Report From the Line. Part 6.

Today was a memorable day on the line for several reasons. There was mass picketing at our site today, as it is one of two areas that gets a surplus of traffic. People from other locations are asked to volunteer to join us for one or two shifts per week. Generally visitors like coming to our site, as there are plenty of distractions that seem to make the time pass quickly. We've seen a diverse range of reactions from drivers- everything from enthusiastic waves to something we like to interpret as the "You're-number-one!" sign. There have been a few who have supplemented their sign language with unsavory comments. Unfortunately for a few among that group, we've got a cop in an unmarked car ready to chase folks down and offer citations. I've seen that happen on a few occasions, and I can only imagine the indignation that results. One guy yesterday actually got half way out of the passenger side window to shout his eloquent criticism. Shame on me for wishing he would have been clipped by a road sign.

With all the extra strikers showing up today, we received an influx of interesting treats and refreshments. I used to think I loved donuts, but after four weeks of staring at them as the only form of sustenance- I think I'll be passing on the delectable dough for awhile. Imagine the pleasure that piqued my stomach when I saw an aluminum tray full of chicken wings and a big bowl of meaty chili. This was the goodwill of the temporary, and it took me about two minutes to decide to dig in... even with my typical concerns about proper digestion. The stuff was tasty- and lent a faintly festive touch to the occasion. There were new partners for conversation as well, and that meant I wasn't checking the time every ten minutes.

So everything pointed to a relatively smooth Friday, and that's how the first half of the shift progressed. I even took an extra smoke break with a couple of the newbies. We caught up with the news from the other sites. Apparently one woman, who had claimed to be sick and was thus malingering her way off the lines, completed a marathon in another city. We also discussed the various eccentricities that our co-workers normally keep hidden. All the time together has led to a fair share of unexpected and unlikely associations. I've learned a lot about people I never would have guessed. Remember the snake skin that I mentioned was tied around my car antennae a few weeks ago? It turns out that a strait-laced science teacher did it as a prank, and then was too embarrassed not to cover up his deed with explanatory tall tales. Oddly, learning the true story behind the gesture has made me like him more.

Because the bulk of the shift was pleasant, I was taken by surprise when a community member pulled into the school parking lot, and proceeded to deliver a monotone rant to the mass of teachers standing about. Most everyone was employing the same strategy as me- trying to ignore her and avoid eye contact. The lady was dressed in loose clothing, and had somehow not noticed that her pants were unzipped. When informed about that, she responded that they weren't her clothes anyway. She was a singularly unpleasant creature to look at. Although she was not employing vulgar language, many of those closest to her seemed to be increasingly unsettled by her presence. She droned on and on until a few people began to motion the security guard over for assistance. The woman was trespassing, and nobody wanted an ugly incident.

Next a cop car pulled up, and the policeman began to question the interloper about her intentions. Believing that all would soon be acceptably resolved, many of us turned away. But it only took a few more minutes before the cop began to give her a field sobriety test. This went on for a bit, and then the officer grabbed her by the arm and starting escorting her in the direction of her car. This is when she started resisting... shoving and trying to break away from his grip. Unbelievably, we actually watched the small-framed policeman employ a clumsy take-down procedure in order to restrain her. The wrestled on the grass. She was flopping around like a beached whale, her sweatshirt riding up to expose her pale white belly. It was a nasty sight. We tried to move our line back to screen the view of passing cars. The woman fought all the way to the police cruiser, and refused to lower her head for clearance as she was pushed into the backseat. Someone heard her yell, "I haven't drank one cent!!" This is when the jokes started.

I quipped that this sort of thing was the natural outgrowth of homeschooling, and this observation was met with a tension-relieving round of laughs. But deep down I found the entire sordid occurrence pathetic. I pictured the lady drinking at a bar in the afternoon, feeling frustrated about this conflict that has torn apart a community. In her inebriated state, she obviously thought that she could do something about it. I would hazard a guess that she never anticipated being arrested for D.U.I., resisting arrest, and disorderly conduct. I wondered what her husband and kids would feel when they found out about the incident.

Report From the Line. Part 5.

I have now officially entered the fourth week of a labor strike. As time progresses, the terms of the debate get progressively muddier. A couple of years working in the marketing department of a public relations department taught me the lesson that there exists an almost infinite amount of ways to manipulate numbers in order to make a point. Unfortunately everyone involved in this dispute seems to be applying this concept. It's difficult to translate the various offers that are getting tossed about. I can only imagine the confusion of someone who isn't watching very carefully. There are some eerily Orwellian concepts at work here- apparently 1 + 1 is not always equal to two. The meaning of 4% (obviously) changes depending upon the figures we are applying it to. It's a shame that there's not much clarity to the definitions. People don't even know what they are fighting about. Like so much in this society the argument gets reduced to "us vs. them".

I'd be disingenuous if I tried to claim that I did not know what I was getting into when I took this job. I knew that the area was jammed packed with conservative Republicans. I also knew that people of that political stripe generally bristle at the idea of "public education". When it comes to taxes, they certainly don't want to spend their money to solve "other people's problems". Apparently it's one thing to invest hundreds of billions of dollars in a war and occupation aimed at liberating an oil-bearing nation, but quite another thing to fork over hard-earned cash to educate the neighbors' kids. While that may be a shame, it's not likely to change anytime soon.

You might suggest that the best decision would be to pull up the stakes and move to a more favorable ground. However, there is a common perception among teachers (at least in the region of the state that I live in) that it becomes progressively more difficult to transfer to a new district once one has several years of experience. Apparently school boards prefer hiring new teachers because they can pay them less salary. Whatever collusion exists between boards on this issue serves to depress overall wages. That makes it much more difficult to upgrade to a better situation when you are undervalued where you are. People are fond of comparisons to the private sector, but things work quite differently in the taxpayer-funded segment of the workforce. You tend to get locked into the position that you start in. There simply isn't as much opportunity for mobility. So you just try to make the best of things and pick your battles.

I don't see any imminent end to this particular struggle. We'll be forced by the state to go back to the classrooms in a couple of weeks, and we'll be doing so without a new contract. The board has expressed absolutely no interest in negotiating a compromise. And once we are back at work they will have no incentive to continue to bargain. It serves their interests to drag it out, and without overwhelming pressure from that part of the community that is inconvenienced by the strike, there will be no reason or them to change their offer. So it looks like we are going to be in the same position next fall. The only thing that will ultimately affect a change in the situation is a school board election that replaces the one currently in place. Despite the strong preference for a legislative ban on teacher strikes among the board members, there seems to be little political traction for such a direction in the state capitol. Unfortunately... you don't go into negotiations with the opponent you want- but rather the one that you have.

If it were up to me, I would be pushing for 'final offer' binding arbitration. I've heard from a trusted authority that such a strategy has worked in similar strike situations in the state. Such a resolution carries risks for both sides. Everyone puts their best offer on the table, and a 'neutral' arbiter decides the contract. There are no votes on the decision, but rather all parties must live with the final outcome. In this case we already have a fact finder report and it looks certain that we will be forced into non-binding arbitration. Unfortunately that's only going to result in yet another stall in negotiations. Both sides will reject the compromise, and we'll be back to where we are now. At this point, with the amount of acrimony building in the community, binding arbitration seems like the most 'fair and balanced' option. Still, I haven't heard either side express any desire for this solution. All I see is all players digging in their heels for a long fight.

Report From the Line. Part 4

Almost two weeks have passed since the strike began, and while discussion is heating up in the community, negotiations have completely stopped. Personally I would like to see both sides sitting down across from each other 24-7, but I realize that most of the major players have full-time jobs and families to support. Despite claims that they would like to see teachers back in the classrooms, school board members don't seem to display the type of imminence that one might expect. Perhaps that is because the politics of this particular conflict extend past the local level. Is it a coincidence that the local state representative initiated a proposal to ban school strikes the very day this one started? Some parents have consistently accused the teachers of "holding the students hostage"... I wonder if they ever considered that the board is trying to make a larger political point.

I do know for a fact that other districts throughout Pennsylvania are watching this situation closely. Negotiations in M.'s district were reported to be progressing quickly until my own school's strike began. Board members from the two areas have reportedly consulted with each other, and now the talks have stalled in both places. The local news media is alert to the fact that there could be widespread ramifications based upon what happens as the weeks pass by. No one wants to go through the type of upheaval that a school strike causes, with the exception of those wanting to push a broader political perspective. Parents do not want to make alternative arrangements for daycare for their children. Kids enjoy the break at first, but quickly tire of the lack of structure. Meanwhile every teacher I know laments the fact that they are trading their vacation days for shifts walking on the picket lines. But in a district as conservative as the one I teach in, tax dollars are always dispensed grudgingly.

The current news is that a local radio station has decided to hold a town hall meeting to help resolve the issue. I actually believe that these folks would like to contribute to a solution. The problem is that one of the morning commentators has continually stoked resentments by staking out a rabidly anti-teacher position. It's going to be hard for union leaders to trust that promises of a "fair and balanced" (a phrase with extremely negative associations, by the way) forum will be honored. In the defense of the station, the moderator has attempted to take a middle-of-the-road position on the issues. Meanwhile the school board's members have not agreed to participate. They would like their divisive lead negotiator to represent their side. In fact, when asked by a district parent whether or not he would appear at the event, the school board president replied that he would not do so because he didn't feel qualified to represent the board's position. If not him, then who?

Another notable item was the release of an e-mail communication between a board member and the administration. In this missive, the extremely recalcitrant board member (Mr. A.) referred to district teachers as "incompetent" and "deadwood", and suggested that he would never want his children to be around such staff. Incidentally this concern has never presented a real problem, considering Mr. A. sends his kids to private schools, instead of the public institution he pretends to represent. He further called for the board to cast "crumbs" to the most senior teachers in the district, who under the board's "last, best proposal" would receive what amounts to a decrease in standard of living, rather than a raise. This point has been a major stumbling block throughout contract negotiations. Thankfully the letter and its public reception has caused Mr. A. to remove his name from the upcoming ballot for the November elections. However he remains completely unapologetic, and stands by the sentiment expressed in the document.

One can only hope there is movement toward reconciliation soon. The last proposal was extended by the union side in August, and there has not been a change from the Board's stance since then. Negotiation requires each side to make counter-proposals aimed at eventual compromise. The union has stated repeatedly that they will be willing to change their offer, but it won't negotiate against itself. Unless the board decides to reconsider its immobility, this strike will certainly continue until we are mandated by the state to return to school.

Report From the Line. Part 3

Today I found myself back on the picket line for the start of a brand new week. I volunteered to go to the alternate site where I went last Tuesday. It was just too boring and discouraging at my assigned site. I'd much rather engage the passing traffic, regardless of the prevailing reaction of the community. There are still more encouraging displays than otherwise. A lot of people will honk as they pass and give us the thumbs up. The negative feedback is also intensifying, and more people are screaming out of their windows as they pass. As the days pass, and people feel more and more inconvenienced, I expect it to get worse. But for now it is OK. The only time I get upset is when someone yells "Get a real job!" That's one we have heard repeatedly from a "gentleman" in a BMW. It's almost as if he needs a replacement for his missing illegal immigrant maid.

It doesn't take a lot of work to find the folks that are truly against us. All I have to do is Google the strike, I can find message boards with frustrated people railing against teachers. I'm not sure where the angry sentiment comes from, but I can certainly speculate. There are a whole lot of folks out there that believe that they are self-made, and therefore resent whenever they perceive others as being "given" what they don't deserve. These are the people that were apparently self-taught. They will go to any lengths to ensure that they don't spend a single dime on the public welfare. Many of them still believe that everybody has an equal chance at getting rich, and that poor people deserve their lot in life. It's the prevailing mythology in the United States- the lore of self-reliance and the "free market". The cream rises to the top. At least that's the way they see it.

Others are products of private schools and would like to see public education disbanded. They fail to see that whatever remnants of a middle class are left in this society are still around primarily because of public schools. We teachers give many kids their only chance in life. That's a sad reality, but the truth nonetheless. Yet most people never make this connection. Many in the community I teach in moved there specifically to avoid the problems of the less fortunate. They pay less taxes and escape the social concerns of the city. Why should they be concerned about others? That defeats the purpose of leaving in the first place. And then these same people have the nerve to call teachers selfish for valuing their own labor. It smacks of hypocrisy and extreme self-interest to me. However when the schools attract others to the district, you will never hear them complain about the increase in their property values.

Critics of the teacher unions want to compare us to employees in the private sector. They say that workers rarely get annual raises or decent health plans. Teacher salaries are printed in the newspaper to be used as fodder for their arguments. But somehow we never find out how much these critics make, or what the perks of their jobs are. We never hear what they do. I think it should be incumbent upon them to explain the services that they provide to society. If we are going to compare teachers to middle management in (for example) financial corporations, then we should all be honest and forthcoming. How do we all benefit from the work that they do? How important are they to the functioning and future of our community? Are they indispensable? Would we be worse off if they disappeared? It seems that values have been turned backwards when we suggest that striking teachers should "Get a real job!"

Another popular idea concerns how easy teachers have it. They work a seven-and-a-half hour day with prep periods! They have summers off! Of course the requirements of the job extend past 40 hours per week. Certainly teachers must continue a process of lifelong education that encroaches upon their vacation. Don't forget that the teacher contract is 187 days long, and that's exactly what they are paid for.

In order to illustrate just how easy teachers have it- let's continue our comparison to the private sector. Picture a manager that is directly responsible for 120-150 people. He/she must spend 40 minutes each and every workday in the supervision of their training... in face-to-face interaction with each and every one of them. Add in such factors as a general reluctance to be managed, and a lack of socialization and maturity. Clearly some of the manager's charges are developmentally and/or emotionally disabled. These are people with the most basic of skills that will be expected (without exception) to achieve at a proficient level. None of them can be fired or transferred elsewhere. The manager is personally accountable for the security and well-being of everyone at all times. Aside from the training and supervision, the manager is wholly responsible for the evaluation and reporting of each individual's progress. And there are twice as many people who consider themselves to be the manager's "employers", who watch their every move... just waiting for them to slip up and do something to offend them. What do you think such a corporate manager would demand in compensation?

What is an Occupation?

As I continue to watch the second season of Lost, I'm reminded of a basic human fact- people need something to do. If they don't have an obvious task to complete, they will seek something else. It's striking just how often you see characters in a television show mucking things up out of sheer boredom. It's easy to observe from the outside, and to predict the trouble down the line. We are tempted to revel in our own objectivity and superiority, believing that we would act better in similar circumstances. Most likely that's not true... at all. It wouldn't be true if we were on television. And it wouldn't be true in our own lives. For the most part we can't leave well enough alone. If left to our own devices, we will create our own drama.

We are warned about this in oral folklore tradition, in children's books, and holy texts- "Curiosity killed the cat", the damned monkey always finds trouble when he fails to mind the man with the yellow hat, and Adam and Eve got expelled from paradise for their transgressions. Why can't we let well enough alone? Perhaps it has something to do with the size and complexity of our brains. Maybe we are too self-conscious? Or maybe we just have too much time on our hands. Ever since the invention of agriculture and the surplus of food, we have been making things complicated for ourselves. The smartest of men are often the most to blame.

It could be that free will inevitably produces chaos and entropy. If we are kept busy with foraging and hunting, sleeping and eating, finding shelter and voiding our bowels... when will we find the opportunity to create additional problems for ourselves? I'm pretty damned sure that the majority of Americans would turn sour if they worked a 30-hour work week. It takes the discipline to impose a self-created structure so as not to go bad during large blocks of free time. Compounding the problem is the fact that we have poor examples to follow. Surf the internet porn sites or go to a casino of you want positive evidence of what I'm talking about. We'd have a leg up on our addictions if we merely had the ability to manage our extra time wisely.

All of this becomes especially poignant while walking the picket lines. Union workers are asked only to demonstrate by walking a circle in a circumscribed plot of ground. Doing this for hours can be quite maddening. Naturally this is where many of the most destructive and insidious rumors and resentments are formed. The mind is free to wander, and do the devil's business. After the first half hour or so, you've exhausted all the innocuous topics of conversation. At that point anything is fair game. The alternative is to keep to yourself and let whatever transient concern occupy you to the point of obsession. It's not mentally healthy. Four hour confined strolls are quite illuminating. Imagine what living through a long prison term is like. Is it any wonder why incarceration often transforms into criminal graduate school? The wisest leaders control minds by deciding what their followers are to do.

Report From the Line. Part 2

Today was much like yesterday in that there were periodic rain showers making everyone a bit uncomfortable at the picket sites. We had a visit from some "higher-ups" in the state union. They wanted to address a few of the issues we've been having with the media, specifically a certain local AM radio pundit that's full of shit. One would expect a certain level of misrepresentation from someone who has been clear in his animosity toward public education. He's a product of the private schools and (like many of them) would like to see all places of learning privatized. Of course he has seized every possible opportunity to rile up the community, while at the same time accusing the union of throwing fuel on the fire every time it takes a stand.

We have several coaches who have decided to cross the picket line. There are eight that want to continue to "serve the kids" by continuing games and practices during the strike. A few of them have even had the gall to show up on the lines and march with the rest of us. Naturally that has created a lot of animosity. By doing this they are playing both sides against the middle. They don't want to face alienation from the peers with whom they will eventually return to the classrooms. But at the same time they want to score points with the parents of the players and the team boosters. Their actions send a bad messages and undermine the union. For one thing it's a clear statement that they value athletics over education. In a district such as this, an inordinate amount of focus is already on sports. Many will accept the inconveniences of shifting the schedule to accommodate a strike, yet God help anyone that stands in the way of that red-blooded American past-time of football. Perhaps there would be more pressure on the board to get this thing settled if these double agents would just stay home and let the adults iron this out.

Why should student athletes be catered to anyway? Wouldn't the funds used for stadiums be better put to use by earmarking them for educational purposes? The aforementioned pundit (who I'll refer to here as MG) has made a hero out of the head coach of the gridiron. This Mr. B. has allowed himself to be exploited by the anti-union cause. As if this weren't enough insult, he is participating in the worst type of moral grandstanding in the public eye. He's had the nerve to imply that he cares more about the kids than the striking teachers do, and has stated that he would break into the school tomorrow to teach class if that were possible. Still he insists he is not trying to make an anti-union statement. Meanwhile he quietly collects his portion of the $8K the district shells out for his "leadership service". While he has refused to give a live interview on the radio, he evidently had no qualms about talking with MG for "about an hour or so". So now he's managed to transform his image from the guy who cares more about football to the poster child for the union-busters. In his own words, MG "loves the guy."

There will be ramifications for these individuals. Most likely there will be a few former fans that look cross-eyed at the new "big-man-on-campus". In the meantime the issue is getting heated on the lines. Now the coaches who haven't crossed the line want to be paid off. They believe that a portion of the union dues paid by all teachers should be used to compensate for the supplemental income they are losing during the strike. My opinion is that their requests expose them for what they are... self-serving prima donnas. Everyone on the line is making a sacrifice. The checks for their main source of income are going to be withheld. Everyone of us knew that this would be the case. They need to carry their own loads just like the rest of us. Should I demand funds to make up for whatever art I don't make or sell because I'm losing my vacation days? I don't think so. Cry me a river, tough guy.

Someone actually had the nerve to suggest we take up a collection for the "union-loyal" coaches. They might as well pass me right by, because they are getting no sympathy from me, let alone money. That cause simply serves as a source of distraction and dissension. In fact we spent a good twenty minutes talking about this non-issue with the union "bigwigs" who deigned to visit us out in the field. After promises that they would join us on our march (that of course never happened), they beat a hasty retreat. I wanted to ask them to elaborate on their new "media policy". Supposedly they are not dealing with the media anymore. From my observation they weren't doing anything useful before. We are clearly losing the P.R. battle, despite the fact that the majority honk and wave at us as they pass by the lines. They seem hapless, even on a superficial and personal level. Why would they send a fat guy in an ill-fitting suit to inspire confidence and give us a pep talk? I wonder when the last time he actually had to march was.

Report From the Line.

So I've decided it's futile to stem the tide. Given that less than 12% of the American workforce is part of a labor union, I feel that fewer and fewer people are ever going to have the experience that I'm going through now. Ultimately it seems like I'm going to someday regret not putting any words down about what is happening. My main concern is that no one stumble upon this forum and make me some part of a specific public debate. The best way to minimize that riskt is just to avoid all references to proper nouns. There's no way I want some irate community member coming upon this via Google. I simply don't need that kind of attention.

Today I completed my third day on the picket line. The first two days I switched with a co-worker who drew an early shift. It's bad enough I have to make a long drive to walk in a circle for three plus hours... I don't want to get up at 5:30 in the morning to do it. The line outside the main school campus is particularly prone to monotony. There is very little through traffic at the location, and not much to do other than make conversation with those you are walking with. In the years I have been at my job I haven't made any close connections with the staff, and so I mostly walk alone. I have to time my circuits around the little plot given for strikers, so that I can avoid getting bunched up with the others. If I continue quietly and in relative isolation, I am able to access some sort of zone. That describes the bulk of my experience on Monday.

I drive all the way to a rural household owned by a fellow teacher, and park my car. Several non-tenured staff shuttle us to the strike site via SUVs. There is always junk food waiting there for a burst of quick energy. I stop on my way to pick up a high-powered espresso drink, and sweat it out in the unseasonably warm weather. We wear professional clothes (minus a tie), just as if we were reporting normally to work. It's not active wear, so it's a bit uncomfortable. Midway through my shift I walk up the road to a porta-john on the property of a generous parent. I sit on a rock and have a smoke or two, and then get back. At 6PM, the shuttles come and bring you back to the car. This would be a typical day on the line.

Yesterday I went over to the middle/elementary schools in the next town- these facilities sit bestride a high-traffic road, and are staffed mostly by females. There is more anti-union sentiment here, and the home teachers feel more comfortable with additional men at their side. I didn't have to walk in a circle there. We stood in a line facing the passing cars, wearing big signs suspended by string from our necks. Mine says we are looking for a "fair contract". Everyone was very nice, and time passed quickly as everyone socialized amiably. Mostly we looked at drivers and received the full range of reactions one might expect. The vast majority waved at us, smiled, or gave us the thumbs up. I hadn't expected that as the media is presenting a picture of a public very biased for the district and against teachers. From my experience, that isn't the case at all.

We did have an incident though. Late in the day a tall older man with military bearing came over to inquire what we were "protesting about". I sized him up immediately as someone who opposed our cause. I made it a point not to make eye contact with him, but other teachers engaged him. He started angrily interrogating one guy about his salary. When given a handout prepared by the union for such situations, the man angrily shoved it inside the shirt of one of the picketers. I was amazed at the restraint of my co-worker. The policeman who was assigned to ensure order at the scene stepped in and held the aggressor for questioning. He asked if the teacher wanted to press charges, but it was decided that such an action would only aggravate the incident and possibly inflame further conflict. The man was told to stay away or face arrest.

Of course word travels quickly on the lines, and some of the staff knew the threatening individual. It's been suggested that he is unstable. A stressful upheaval of the community is liable to bring out all types of unsavory characters. I had the sense that this one is mildly psychotic, and it has been confirmed that he is an ex-marine. I watched him walk down the street after he was released, and wondered if he'd be waiting later in the parking lot. The police escorted us to our cars when we left. Today when I got off the lines and back to my vehicle I noticed that someone had tied the shed skin of a large snake around my antennae. Naturally my mind flashed to yesterday. At some level I kind of appreciated the creativity of the gesture, but I was moved to report it "just in case". There's no way of knowing who attached this relic, or when they did it. Needless to say it adds a bit of drama.

A Few Words About Teacher Strikes.

Because of personal bias, I really didn't want to get involved in the timely debate over teacher strikes. But it appears that a legislator in the PA state Congress is gearing up to introduce another ban on such actions. Representative Todd Rock had introduced a similar bill earlier this year, and local union activity has brought the issue back to the forefront of public attention. It seems that you can't tune in to a television news program, read a newspaper, or listen to AM radio without hearing plenty of commentary. Of course the vast majority of citizens are not teachers (or closely related to one) and they are understandably most concerned about how teacher salaries affect their property taxes.

Discussions based upon willingness to pay increased taxes are going to naturally be one-sided. While millage rates are not always applicable to all contract negotiations, you can bet that every school board will use them as a hammer to shape public opinion. Regardless of the reality of a district's finances, and whether or not there is a budget surplus in the educational system, the threat of more taxes is always going to be invoked by management. Only when the prospect of higher tax rates is removed from the discussion can we get at the core of people's feelings and thoughts about teacher strikes. Perhaps the underlying cause of a lot of the current invective regarding teacher unions could be mediated by a reassessment of property taxes- which is the primary funding source of public education. However, that entails a deep examination that I am not prepared to initiate here.

So why are most residents concerned about teacher strikes? Is it the pervasive animosity society has been programmed to direct toward all unions and collective bargaining? Less than 12% of American workers are members of unions. Ideas about the "free market" and the private sector have poisoned this society when it comes to the topic of unionization. Because corporations have been so effective in guiding our government toward the disenfranchisement of labor, it is almost impossible to have a rational conversation about what rewards we can expect from our employers. "Free trade" agreements have lowered expectations even further. The average worker salary, adjusted for inflation, has steadily decreased since 1970. The game is all but over, and the robber barons are consolidating their victory.

Consequently teacher unions are among the very last organized groups of professional workers in the nation. They are also (not coincidentally) among the last salaried employees to have adequate health care and pensions built into their contracts. Is it surprising that the most widely educated segment of the American workforce has managed to hold on to these benefits? PA educators are required by state law to be life-long learners. In order to acquire a permanent certification, teachers must earn the equivalent of a master's degree in post-graduate credits. In addition they must accumulate 180 hours of further education every five years to maintain active status. Because of these requirements they have learned to value their worth and significant collective contribution to a progressive and functional society. Their expectations for compensation are commensurate with their role as leading figures in the development of an educated population. To maintain their position they have cultivated a system to ensure their just reward.

Exactly what leverage would teachers have in contract negotiations if striking became illegal? How would they maintain the type of salaries and benefits that attract the brightest minds to the field of education? Being a teacher is a great responsibility on multiple levels. In every way, they are the true role models of society. Yet when they strike, they are accused of using children as hostages for their own advancement. However, this charge is fallacious. Students in PA are mandated by law to receive 180 days of education every year. Every day that teachers spend on strike must be made up during holidays or at the end of the original school schedule.

Critics of strikes claim that teachers get paid despite the fact that they aren't working. This is completely false. Without exception, they still must fulfill the terms of their 180-day contracts. Students don't lose a single day of curriculum. Additionally teachers sacrifice one non-working day for every one they spend on the picket line. They are substituting demonstration for "vacation". And all of this is in the service of just compensation. While it may be "inconvenient" for parents to adjust their schedules to accommodate strikes, it is simply not true that it is the kids that make the ultimate sacrifice. In the end strikes are a direct communication with the population that teachers serve- the parents and taxpayers of a district. You get what you pay for, and teachers are providing for the future. What value do you place on that?