We were all sort of shocked a few weeks ago when KIPP AMP and another KIPP school in New York reached out the New York United Federation of Teachers. How could a school whose model is based on long hours and staff hiring and firing autonomy possibly consider union representation, which would, in effect, prohibit those two things? Then, just this week, another famous charter school, LA's Accelerated, announced its teachers were reaching out their local union, too. Well, it looks like KIPP's teachers may have changed their minds after all. According to yesterday's??New York Times, AMP's teachers have let the deadline pass to voluntarily recognize the union. The UFT must now file for recognition with New York State's Public Employment Relations Board. Let's hope the KIPP administration, which will be given an opportunity to respond by the PER Board, puts its foot down! Stay tuned...
Update: I misread... the teachers have (in my opinion, unfortunately) not changed their minds about unionizing. The school is simply running down the clock on recognizing them.
Update: After all of you pointed out that I had read too quickly, I became curious on what exactly KIPP could do to fend off the UFT. The short answer is not much. If a majority (not even a supermajority) of teachers want to unionize, the school has to, by law (at least in New York State) recognize them. Its only out is if the organizing teachers committed some blunder, like not following procedure or artificially inflating their numbers by having former KIPP AMP teachers fill out union cards. There are strategies for preventing unionization before teachers have submitted their cards--talking to teachers, trying to address their concerns internally etc. In the case of KIPP AMP, the UFT seems to have accused Dave Levin (KIPP co-founder and supt of KIPP's four NYC schools) of trying to intimidate teachers into redacting. Doesn't sound like it's worked though. After the teachers have submitted their cards, the school's hands are basically tied unless teachers change their minds. Find out more here.??HT to Elizabeth Green.
All of this makes me ponder the neverending question of human capital. KIPP schools and charters like it have high turnover and burnout rates (these, in fact, are some of the reasons AMP's teachers decided to unionize). If successfully educating socioeconomically disadvantaged and typically way below grade level students requires an unsustainable commitment in the long term, how can we possibly marry the successful elements of a charter model to the large scale traditional public education system? Does that mean we need, instead, to change our perceptions of teaching as a long term career? What is the give and take between teaching staff continuity and the 80-hour work weeks of places like KIPP?
