Organizing Charter Schools, A Challenge to Unions     
Friday, April 14, 2006
U.S. Freedom Foundation www.FreedomFoundation.us      
David W. Kirkpatrick Senior Education Fellow

After years of trying to crush the charter school movement, both major teacher unions, the National Education Association and the American Federation of Teachers, have decided if you can't beat them, join them.  The problem is that as they try to persuade charter school teachers to unionize, the NEA and the AFT continue to fight the movement.  They argue against charter school laws in state legislatures, challenge their validity in the courts, seek to prevent school boards, or other chartering agencies from authorizing schools, and otherwise try to throttle the movement.          

It is too late for the unions to win this war even if they win some skirmishes.  With charter schools  approaching 4,000, with nearly 60,000 teachers and more than million students, the point of critical mass has passed.          

So, now the unions approach charter school teachers saying "join us and we'll look out for your interests."  Sure.  Just has they have done for the past decade and a half.          

The March 22nd issue of Education Week reported on this with a lead story, "Efforts to Unionize Charters Grow, But Results So Far Appear Modest."  Indeed they have.  And indications are modest results will continue, at best.           

And for good reason.          

The article noted, and more than one observer has pointed out, the inconsistency of opposing charter schools, which necessitates opposing  the interests of teacher who wish to work in them.  Charter school teachers are obviously aware of this inconsistency, one might say this hypocrisy, since their willingness to become affiliates of the two major teacher unions has been largely nonexistent.             

True, there are charter schools that are organized as union affiliates but they are few.  Even most of those that are affiliated are former unionized public schools that continued their status when they converted to charters. Thus they constitute no gain for unions since they were already members.  On balance such conversions have probably been a negative factor for unions since a number of them dropped their affiliation, to which must be added the even more numerous new charter schools which have elected to stay independent, or unorganized.          

But other factors pose serious problems for the unions, and which should encourage those concerned with the power of teacher unions, including school board members, to promote charter schools.            

One is that most charter schools are relatively small, especially new ones.  While there are some large ones, even with 1,000 or more students, they, again, are often former public schools.  The fourth annual study of charter schools by the U.S. Department of Education reported that new ones averaged only 137 students each.  While that exact figure may not still hold, the tendency is in that direction.  With about a million students in more than 3500 schools, the average enrollment is less than 300 each.  Recognizing the existence of former public schools with 1,000 or more students, this would indicate the great majority of new charter schools may have fewer than 200, maybe not too much larger than the 137 of a few years ago.           

So what's the problem for unions?  Organizing very small schools, with maybe 10 or less teachers, is a very chancy financial proposition.  Thousands of union staff members earn more than $100,000 annually, especially when fringe benefits are included.  That's about $2,000 a week, $400 per day.   How much staff time can unions expend organizing ten teachers, or representing them during extended negotiations, at $400 per day per union employee when the teachers only pay a few thousand dollars a year in dues, and that includes the sharing of dues at the local, state and national level?          

Consider nonpublic schools.  While, unlike charters, they are not public schools, both sectors have common characteristics.  Most schools are small, largely autonomous, do not have the power to compel attendance, and they cannot compel people to pay for them whether they wish to or not. 

This causes both the administration and teaching staff to be cautious about making unacceptable demands upon their clientele.          

As a result few nonpublic schools are organized and those that are rarely have strikes which can cause their students to leave.          

To date charter schools seem to be on the same road.
                                                         
# # # # #          

"It is because his relation with his patient is based on mutual consent that the doctor can afford to be professional...Only when all parents, not just rich ones, have a truly free choice in education...will we teachers begin to stop being what most of us still are...which is jailers and babysitters, cops without uniforms and begin to be professionals." Teacher John Holt, p. 265, What Do I Do Monday? NY: E.P. Dutton, 1970