“TAKE ACTION”
Email your legislators to urge opposition to HB 1219 as currently drafted. HB 1219 would allow for the conversion of a public school into a charter school upon the petition of 51% of the students' parents OR a simple majority of the school board.
When a public school converts to charter school status, teachers' collective bargaining rights are eliminated because the school board is no longer the employer. Prior law required at least 60% of the teachers to agree to the conversion, as well as parental input. In 2011, the General Assembly removed the teacher input from these decisions. ISTA asks that a "teacher trigger" be reinstated into the process.
Click on the Take Action link: http://keepthepromiseindiana.org/take-action_1
Don’t hesitate to call if that works best. HOUSE SWITCHBOARD: 800-382-9842 or 317-232-9600.
Talking Points:
- Teachers want to be a part of the partnership in these issues where their experience, knowledge of learning, and professional understanding of children is valued and embedded in the process.
- Under existing law and under this proposal, if a conversion occurs, bargaining rights go away as the employer is a different entity. HB 1219, absent some assurances in this regard, becomes an anti-teacher/bargaining bill.
- Prior law (prior to last year), bargaining was preserved in school conversions and teachers were a partner in the conversion. There is a simple fix if there is a willingness. Inasmuch as bargaining rights are currently limited to salary and wage-related benefits, instilling some threshold of teacher participation in developing a conversion should not be an issue anymore. Teacher buy-in and meaningful partnering, instead, should be an integral part of what would make any conversion workable.
- There is no provision in law (existing or proposed) to “reverse” a conversion.
- Because this would apply to any public school in the state, the potential for ongoing, chronic community upheaval in terms of “bureaucracies” and “who runs this/that” grows. School communities should be assured that the main discussions center on instructional/programmatic review and direct student learning issues and not these “who’s in control” issues that deflect from job 1.
- The existing law is just a few months’ old. There is little reason to make such a substantive and extreme change during a hurried short session when there was so much discussion last session.
No comments:
Post a Comment