Union contract. No to bad options, yes to good option.

Our contract is up at the end of the year. Last week we were asked to participate in a survey distributed by the union. Most of the questions gave you two options to pick from. For example, would you rather have lay offs or have a raise freeze for a year. Would you rather change insurance coverage to keep the same rate or increase our rates to maintain the same coverage? I kept looking for a third option because lets face it, these options suck. But the questions continued in this manner and 10 minutes later, I had a little bit more insight into the type of negotiations we would see. A defensive one where the union accepts where the administration’s starting point is. At the end of the week, I asked some co-workers what they thought about the survey because I thought the questions were awful. They looked at me for a moment and said, they are trying to figure out our priorities and this is going to be a hard year for negotiations because of the economy. What else can they do? I asked about a third option? One that did not start from us having to take a loss and simply deciding where to take it from, but went after administration instead. What about their salaries or health coverage? Do we really need all the administrators we have? One of my co-workers looked at me and said they not allowed to do that. Of course they can, I said. Why do we have to not only accept that we are going to have to give up something but also, their questions pit us against each other: younger less experienced teachers vs. tenured teachers.

These teachers are hard workers. They fight and advocate for their students all day. But there is fear. Fear that jobs will be lost and insurance benefits cut. Its survival time, that’s it. But there is another way; there is an alternative that our union leadership refuses to acknowledge. They put forth one method and perpetuate the fear, leaving the union membership feeling as if there is no other way.