There is nothing about the DCPS v WTU mess, whereby 75 teachers were fired and are now un-fired, that doesn’t make me angry. But the story is timely and relevant and worth knowing, especially for all of the districts and schools looking to dismiss the worst and improve the rest in teaching.
So here’s what happened, in brief. In 2008, 75 DCPS teachers, all on probationary status, were fired via a letter that stated, “based on input from your principal and your status as a probationary employee, your position as teacher with District of Columbia Public Schools is terminated effective August 1, 2008.” The WTU promptly filed a grievance arguing that DCPS, as the employer, violated “agreed-upon and accepted procedures set forth in the collective bargaining agreement” in favor of a more “secretive and summary process.” DCPS rejected that claim, saying that termination of probationary teachers was governed by DC municipal regulations not by the collective bargaining agreement.
Enter formal dispute and hearing, which was held at DCPS’s offices in Washington D.C., on December 18, 2009, and September 29, 2010.
Now the opinion has been issued. It backs many of the arguments made by DCPS, including that DCPS had the right to terminate probationary teachers in their first or second year based on a negative recommendation by a supervisor. It also makes clear that these teachers were clearly deemed to be “ineffective or worse” by their supervisors, with principal narratives describing problems such as “extremely poor classroom management skills,” “rude and aggressive demeanor toward paraprofessionals,” an “excessive failure rate at every marking period,” “excessive absences and latenesses, including 24 tardies, and 20 days of absences,” and “AWOL since May 5th.”
But ultimately the decision favors the WTU’s grievance and, in so doing, sends the teachers back to the classroom and leaves the city with a multimillion dollar charge to pay. The “glaring and fatal flaw” for DCPS, according to the arbitrator, was that teachers were never told why they were terminated, only by what means (the principal). Even as probationary teachers, they cannot be discharged without demonstrating cause for dismissal, the cause of which was never shared with the teachers themselves. As I see it, the fatal flaw of DCPS was its quick and brash approach to teacher dismissal (even if every single teacher deserved to be dismissed), along with the assumption that DCPS could and would win this dispute in a good triumphing over evil sort of way.
Is this a win on a technicality? Perhaps. Doesn’t really matter, though, because it’s a “win” that calls for the following “remedy”:
1. DCPS shall make a 60-day good-faith effort to locate terminated teachers. It shall offer them reinstatement to an appropriate position, effective to the date of termination. All will be made whole, minus any appropriate deductions.
2. Teachers who accept reinstatement shall be returned to the probationary status they held prior to termination. The Employer may make a new determination, by means of an appropriate process, if a reinstated teacher should be continued or terminated.
3. Teachers who waive reinstatement shall have their records changed to show that they resigned.
4. Teachers who cannot be located, or who do not respond within the 60-day window, shall have their records changed to show they resigned.
Score one for no one. A bunch of beginning teachers who, with the nicest spin, weren’t doing well, are coming back into DC classrooms! DC now owes a bunch more money. DCPS gets to chase after teachers it doesn’t really want. And the union falls further from grace by living up to its image as the protector of bad teachers.
So what can we learn from this? For starters, districts and unions, please communicate early and often, even if you don’t like each other, to at least reduce the volume and expense of these kinds of lawsuits. And more broadly, to every manager anywhere in the world, especially those running schools, know that your organization and your employees and thereby your clients or students or whomever matters most cannot be successful without an effective and transparent performance evaluation system that is used—all the time– to provide clear and honest information to employees about their work and their jobs.
Click Image To Enlarge
5/11/2012 | U.S. News & World Report highlights ideas from "Moving On Up: How Tuition Tax Breaks Increasingly Favor the Upper-Middle Class." 
5/11/2012 | In Diverse, Steve Burd comments on the Obama administration's plans to address student debt. 
5/11/2012 | Kevin Carey talks to Salon about the government's role in rising student debt.
{ 4 comments }
Marktropolis — Sure, the union’s job is to protect its members. But if this is a win for WTU, it’s very short-sighted. Regardless of blame, do you really think this outcome boosts the confidence of DC residents in their public education system? For the vast majority that are not in the Rhee pro/con battle, all they see is that we will spend millions of dollars and re-hire a large number of teachers with very poor records. How is that supposed to change the perception that DCPS schools are terrible, build public support for the profession, for higher salaries, for more investment in education?
Marktropolis,
We need unions to be in steady communication. Had that been the case, it would have been in the union’s best interest to remind the district that they needed to inform the terminated teachers of their reasons. In such an environment, when a good teacher was being mistreated, the union rep would have credibility in saying the case of so and so should be reviewed. Informal conversations like that also common in courtrooms where the local DA has respect for the law and legal traditions. Without those informal relationships, our constitutional democracy could not function nearly as well as it had.
In fact, think of the civil rights movement and how federal prosecutors by following those unwritten codes were able to help bring the South into the 20th century. Had RFK’s Justice Department not followed the model I described, think of the backlash. Several federal prosecutors who were the heores of my state’s struggle to become a democracy explained how they balanced toughness while holding themselves to the standard I described. Something tells me that Joel Klein had a different philosophy though …
Actually, not such an excellent post in my view. It’s not the teachers union’s job to determine who is or isn’t a “good” teacher. The union’s job is to uphold the contract. Which is what they did in this case. I’d say it’s a big win for WTU – the outcome isn’t optimal, but it does say to all those folks out there praising Rhee et al., that when there’s a bargaining agreement in place, you can’t willy nilly start firing people. Yes, this will get spun as “this is why unions are bad,” but the flip side is “this is why unions are good – when they do their jobs.”
For me this just serves as another nail in the coffin of Rhee’s career – and a well deserved one. If she’d worked just a tad harder collaborating with the union – and not making unilateral employment decisions – we might not be in this mess.
Excellent post.
Yes, “the fatal flaw of DCPS was its quick and brash approach to teacher dismissal (even if every single teacher deserved to be dismissed), along with the assumption that DCPS could and would win this dispute in a good triumphing over evil sort of way.”
And you are also right about the layers of damage this debacle caused. We should work harder to develop collaborative methods of removing bad teachers. The bottom line, however, is that honesty is the best policy.
Comments on this entry are closed.
{ 3 trackbacks }