MV P Street and Teachers have a tentative contract

[Anonymous]

This is, to me, a really positive development. Must still be ratified by the union members though.

https://wamu.org/story/19/11/14/teachers-on-cusp-of-creating-first-ever-union-at-a-d-c-charter-school/

[Anonymous]

WAMU's ed coverage is so far superior to the Post.

[Anonymous]

Good for them! All professions deserve representation and rights in their workplaces. The anti-union propaganda is just one of the many things to dislike about the charter school movement.

[Anonymous]

Glad both sides were able to cross the aisle and work together for the benefit of the children.

This is very news worthy for teachers in a charter school to effectively unionize and make their voices heard.

[Anonymous]

Having a voice and seat at the table leads to better teacher satisfaction and retention. It’s a good thing.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Having a voice and seat at the table leads to better teacher satisfaction and retention. It’s a good thing.

And guaranteed raises for 3 years, not to mention job security. I hope other schools follow suit.

[Anonymous]

Kudos to the teachers at MVP for organizing and succeeding!

It’s much easier to just leave and find another job than to stay and do this. I think the teachers who organized wanted to stay and was invested in the school.

My understanding is that the majority of parents at MVP also supported the unionization.

[Anonymous]

Why doesn't it cover the 8th St teachers as well? Are they working on a similar effort?

[Anonymous]

I am generally OK with the teachers not being at will employees but it does seem risky for MV. as a former MV parent, I saw many new hires not work out and get forced out. The school is going to have to step up their hiring game if they can no longer push teachers out when they aren't a good fit. The responsive classroom model that MV uses is tough for a lot of teachers to execute.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I am generally OK with the teachers not being at will employees but it does seem risky for MV. as a former MV parent, I saw many new hires not work out and get forced out. The school is going to have to step up their hiring game if they can no longer push teachers out when they aren't a good fit. The responsive classroom model that MV uses is tough for a lot of teachers to execute.

I think that's for the best. Sloppy hiring comes at a cost even if you can fire them.

MV has to compete for DCPS and other charters for Spanish-speaking teachers. Seems like with all the expansions lately, the market leverage is with the teachers and not the schools. Best to accept that fact and offer them a good enough deal.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I am generally OK with the teachers not being at will employees but it does seem risky for MV. as a former MV parent, I saw many new hires not work out and get forced out. The school is going to have to step up their hiring game if they can no longer push teachers out when they aren't a good fit. The responsive classroom model that MV uses is tough for a lot of teachers to execute.

I think that's for the best. Sloppy hiring comes at a cost even if you can fire them.

MV has to compete for DCPS and other charters for Spanish-speaking teachers. Seems like with all the expansions lately, the market leverage is with the teachers and not the schools. Best to accept that fact and offer them a good enough deal.

I agree. They will need to do better recruiting and screening which is a good thing. Also just because they have a Union does not mean you can’t let go of teachers. I’m sure they have negotiated a process to let teachers go. If not, they will.

The model that MV has (immersion, expeditionary, responsive) is not easy. But it’s a really good model if done right which a number of teachers at MV do. Those veteran teachers, who are likely the ones that were involved with the creating the union, realize and understand this, and I don’t think would be unreasonable if it’s obvious a new teacher can’t implement well for it will affect the other teacher on the team.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I am generally OK with the teachers not being at will employees but it does seem risky for MV. as a former MV parent, I saw many new hires not work out and get forced out. The school is going to have to step up their hiring game if they can no longer push teachers out when they aren't a good fit. The responsive classroom model that MV uses is tough for a lot of teachers to execute.

I think that's for the best. Sloppy hiring comes at a cost even if you can fire them.

MV has to compete for DCPS and other charters for Spanish-speaking teachers. Seems like with all the expansions lately, the market leverage is with the teachers and not the schools. Best to accept that fact and offer them a good enough deal.

I agree. They will need to do better recruiting and screening which is a good thing. Also just because they have a Union does not mean you can’t let go of teachers. I’m sure they have negotiated a process to let teachers go. If not, they will.

The model that MV has (immersion, expeditionary, responsive) is not easy. But it’s a really good model if done right which a number of teachers at MV do. Those veteran teachers, who are likely the ones that were involved with the creating the union, realize and understand this, and I don’t think would be unreasonable if it’s obvious a new teacher can’t implement well for it will affect the other teacher on the team.

+1. With their two-teacher, alternating days model, if your partner teacher is a dud that must really stink.

[Anonymous]

I would also look at it from the viewpoint that this gives MV an advantage in hiring teachers over other charter schools. Having a voice and a union can be the winning decision if other factors such as pay, vacation, etc... are equal.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Why doesn't it cover the 8th St teachers as well? Are they working on a similar effort?

A majority of those employees need to vote to join the P St bargaining unit, or I guess they could create their own.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I am generally OK with the teachers not being at will employees but it does seem risky for MV. as a former MV parent, I saw many new hires not work out and get forced out. The school is going to have to step up their hiring game if they can no longer push teachers out when they aren't a good fit. The responsive classroom model that MV uses is tough for a lot of teachers to execute.

You can still fire for just cause. And they could have included a probation period in the bargaining agreement. My workplace’s CBA has a 90-day period for new hires during which one can be let go.