LAUSD Strike: Who's the Big Winner Now That the Strike is Settled?

This strike is a bunch of thieves and bums rushing to make their mark and make off with the most money from us taxpayers, but the ones paying the highest price are the students.

Or are they?

The strike has now ended, and it's been about three weeks since the settlement was passed and agreed to be all parties concerned.

Who are the big winners? The big losers?

Who could come out strong in the LAUSD teachers' strike when all is said and done?

A week ago, Los Angeles schools Supt. Austin Beutner went to Sacramento to nail down support for the school district if teachers decided to go on strike.

He came back sounding very optimistic that lawmakers understood the district’s finances were so perilous that it could not afford what the teachers were demanding.

Unions do not care whether there is enough money or not. They will always claim that the leadership, the administrators are holding out on the teachers and the students. They can make the argument that the school board members and upper-level staff are paying themselves big money, while so little money and talent is going to the classroom.

But the images of teachers marching in the rain, often cheered by parents and students, have amounted to powerful politics in this blue state, and have weakened the district’s hand.

The unions still wield an incredible amount of power in California, even post-Janus. Most of the teachers don't know anything but union representation and support. They can't imagine a career without the union representing them.

The teachers have told personal stories that many find hard to argue with: that too many students shouldn’t be crowded into classes, that schools should have nurses on hand every day. And that has up to now trumped Beutner’s grim financial diagnosis, even though it was largely endorsed by a county oversight agency.

The Los Angeles County Office of Education has signaled that the fiscal problems in LAUSD are immense. If the district doesn't get a hold on its finances, the district will go insolvent and the county office will have to take over.

Now, some lawmakers Beutner met with less than a week ago have scheduled a news conference Friday “in support of teachers and families to demand that LAUSD negotiate fairly.”

As the L.A. teachers’ strike enters its fifth day and a new round of negotiations begin, two realities are emerging: The tremendous enthusiasm over the walkout and the toll its taking on the school system.

This report had gone out during the strike. Looking back three weeks later, the teachers didn't get concrete gains, but some promises. They are going to get pay increases retroactive to when the previous contract had ended. The district is already drowning in debt, but they have still agreed to higher salaries, more support staff, and a promise to deliver smaller class sizes and less testing.

Of course, promises are just words. Where's the action to back up these promises?

Inside campuses, skeleton crews of supervisors, subs and remaining workers have herded students into large spaces, showing movies and plugging students into online coursework. About two-thirds did not show up, even though many working parents depend on schools to provide childcare and even meals.

To add financial insult to injury, the district lost hundreds of millions of dollars over the week of strikes.

The district estimates that each day of the strike is costing $10 million to $15 million, and Thursday’s student attendance was the lowest during the strike.

Garcetti's Presidential Bid
Has Gone Up in Flames

L.A. Mayor Eric Garcetti, whose possible entry into the 2020 presidential field has been challenged by the strike, is now trying to take a leadership role in ending it.

His leadership role pretty much sunk his election chances. Plus the fact that Kamala Harris has more name recognition and national presence than a mayor for a large city. Garcetti never really had a chance to begin with. 

This was evident Thursday when he hosted negotiating teams from the school district and union at City Hall. They were the first talks in a week.

“The mayor asked and received commitment for both parties to stay at the table until they reach an agreement,” said spokeswoman Andrea Garcia on Thursday. “Mayor Garcetti has cleared his schedule and is in regular contact with both parties and state leaders, including the governor.”

Let's not kid ourselves. Garcetti was hoping to get this strike out of the way as soon as possible. He was probably spending more time testing the waters with key special interests in Los Angeles and throughout the country to see what they had to say about his efforts as mayor. They probably gave him the by and large sense that they did not like his style or his substance.

I cannot recall the number of times people criticized Garcetti for giving into special interests and developers in the region. Some of his most vocal critics actually compared him to Donald Trump!

That was never going to help his bid for President. As the chief executive who ultimately had to balance budgets and provide public safety, he was alwasy going to run progressive activists the wrong way.

Given his possible presidential ambitions, the strike’s outcome needs to be a win, and preferably a quick win. Garcetti had paid limited attention to the nation’s second-largest school district until the labor unrest.

Gov. Gavin Newsom seemingly has much less at risk than Garcetti, but he, too has been pulled into the fray.

Thanks to higher tax revenues, his new budget proposal for the state delivers added funds that could contribute to a settlement. He also faces pressure from a key ally — teachers unions — to do something to control charter schools — either by increasing oversight over them or limiting their growth, or both.

The higher revenues or a smokescreen. The wealth is fleeing California, and fast. There is no way that they can continue to spend so much money on pensions and benefits for teachers, administrators, and the rest of the bloated support staff.

Politics around charters are tricky though; both unions and charter supporters are powerful special interests.

United Teachers Los Angeles, whose power in L.A. schools had been diminished by the rise of charter schools, seems to be on roll this week. But that might not last.

It won't. If parents cannot get their kids to attend good schools in Los Angeles, they will just move out of the area, or out of the state entirely.

Parents know what is best of their children

The organizing momentum has energized members. That’s especially important because a Supreme Court ruling last year made all union dues and fees optional. And, at this point, members can look forward to a deal that meets or exceeds reasonable expectations.

Union President Alex Caputo-Pearl has raised the expectations of his members — and their animus toward Beutner — to a fever pitch. And yet a final deal may look a lot like the district’s most recent offer in the key particulars.

Peripheral elements could prove crucial — like a pilot program using union-backed reforms. Tougher accountability for charter schools at the state level also would be something the union could sell as a win.

The length of the strike also matters, as does the unknown depth of public support. For Caputo-Pearl to win policy concessions on charters at the state level, timing could be everything.

The superintendent came into office last May on a divided vote, and the mixed loyalty is showing, too. Board President Monica Garcia has often been by Beutner’s side at news conferences this week. Others on the board have been less visible.

Board member George McKenna, who voted against hiring Beutner, called this week for an immediate settlement — and he seemed to be talking to Beutner more than to the union.

Scott Schmerelson, who also voted against Beutner, issued a statement openly siding with teachers, saying he could no longer accept that board members should present a united front.

Final Reflection

I am not sure that there are winners in this debacle, ultimately. Teachers are still overwhelmed with classes that have so many students in them. There is no assurance that proper leevel sof support staff will be hired to help the teachers and the students.

What about the students, anyway? Will they learn? Will Johnny be able to read? The failure of government education has become too great for parents to tolerate long-term mediocrity. They demand the best for their students, and Los Angeles Unified is simply not delivering.

The teachers are still not paid enough, illegal aliens are straining the system to its breaking point, special interests are calling all the shots, and kids are learning to hate this country more than to honor and respect the greatness that made the United States what it is.

LA Unified Teachers on Strike: Halldale Elementary, Torrance (Really, Harbor Gateway) -- Photos

LAUSD/UTLA Strike Is Coming -- First Thoughts

Los Angeles Unified School District teachers are going to strike.

This is not going to go well. Uh Oh!

Here's the Los Angeles Times report from Howard Blume, one of the few reporters at the El Segundo Times whom I have more respect for. When I was a teacher in Los Angeles Unified, I contacted him a number of times to let him know that my classroom was overwhelmed with students. I had 45 kids crammed into the classroom. I have to remove one of the computers in order to provide a desk.

The assistant principal at the time, Jose Suarez, informed me that they would get my classroom numbers down to 42 students. 42 students?! Unreal! That was the best that they could do for me at the time. What is the world coming to, what is LAUSD coming to that they can't even get classroom sizes down to 30?!

Judge denies L.A. school district's bid to block teachers strike

A federal judge has rejected an attempt by Los Angeles school district officials to limit or prevent a teachers strike.

The school district leaders wanted to go to every length possible to stop this strike. Not sure what they thought they would achieve by going to a federal judge. This is a state and local matter, anyway.

The district’s legal maneuver was based on its responsibility under federal law to provide services to students with disabilities. The district is under additional legal restrictions based on a settlement that is under the supervision of a federal judge.

OH ....

Those combined obligations should have compelled the court to prevent or limit a strike, the district argued in papers filed this week. But U.S. District Court Judge Ronald S.W. Lew disagreed, taking only one day to issue an order denying the district’s suit.

Judge Ronald Lew

The L.A. Unified School District “is attempting, prematurely, to bring an unrelated party into a long-settled dispute without any explanation as to how [the teachers union] would be legally liable” under the settlement or special education laws, Lew wrote in his decision.

The judge acknowledged that a strike could “burden” district efforts to provide services to students, but said the district’s court filing “is a new and independent claim that would inject facts and legal issues that have nothing to do with claims that were settled … over fifteen years ago.”

One lawsuit precludes another, and the judge issued the decision in one day! That was fast!

Lew held open the possibility that the district could file a claim later, but that it would have to be after the start of a strike and was likely to involve a more time-consuming process.

In other words, the strike would still go on, even if the district filed a lawsuit to stop it.

United Teachers Los Angeles hailed the ruling in a news release late Friday night.

“The court’s swift and decisive action shows just how desperate a move this was,” said union President Alex Caputo-Pearl.

The whole situation is desperate. How bad is this going to get for everyone in Los Angeles Unified. At the end of the day, students need an education. Judging on what kids are learning in LA area schools, they are getting an indoctrination while 

The action was a novel approach, essentially using legal protections for students under federal law in an attempt to forestall a strike carried out under provisions of state law. L.A. Unified had no immediate comment Saturday morning, but officials have made no apologies for pursuing whatever strategies they can devise to delay or prevent a teachers walkout. L.A. schools Supt. Austin Beutner has said a strike would be bad for students and that he would pursue any appropriate means to prevent one.

This is the result of unrepentant left-wing activism overwhelming a district. There is no recourse for what is best for the students, since all the powers that be at work in this situation are more interested in lining their own pockets or doing what is best for their interests. Too much politics, not enough principles, and all of that defines Los Angeles Unified.

The two sides have scheduled a last-ditch negotiation session for Monday morning, tentatively scheduled to take place at City Hall at the invitation of Mayor Eric Garcetti.

That last minute meeting is going nowhere.

Garcetti told The Times on Friday that so far he had not been invited into the room with the parties, but that he was prepared to participate in any way that would be helpful.

The contract talks would be the first since mediation efforts broke down in early October.

Many observers see a strike as almost inevitable.

The district’s legal filing was based in part on the terms of a long-running settlement called the Chanda Smith Modified Consent Decree. Chanda Smith was an L.A. student who received a deficient education, according to a 1993 lawsuit, because she was deprived of services that were legally required under federal law. District officials ultimately agreed to sweeping and costly measures to assist all students with disabilities, all under the supervision of a court-appointed monitor. That agreement holds to this day.

Wow. Now federal judges have gotten involved? Unreal.

For years, L.A. Unified has tried to get out from under the settlement, arguing that it has fixed its problems. Some parents and advocates have argued otherwise.

The best solution to this problem is school choice, competition, and accountability. The major stakeholders in LAUSD, however, are not interested in education for the students. They are interested in pushing an agenda.

On Thursday, attorneys for L.A. Unified cited the settlement as reason to limit a walkout, saying the district could not satisfy its terms if employees who work with disabled students went on strike. They wanted a court order to keep those workers on the job. Such an order could have affected teachers as well as nurses, counselors and psychiatric social workers, who also are part of the union.

L.A. Unified has about 60,000 disabled students, more than 12% of overall enrollment, district officials said.

From this figure, that means that there are 500,000 students in the entire district. The numbers have gone down considerably.

The district has offered teachers a 6% raise spread over the first two years of a three-year contract. The union wants a 6.5% raise that would take effect all at once and a year sooner.

But the issues that the union is pressing for go well beyond wages. UTLA also is demanding a significant reduction in class sizes and the hiring of enough nurses, librarians and counselors to “fully staff” campuses across the nation’s second-largest school system. Union leaders have framed their activism as a fight for the future of public education.

Indeed. I spoke with a neighbor who still works in Los Angeles Unified. He has been telling me that they are overburdened, underpaid, tired at the end of the day with no support or relief. There is too much testing, not enough learning, and the teachers have little support for all that they have to deal with.

Beutner has said that some of the union proposals are worthy, but that, if accepted, they would immediately push the school district into insolvency.

Pensions, benefits, etc are a huge cost right now. Huge. When I was a teacher for LAUSD, the district paid for everything. There were no copays for health issues. My pay startin got was $43,000 a year. After the contact settlement in 2006-2007, my salary went up to $47,000. Other districts were still making more money than LAUSD teachers.

The superintendent wants as narrow a focus as possible in contract talks. Unlike the teachers, he doesn’t want to deliberate over whether there is too much standardized testing or too little control over privately run charter schools that operate on district-owned campuses.

Final Reflection

I don't know how this is going to play out. This is the first LAUSD strike in 30 years.

The district enrollment has been declining considerably. Why can't the teachers have smaller class sizes? The bureaucratic bloat in the Los Angeles Unified main office is overwhelming. There are too many people going to meetings, when they need to work in the classroom or find another line of work.

It's pretty sad to see that many teachers look for another type of work in the district. They can't wait to get out of the classroom and get into an office or boardroom. What gives?