CALIFORNIA FOCUS
FOR RELEASE: TUESDAY, SEPTEMBER 23, 2014 OR THEREAFTER
BY THOMAS D. ELIAS
“TEACHER TENURE BECOMES KEY CAMPAIGN ISSUE”
FOR RELEASE: TUESDAY, SEPTEMBER 23, 2014 OR THEREAFTER
BY THOMAS D. ELIAS
“TEACHER TENURE BECOMES KEY CAMPAIGN ISSUE”
For three months, the time bomb that
is the Vergara vs. California court decision lurked in the background as two of
this fall’s major political contests gradually took shape.
Those are the races for governor
and state schools superintendent, both offices now occupied by Democrats
strongly backed by teachers unions: Gov. Jerry Brown and Supt. Tom Torlakson, a
longtime state legislator before he moved up.
Each now faces an opponent who has
long backed the essence of Vergara. If upheld by appeals courts, the decision
would essentially throw out California’s teacher tenure system and end rules
that make it harder and more expensive to fire teachers than other state
employees.
For three months it was not certain
Brown and Torlakson would appeal the ruling by an obscure Los Angeles County
Superior Court judge, Rolf M. Treu.
But once Treu finalized his decision
in late August, Brown and Torlakson instantly appealed.
Both Republican gubernatorial nominee
Neel Kashkari and Torlakson’s charter school-oriented, nominally Democratic
opponent Marshall Tuck had long demanded that the two incumbents accept Vergara
and revamp the rules for teachers substantially.
Brown and Torlakson were not moved.
Both emerged from the June primary election with huge margins over their
respective rivals and neither feeling particularly threatened. Brown actually
won a majority of the vote last spring, but a wasteful and unreasonable twist
of the top two system demands that even candidates who get a primary election
majority must run again in the fall. Torlakson, meanwhile, came within less
than two percentage points of a majority, besting Tuck by about 20 percent of
the vote.
Neither will turn his back on their
leading supporters, as Torlakson made clear in appealing. “No teacher is
perfect,” he said. “(But only) a very few are not worthy of the job. School
districts have always had the power to dismiss those who do not measure up.”
Responded Tuck, “Kids should not have
to sue to get a quality education.” It was essentially the same thing he’s been
saying since starting his campaign in early spring, when he decried the fact
that teachers, who can get tenure after two years on the job, often are assured
they’ll win that status after only 16 months of work. Not long enough, Tuck
said in an interview, for them to prove they're worthy of a lifetime
sinecure.
This was always going to be a major
fall issue, but no one could say much until Treu finalized his opinion. Treu
himself is a bit of a time bomb. Appointed to a municipal court judgeship by
ex-Gov. Pete Wilson in 1995, Treu should have expected to hear traffic cases,
misdemeanor trials and some criminal arraignments, but never to get the chance
to make education policy for the nation's most populous state.
But Treu morphed into a more powerful
superior court judge when municipal courts were eliminated three years after
his appointment. The result is that the most important education decision in
decades was not made by a qualified expert or even an elected lawmaker, but a
judge nicknamed “The Wolf” by some lawyers who practice in his court and
described by other attorneys on The Robing Room blog as “sanction happy” and
“reminiscent of a cop with a (traffic ticket) quota system.”
So it was no wonder Brown’s notice of
appeal laconically said “changes of this magnitude, as a matter of law, require
appellate review,” a point he repeated in the fall's only gubernatorial debate.
Regardless of the judge’s background,
the debate is the same: Does the relative ease of gaining teacher tenure
combined with the difficulty of dismissing teachers create poor quality
education? Or does tenure attract talented people to teaching, people who might
otherwise take higher-salaried jobs in private industry, but like the job
security they get from tenure?
That is the essence of this fall’s
loudest California campaign disagreement. For purposes of the election, it
really doesn’t matter which way the legal case will eventually go. Since
most existing working conditions are determined not only by state law, but
also by local union contracts, there’s a good chance Vergara will be
overturned. That’s especially true since two Brown appointees, with a third due
early next year, have shifted the seven-justice state Supreme Court leftward.
But both Kashkari and Tuck know
educational quality is an emotional issue, and each needs one to make up his
huge primary election deficit. This one has now fallen into their laps.
-30-
Email
Thomas Elias at tdelias@aol.com. His book, "The Burzynski Breakthrough,
The Most Promising Cancer Treatment and the Government’s Campaign to Squelch
It," is now available in a soft cover fourth edition. For more Elias
columns, visit www.californiafocus.net
No comments:
Post a Comment