you want them to feel.

And you’re making me ‘mad’ with your lackluster and unrealistic suggestions. Why do only your feelings matter? I am a parent too. I’d rather not strike, obviously that is the last thing I want to do.

But how can you tell a teacher to willfully stop doing things beyond their duty when that will also hurt students? Anything we do can hurt them, I feel as though we cannot win.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:All teacher's unions have enormous power now with teachers quitting, retiring, etc. I suspect a deal will get done fairly quickly. One side has all the leverage and it's not even close.

Then why no contract after over 3 years? If they have ‘enormous’ power.

Please, I encourage you to stop spreading misinformation. It only hurts us and ultimately the kids pay the price as they have been. And yes, covid was a part of that and the learning loss. I volunteered to go back in Jan 2021 but even still I understand the hurt parents feel for their babies’ loss.

But we can only move forward and we (teachers) need a better evaluation system, title 1 schools especially need more resources, we need to figure out how we can stop chronic absences and tardies, and yes teachers do need a raise. I know we are paid ‘well’ but I want to continue living in DC, I support better wages for literally almost everyone.

This is the insidious framing that teachers often employ, and it's often nonsense. They suggest that anything that hurts teachers will inevitably hurt students. In reality, the teachers union is looking out for the interests of teachers (as it should - this is not a criticism, that is the function of the union). If it also helps the kids, great. But that's serendipitous, not the purpose of the union's position. But you can't have a conversation with a teacher without being told "what's good for teachers is good for students." That's a myth.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:They are absolutely evil to be threatening to strike.

Could you provide some examples of other ways you would like them to advocate for a new contract?

Pretty much any way except that? But sure, you can keep on asserting that teacher’s unions can do whatever they want to advance their interests, and that the interests of children are irrelevant to the union. And if you say that, I will assert that the union is evil because they are using their power to hurt children. Even the threat of hurting children is unconscionable. The sad part is, most DC parents would actually support teachers getting a good contract - but when you make clear you don’t GAF about hurting kids, you lose your natural allies.

Would you mind building on your first sentence? What are some other ways?

NP but teachers could work to the contract:
Only at school during contracted hours (no after school extra help, club meetings, etc.)
Only cover classes under the contractual way (I don’t remember what it is but there’s something where you don’t have to give up your planning every day for class coverage)
Don’t write any college recommendation or scholarship recommendation letters because it’s not in the contract (HS mostly, and this one most teachers won’t actually do but it’s effective)

Guess what? Teachers aren’t going to strike. You know it, and so do we. Also, your ideas are great. If I did any of them my Impact rating would be abysmally low. That’s right, part of our evaluation is based on what we do outside of our contracted requirements. How fair is that?

Seems pretty sensible to me. I am a public servant, and we all understand that our contract is the bare minimum. If we work to that standard, we meet expectations. If we do more, that is how we achieve exceeds expectations or outstanding.

So your fired when you only meet the requirements?

Oh wait, I do think you're a troll. I am not one to pick at spelling errors, but I simply don't believe there are teachers here who would make this error.

God, yes you’re*

I am not teaching right now, I’m typing on my iPhone. Tell me are you one of those people who anxiously proofreads while sending an unprofessional and casual text message.

Also you did not answer the question.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:They are absolutely evil to be threatening to strike.

Could you provide some examples of other ways you would like them to advocate for a new contract?

Pretty much any way except that? But sure, you can keep on asserting that teacher’s unions can do whatever they want to advance their interests, and that the interests of children are irrelevant to the union. And if you say that, I will assert that the union is evil because they are using their power to hurt children. Even the threat of hurting children is unconscionable. The sad part is, most DC parents would actually support teachers getting a good contract - but when you make clear you don’t GAF about hurting kids, you lose your natural allies.

Would you mind building on your first sentence? What are some other ways?

NP but teachers could work to the contract:
Only at school during contracted hours (no after school extra help, club meetings, etc.)
Only cover classes under the contractual way (I don’t remember what it is but there’s something where you don’t have to give up your planning every day for class coverage)
Don’t write any college recommendation or scholarship recommendation letters because it’s not in the contract (HS mostly, and this one most teachers won’t actually do but it’s effective)

The problem is that all of these things would hurt kids too. Working to the rule would get some parents what they wanted, for sure, but it would most definitely hurt kids. Lessons wouldn't be planned, and certainly not planned well. Bowser knows this. She has all the leverage because the bulk of UMC white parents would balk at any attempt by teachers to push back.

Strikes are meant to hurt management, not the vulnerable. It's not a good look to hurt kids because of your beef with management. The WTU is completely awful at strategy here. You DO want a sympathetic public when you're negotiating in a political space. This is why it is illegal for teachers to strike. What could they do? Stop fulfilling administrative requirements--stop taking formal attendance, stop administering mandated tests, stop data gathering, stop performing any (non-safety related) reporting to admin. All of this while continuing to hold high standards for education in the classroom--in fact educational quality may improve when teachers don't have to waste time on these sorts of things. However, admin depends on this kind of information to meet funding and reporting requirements.

I know you’re trying to be helpful but this is a literal impossibility for some teachers. Doing extra is literally part of our evaluation. And if you do not score well on this eval system for 1.5 years admin can fire you and they will certainly fire a teacher who will not do extra.

We are not protected, please understand this. Your teachers are unprotected employees, who if admin doesn’t like can be given an illegal lower score. Even when we file a grievance it take so many years it’s better just to get out of DCPS.

Great. Then tell your union leadership to stop insinuating that you are going to close schools again, and we’ll support all of your no doubt reasonable demands.

Ha, no actual suggestions. You just want us to keep breaking our necks doing extra and just take the money.

Guess a strike it is!

Like, do you see how antagonistic this is? Do you want parents on your side or no? Perhaps you're a troll, because I can't imagine any well-educated union member wanting to go this route when drumming up support for a strike. I have been part of a union before, and helped organize a strike. You need allies, not opponents.

I agree with this. Pre-Covid I was all “teacher working conditions are student learning conditions”. I believe that still, to a certain extent. But we parents were burned by the school closures and disruptions - long after vaccines were available. I would support a strike for a contract, but y’all have some serious PR you’re going to need to do to get parents behind you.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I am the OP.

So far we had one poster who says there are many things we could do besides strike, but then when pressed on other options, claimed that “they don’t really care”

We’ve had others who think we should do work to rule type strategies, which doesn’t really work bc the management we are in negotiations with is not the admin that directly evaluate and manage us.

So, I’m still feeling at an impasse

OP if you’re truly at an impasse I can’t help you. I am saying a strike is an unconscionable harm to kids. You are saying that doesn’t matter to you, and PARENTS should come up with another tactic. You frankly sound like a disengenuous troll or an idiot. It’s not my job to tell you how to negotiate your contract. It’s my job to protect my kid, and as long as you and your union are happy to threaten my kid, I will do everything in my power to oppose you.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:They are absolutely evil to be threatening to strike.

Could you provide some examples of other ways you would like them to advocate for a new contract?

Pretty much any way except that? But sure, you can keep on asserting that teacher’s unions can do whatever they want to advance their interests, and that the interests of children are irrelevant to the union. And if you say that, I will assert that the union is evil because they are using their power to hurt children. Even the threat of hurting children is unconscionable. The sad part is, most DC parents would actually support teachers getting a good contract - but when you make clear you don’t GAF about hurting kids, you lose your natural allies.

Ok, can you elaborate? If your employer is unwilling to negotiate in good faith and just wants to give you a little money instead of better working conditions what would you do? The option is wait until Bowser is no longer mayor?
I’m seriously asking.

Your premise that Bowser is refusing to negotiate in good faith is totally unsupported and incorrect afaik. In my job I don’t have the right to strike so I don’t think teachers should either.

We don’t just want MONEY! So you’re saying you want us all to quit instead? Because isn’t that what you’d do if your employer was corrupt? Great plan.

Real talk here. You're a teacher, presumably on this board to rally support. I don't think this argument is going the way you want it to. It is making the parents worried and mad. That can't possibly be how you want them to feel.

And you’re making me ‘mad’ with your lackluster and unrealistic suggestions. Why do only your feelings matter? I am a parent too. I’d rather not strike, obviously that is the last thing I want to do.

But how can you tell a teacher to willfully stop doing things beyond their duty when that will also hurt students? Anything we do can hurt them, I feel as though we cannot win.

You are all cowards, then, more willing to hurt children than you are to actually face admin. You think you're SAFER completely abandoning children and striking than continuing to teach and putting pressure on your administration through other methods because you're more worried about your individual IMPACT scores than solidarity. If this is really what you believe, then you deserve to lose.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I am the OP.

So far we had one poster who says there are many things we could do besides strike, but then when pressed on other options, claimed that “they don’t really care”

We’ve had others who think we should do work to rule type strategies, which doesn’t really work bc the management we are in negotiations with is not the admin that directly evaluate and manage us.

So, I’m still feeling at an impasse

OP if you’re truly at an impasse I can’t help you. I am saying a strike is an unconscionable harm to kids. You are saying that doesn’t matter to you, and PARENTS should come up with another tactic. You frankly sound like a disengenuous troll or an idiot. It’s not my job to tell you how to negotiate your contract. It’s my job to protect my kid, and as long as you and your union are happy to threaten my kid, I will do everything in my power to oppose you.

Right. So we have no leverage. Thank you for explaining the mayors strategy

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:They are absolutely evil to be threatening to strike.

Could you provide some examples of other ways you would like them to advocate for a new contract?

Pretty much any way except that? But sure, you can keep on asserting that teacher’s unions can do whatever they want to advance their interests, and that the interests of children are irrelevant to the union. And if you say that, I will assert that the union is evil because they are using their power to hurt children. Even the threat of hurting children is unconscionable. The sad part is, most DC parents would actually support teachers getting a good contract - but when you make clear you don’t GAF about hurting kids, you lose your natural allies.

Ok, can you elaborate? If your employer is unwilling to negotiate in good faith and just wants to give you a little money instead of better working conditions what would you do? The option is wait until Bowser is no longer mayor?
I’m seriously asking.

Your premise that Bowser is refusing to negotiate in good faith is totally unsupported and incorrect afaik. In my job I don’t have the right to strike so I don’t think teachers should either.

We don’t just want MONEY! So you’re saying you want us all to quit instead? Because isn’t that what you’d do if your employer was corrupt? Great plan.

Real talk here. You're a teacher, presumably on this board to rally support. I don't think this argument is going the way you want it to. It is making the parents worried and mad. That can't possibly be how you want them to feel.

And you’re making me ‘mad’ with your lackluster and unrealistic suggestions. Why do only your feelings matter? I am a parent too. I’d rather not strike, obviously that is the last thing I want to do.

But how can you tell a teacher to willfully stop doing things beyond their duty when that will also hurt students? Anything we do can hurt them, I feel as though we cannot win.

You are all cowards, then, more willing to hurt children than you are to actually face admin. You think you're SAFER completely abandoning children and striking than continuing to teach and putting pressure on your administration through other methods because you're more worried about your individual IMPACT scores than solidarity. If this is really what you believe, then you deserve to lose.

BOOM

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:All teacher's unions have enormous power now with teachers quitting, retiring, etc. I suspect a deal will get done fairly quickly. One side has all the leverage and it's not even close.

Then why no contract after over 3 years? If they have ‘enormous’ power.

Please, I encourage you to stop spreading misinformation. It only hurts us and ultimately the kids pay the price as they have been. And yes, covid was a part of that and the learning loss. I volunteered to go back in Jan 2021 but even still I understand the hurt parents feel for their babies’ loss.

But we can only move forward and we (teachers) need a better evaluation system, title 1 schools especially need more resources, we need to figure out how we can stop chronic absences and tardies, and yes teachers do need a raise. I know we are paid ‘well’ but I want to continue living in DC, I support better wages for literally almost everyone.

This is the insidious framing that teachers often employ, and it's often nonsense. They suggest that anything that hurts teachers will inevitably hurt students. In reality, the teachers union is looking out for the interests of teachers (as it should - this is not a criticism, that is the function of the union). If it also helps the kids, great. But that's serendipitous, not the purpose of the union's position. But you can't have a conversation with a teacher without being told "what's good for teachers is good for students." That's a myth.

+1

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:All teacher's unions have enormous power now with teachers quitting, retiring, etc. I suspect a deal will get done fairly quickly. One side has all the leverage and it's not even close.

Then why no contract after over 3 years? If they have ‘enormous’ power.

Please, I encourage you to stop spreading misinformation. It only hurts us and ultimately the kids pay the price as they have been. And yes, covid was a part of that and the learning loss. I volunteered to go back in Jan 2021 but even still I understand the hurt parents feel for their babies’ loss.

But we can only move forward and we (teachers) need a better evaluation system, title 1 schools especially need more resources, we need to figure out how we can stop chronic absences and tardies, and yes teachers do need a raise. I know we are paid ‘well’ but I want to continue living in DC, I support better wages for literally almost everyone.

This is the insidious framing that teachers often employ, and it's often nonsense. They suggest that anything that hurts teachers will inevitably hurt students. In reality, the teachers union is looking out for the interests of teachers (as it should - this is not a criticism, that is the function of the union). If it also helps the kids, great. But that's serendipitous, not the purpose of the union's position. But you can't have a conversation with a teacher without being told "what's good for teachers is good for students." That's a myth.

Oh? So keeping great teachers doesn’t help students?
Attracting people to DCPS doesn’t help?

Because if you did not know the WTU includes SLPs, OTs, social workers, etc.

What is good for teachers is indeed related to students besides maybe pay. And the purpose of the union is connected to students because WE (teachers) connect it to them.

For example class size doesn’t impact students?
Caseload size?
If the teacher is absent having a sub in place?
Planning time so students can engage in well thought out lessons?
Actually being paid for after school time so students can enjoy more clubs?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:They are absolutely evil to be threatening to strike.

Could you provide some examples of other ways you would like them to advocate for a new contract?

Pretty much any way except that? But sure, you can keep on asserting that teacher’s unions can do whatever they want to advance their interests, and that the interests of children are irrelevant to the union. And if you say that, I will assert that the union is evil because they are using their power to hurt children. Even the threat of hurting children is unconscionable. The sad part is, most DC parents would actually support teachers getting a good contract - but when you make clear you don’t GAF about hurting kids, you lose your natural allies.

Ok, can you elaborate? If your employer is unwilling to negotiate in good faith and just wants to give you a little money instead of better working conditions what would you do? The option is wait until Bowser is no longer mayor?
I’m seriously asking.

Your premise that Bowser is refusing to negotiate in good faith is totally unsupported and incorrect afaik. In my job I don’t have the right to strike so I don’t think teachers should either.

We don’t just want MONEY! So you’re saying you want us all to quit instead? Because isn’t that what you’d do if your employer was corrupt? Great plan.

Real talk here. You're a teacher, presumably on this board to rally support. I don't think this argument is going the way you want it to. It is making the parents worried and mad. That can't possibly be how you want them to feel.

And you’re making me ‘mad’ with your lackluster and unrealistic suggestions. Why do only your feelings matter? I am a parent too. I’d rather not strike, obviously that is the last thing I want to do.

But how can you tell a teacher to willfully stop doing things beyond their duty when that will also hurt students? Anything we do can hurt them, I feel as though we cannot win.

This is black and white thinking. Say for the sake of argument that a strike incurs twice as much harm to children as teachers working to rule. You are arguing that because both situations cause harm, they are morally equivalent. That is not the case. Furthermore, the main objection to working to rule type strategies has been the effect in IMPACT, not to the education of kids.