It was disappointing to see the comments from well-meaning Rhode Island leaders and policy wonks opposing and pouring cold water over the idea of a statewide teacher contract in last Friday's GoLocal article on the issue.
A statewide teacher contract would undoubtedly lower the cost of education in Rhode Island by realizing cost savings due to economies of scale through purchasing health insurance and other items, as well as make certain that the taxpayers have more seasoned negotiators working on their behalf.
Yet despite that fact, good, decent guys like former Republican Gubernatorial candidate Ken Block, former Rhode Island Public Expenditure Council Executive Director and state Director of Administration Gary Sasse, all attempted to pour cold water on the idea of the statewide teacher contract, claiming it would undermine local control of schools and perhaps end up costing money.
Here's the thing: believe it or not, the state government in Rhode Island, on the whole has been more fiscally responsible than the local governments. Yes, like any other general truth, there are expectations to the rule. But on the whole, it holds up.
The most striking example of this dynamic that sticks out in my mind took place in 2007 when I was a news reporter writing for The Warwick Beacon. The city of Warwick went out to bid for the administration of its self-insured health care plan. United Health Care bid more than $1 million less than Blue Cross Blue Shield of Rhode Island. Yet amidst heavy pressure from the city's union members, the city council caved and spent more than $1 million than they needed to.
Local Governments Are Not More Responsible
There are plenty of other examples. Local communities in Rhode Island like Providence, Warwick, Pawtucket, and others, on a per capita basis, have much higher legacy liabilities (pension, health care, etc.) for their current employees and retirees. Yet statewide pension reform was significant and more effective than any pension reform we've seen on a local level.
Here's the moral of the story: while Mike Stenhouse from the Rhode Island Center for Freedom and Prosperity extols the supposed virtues of local government, as he did in Friday's GoLocal article, it's actually easier for special interest groups to influence smaller governments than larger governments. That's the reason why state and local workers have better pensions and benefits than federal workers.
This is true for two reasons. First, there is actually more transparency at higher levels of government, like state and federal government. That's because there are more people paying attention to it. There is more media coverage. People are generally more knowledgeable. When people are paying attention, it's harder to make backroom deals.
More Transparency Around State Government
Secondly, the people at higher level of government are more seasoned negotiators. Robert Healey, who ran for Governor as the Moderate Party candidate in last year's election made the point rather astutely during the campaign.
"...school boards are usually the first step on a political ladder. Many who run for office are of the ilk that are former school teachers or their relatives...” said Healey during the campaign. "The unions, when negotiating contracts, send in negotiators. These negotiators, having negotiated several contracts across the state, are no match for the lambs sitting on the school board."
Further, since many of the politicians serving on the local school committees harbor ambitions of rising up the political ladder, it stands to reason that they'll be generous with the public treasury to make friends with the powerful union officials, who can rally people to support them at the ballot box. The people who are forced to pay for this scheme, are too busy working two jobs and raising families to pay attention.
Sunlight is Key
There is far more press on the statewide level. A statewide teacher contract would be infinitely more transparent than the local teacher contracts. Sunlight is the best disinfectant to corruption--and not just the illegal kind of corruption. That alone is another great reason to enact a statewide contract.
All these reasons indicate why the reformers in Rhode Island should be rallying around a statewide teacher contract as opposed to being negative about the idea. This state needs good government reforms like blood, and it's a shame to see reformers not getting behind good ideas just because they weren't their own.
Russell Moore has worked on both sides of the desk in RI media, both on political campaigns and for newspapers. Send him email at [email protected] Follow him on twitter @russmoore713.ima
Related Slideshow: Teacher Absences in RI
The below slides show how many teachers were absent for more than 10 days in the 2011 to 2012 school year, using the most recently available data from the Office of Civil Rights in the U.S. Department of Education. The number of teachers and absences are measured in terms of full-time equivalents (FTEs). That means, for example, that two part-time teachers would amount to one FTE. The Department of Education used the same method to calculate absences. The department’s definition of absences does not include absences for professional development. Districts are ordered from lowest to highest absentee rates.
Total Number of Teachers Absent 10 or More Days: 74.5
% Absent: 20.3%
NOTE: Figures for this district were omitted from the U.S. Department of Education’s Office of Civil Rights database. Alternative figures were obtained from other sources. The number of students and teachers was obtained from the InfoWorks database maintained by the Rhode Island Department of Education. The number of absentee teachers provided here is a rough estimated average calculated indirectly using the statewide average and information available for the other districts. Federal authorities East Greenwich had been left out of their database because the data it provided had not been certified. Local officials were not able to respond to a records request in time for publication.
Total Number of Teachers Absent 10 or More Days: 74.5
% Absent: 29.3%
NOTE: Figures for this district were omitted from the U.S. Department of Education’s Office of Civil Rights database. Alternative figures were obtained from other sources. The number of students and teachers was obtained from the InfoWorks database maintained by the Rhode Island Department of Education. The number of absentee teachers provided here is a rough estimated average calculated indirectly using the statewide average and information available for the other districts.
However, the district was able to provide alternative figures for the 2013-2014 school year. They indicate that out of a full-time equivalent of 137.5 teachers, 11, or 8 percent, were absent 10 or more days. (The figure for teachers provided by the district is significantly lower than InfoWorks because InfoWorks includes certified in-classroom teachers while the InfoWorks number represents all certified teachers whether or not they are in the classroom.) The district did not have the corresponding figures for the 2011-2012 school year. Federal authorities said the district was omitted because the data it provided had not been certified.
Total Number of Teachers Absent 10 or More Days: 40
% Absent: 35.3%
NOTE: The figures for Foster-Glocester initially appeared far higher, with 102 teachers absent. The district said the number had been inflated because every single type of absence was erroneously included in the data the district submitted to federal authorities. Included in Foster-Glocester’s filing were: field trips, professional development, curriculum writing, out-of-school meetings, state Department of Education meetings, and in-school meetings for special education students. Other districts did not necessarily include all these absences in their filings. The above figure is a corrected amount the district provided.
Total Number of Teachers Absent 10 or More Days: 95
% Absent: 65.7%
NOTE: The Smithfield School District told GoLocalProv that its rate of teacher absenteeism is actually lower that what the federal database indicates because it includes professional development days. The error originated with Smithfield itself: the district says the software program it uses to track absences includes professional development days. However, the district was unable to provide a revised figure in time for publication. The above figures are those available from the database maintained by Office of Civil Rights in the U.S. Department of Education.
Total Number of Teachers Absent 10 or More Days: 20
% Absent: 74.6%
NOTE: New Shoreham’s high absentee rate appears to be connected to the school district’s small size. Federal data does not appear to correct for this factor.
_400_400_90.jpg)
_80_80_90_c1.jpg)
