Scholarships for 2024 NEA National Leadership Summit
The 2024 NEA Leadership Summit will be held March 1-3, 2024
Preparations are in full swing for the NEA Leadership Summit being held March 1-3, 2024. At this time, the NEA is planning for an in-person experience for the 2024 Leadership Summit to be held at the Hyatt Regency Chicago, Chicago, IL. The summit will further develop Activist leaders and prepare them with the knowledge, skills, and abilities necessary to lead relevant, thriving associations and to lead in their professions. The theme for the 2024 Summit is Education. Democracy. Freedom. Our Right! Our Responsibility!
Please have members use this link to complete the online application no later than Tuesday, December 5, 2023, if they would like to be considered for an NEA funded spot, or funding from OEA to attend the NEA National Leadership Summit. ALL APPLICATIONS MUST BE SUBMITTED BY DECEMBER 5 TO BE CONSIDERED. Members should only apply if they are able to attend all days of the Summit in-person. Again, the online application can be accessed through this link.
For additional information about the NEA National Leadership Summit, please visit: www.nea.org/leadershipsummit
April – May 2022 Ohio Schools
- COVER STORY: Prioritizing Student Health – When COVID-19 threatened those under his care, district school nurse David Pryer made sure Allen East students, teachers, and staff could return to school safely
- MAKING THE GRADE
- Oberlin’s Kurt Russell Named Finalist for 2022 National Teacher of the Year
- Association
- OEA to Hold In-Person 2022 Spring Representative Assembly with Virtual Component on May 7
- Candidates of OEA Statewide Election
- Proposed Amendments to the OEA Amended and Restated Constitution and Bylaws Spring 2022
Moved recently? Contact the OEA Member Hotline to update the address on file at 1-844-OEA-Info (1-844-632-4636) or email, membership@ohea.org. Representatives are available Monday-Friday, from 8:30 a.m. to 6 p.m. | OhioSchools — Past Issues
Oh Yes, We’re Social — Join the Conversation!
Categories
Communications and Community EngagementEducation Policy and Governing Bodies
Education Support Professional
Higher Education Faculty
Higher Education Staff
Leadership Tools and Documents
Legal Issues
Legislative Issues and Political Action
Membership
New Teacher
OEA Member
Ohio Schools Magazine
Professional Development
Representative Assembly
Retired Member
Student Member
Teaching
Union Business
OEA denounces House Bill 616
“These politicians are continuing to use race and sexual orientation as wedge issues to score cheap political points, and they should be ashamed of themselves,” OEA President Scott DiMauro said. “Rather than persisting with these disingenuous attacks on educators and public schools, we need pro-public education policies that enable students to think critically about the world around them and empower them to be proud of who they are, regardless of where they come from, what they look like, how they express their gender identities, or who they – or their parents – love.”
“House Bill 616 represents yet another example of how a national network of extremists is seeking to hijack the education conversation in our state to control a political narrative and distract Ohioans from the real issues facing our public schools,” DiMauro added. “The architects of this bill, who have decided to copy and paste some of the most damaging parts of Florida’s ultra-divisive legislation, are targeting some of Ohio’s most vulnerable students and families and setting Ohio up for a Florida-like showdown with the businesses our state leaders have been working so hard to attract.”
“Why would Ohio want to follow in Florida’s footsteps after it forced a showdown with Disney, one of the state’s biggest employers?” DiMauro questioned. “HB 616 is exactly the kind of legislation that could send Intel and other major employers running, hurting our students’ future job prospects for decades to come.”
HB 616 would also have a serious chilling effect on Ohio’s education profession, which is already facing a recruitment crisis. At a time when it has become increasingly difficult to attract new educators to our classrooms to ensure the adequate staffing levels our students need to receive a world-class education, Ohio lawmakers are sending exactly the wrong message to the state’s education workforce. “Our students and educators cannot be pawns in these ongoing political games,” DiMauro said. “House Bill 616 would have grave consequences for Ohio’s children, public schools, and wider economy. We all deserve better.”
Conference Committee Testimony by Dan Heintz
By Dan Heintz, Chardon LSD
Distinguished members of Ohio’s 133rd General Assembly,
My name is Dan Heintz. I am happy to share that I am a K-12 product of Ohio’s great public schools. I am also proud to say that I am a public school teacher at Chardon High School. Finally, I am honored to serve my neighbors as a member of the Cleveland Heights – University Heights Board of Education. As you can see my friends, public education flows through my veins and animates my spirit.
Our Cleveland Heights – University Heights Schools have suffered under the burden of EdChoice in a way that few other districts have. Currently, 33% of our state funds are being diverted as a result of EdChoice. Our schools have fallen victim to a well-intentioned, but poorly conceived cult of accountability. Nowhere perhaps are these measures more inappropriately punitive than in Cleveland Heights – University Heights.
Cleveland Heights High School is an EdChoice school for one reason: Graduation Rate. Given this, one would expect our graduation rate to be low. It’s not. For the past 2 years in fact, our graduation rate has been higher than the state average, yet the state’s formula has nonetheless labeled ours as an underperforming EdChoice High School.
The College Board is the non-profit organization behind the SAT test, as well as all of the Advanced Placement coursework that many of our students take advantage of. Distinguished members of the General Assembly, four weeks ago, The College Board identified nine Ohio High Schools as AP Honor Roll High Schools. Cleveland Heights High School, labeled by the State as EdChoice eligible school, was one of these nine.
So, contrary to the State of Ohio’s label, the College Board doesn’t seem to think that ours is an underperforming high school at all, but what do America’s colleges and universities think? Are they confident that the graduates of Cleveland Heights High are prepared for success? You bet they are, and they put their money where their mouth is. My friends, Cleveland Heights High’s class of 2018 was offered a combined 10.4 million dollars of college scholarships. 10.4 million dollars. And the class of 2019 beat them! Our class of 2019 (roughly 350 students) was offered 12.1 million dollars in scholarship offers.
So, our graduation rate is above the state average, The College Board identifies us as an AP Honor Roll School, and our grads pulled in over 22 million dollars in scholarship offers over the past 2 years. But our own state government has determined that this is such a disappointing school that we need to provide a financial escape hatch in order for students to attend a private school. I simply cannot imagine that this is what we had in mind as the EdChoice system was being designed.
The pundits tell us that vouchers improve education by introducing competition. The narrative they promote is that families use vouchers to leave low performing public schools in order to attend higher-performing private schools. This narrative is pure sophistry. Facts are stubborn things, and the facts simply don’t support the narrative.
First, the overwhelming majority of our EdChoice voucher recipients are not leaving our schools at all, because leaving our schools would require them to have entered them in the first place. Committee members, 94% of our EdChoice vouchers are being used by students who have never been enrolled in one of our public schools. 94%. Furthermore, the private schools that receive this windfall of Ohio tax dollars are not always higher performing. According to the Ohio Department of Education, 61 of our students use EdChoice vouchers to attend a school whose 5th grade scores are lower than those of our district. That’s nearly a quarter of a million dollars! So let’s be clear, these people are not running from a failing school, they’re running from a tuition bill. Again, I cannot imagine that this is what we had in mind as the EdChoice system was being designed.
Ladies and gentlemen, my two-part request very simple: First, please rethink how we measure our public schools. And as you think that over, please come visit Cleveland Heights High. Second, if vouchers are to remain in the mix, please fund them directly from the state’s operating budget. The work that districts like mine do is hard enough without the additional challenges of depleted state aid.
Committee members, I thank you for your service to our state, and for your time today. If you have any questions, I am at your service.
— Dan Heintz is a Social Studies teacher at Chardon High School, Chardon, Ohio.
Legislative Testimony on HB 70 — State Takeover Law
[Click here print a copy | Click here to send a letter to your Ohio Senator]
Chair Lehner and members of the Senate Education Committee, my name is Scott DiMauro. I am currently in my 29th year in education, including 16 years in the classroom as a high school social studies teacher, and currently serve as the president of the Ohio Education Association (OEA).
On behalf of the OEA’s 123,000 members, thank you for this opportunity to provide feedback on the Senate’s substitute bill for HB 154.
The draft bill under consideration makes a variety of proposals intended to address ongoing problems with the Ohio law (HB 70 131st G.A.) authorizing state takeovers of local school districts.
This testimony will highlight specific feedback and recommendations regarding the draft bill. However, this does not represent a comprehensive outline of all issues and concerns raised by OEA in a previous letter to the Chair (dated August 29, 2019).
Although OEA opposes the current draft bill, we acknowledge the stakeholder feedback process is ongoing and the final product is a work in progress.
OEA looks forward to working with the Ohio General Assembly to find common ground in solving the fundamental problems presented by Ohio’s state takeover law.
To that end, OEA is hopeful that our constructive feedback to policy makers can facilitate the identification of problems with the state takeover law and the development of real solutions. We appreciate the Chair’s commitment to a non-punitive school improvement framework that depends on local control and stakeholder buy-in, acknowledges the time needed for meaningful improvement, and recognizes the need for flexibility in ensuring that each community’s improvement plan reflects the unique needs of that community.
The major shortcoming of the draft bill continues to be the lack of checks-and-balances.
Our focus in providing feedback is two-fold: First, to help all students in challenging learning environments overcome these barriers and become life-long learners. Second, to support the work of front-line educators serving students in especially challenging learning environments.
Classroom teachers are the front-line educators in our public schools. Our service to students is benefited greatly when we have support and collaboration from others who share our commitment to the success of our students, including parents, education support professionals, principals, administrators, and locally-elected school boards.
As an overview to the following OEA feedback, the current draft bill contains some positive elements and constructive concepts that can serve as a foundation for improvement with continued stakeholder input.
However, the major shortcoming of the draft bill continues to be the lack of checks-and-balances to the unilateral authority granted to the Director of the School Improvement Commission. The Director and School Improvement Committee would replace the Chief Executive Officer (CEO) and Academic Distress Committee (ADC) that exist in current law. The recommendations below are intended to address this fundamental flaw in Ohio’s state takeover law and the current draft bill.
OEA recommendations:
1) Return local control to school districts and communities currently under the control of an Academic Distress Commission/CEO before the 2020-2021 school year.
- Local control and community oversight play a fundamental role in both the operation and funding of public schools in Ohio. Those closest to students are in the best position to understand and assess the needs of the students in any given community. State takeovers break this system of local control and citizen-based accountability.
- OEA proposes to amend the ADC dissolution process in the draft bill to require the School Transformation Board (STB) to approve terms for a district’s petition for dissolution and a transition to local control before the 2020-2021 school year. The current draft bill only allows current ADC districts to petition for dissolution between February 15, 2020 and June 30, 2020, and there is no guarantee of a return to local control. Therefore, it remains unclear whether, or when, the current ADC districts will be released from the problems of state control.
- OEA also proposes to automatically dissolve the current ADCs and provide these districts the same report card “restart” on the state takeover clock that all other districts would receive under the draft bill. By treating current ADC districts equally with all other districts, they will have the same fair opportunity to start fresh under whatever state takeover framework the General Assembly ultimately approves.
2) Return all collective bargaining rights taken away under the current state takeover law (HB 70; 131st).
- State takeover laws do not create a school improvement environment by taking away educators’ collective bargaining rights. Removing bargaining rights is a punitive and counterproductive measure that undermines school improvement. Effective school improvement actions taken by the General Assembly should support educators, not punish them. However, the draft bill aggravates this situation by taking bargaining rights away even faster than under HB 70. This is a mistake.
- The removal of bargaining rights by the current state takeover law and the draft bill is a fundamental flaw that is based on false assumptions about the role of collective bargaining in school improvement. Teachers and education support professionals use the collective bargaining process as their formal voice to petition school district leaders for the kinds of supports they know will help them serve students in the classroom. Collective bargaining rights provide educators a necessary opportunity to advocate for their student’s needs, which is even more critical in districts that have especially challenging learning environments.
- School leaders and decision makers also benefit from collective bargaining because they provide an important feedback mechanism to support district-wide collaboration around school improvement. A state takeover law that removes teacher collective bargaining rights will fail. School districts that receive an “A” rating on Ohio’s report cards also have collective bargaining agreements. These important rights should be maintained and protected in all school districts.
- OEA also proposes to remove district board policies and collective bargaining agreements as one of the factors to be included in a root cause analysis under Section 3301.283 of the bill. Collective bargaining is not the reason why some schools perform below expectations. The bill wisely requires an analysis of factors that may include leadership, governance, and communication; curriculum and instruction; assessment and effective use of student data; human resources and professional development; student supports; fiscal management; or other issues preventing full or high-quality implementation of improvement plans. If a root cause analysis identifies one of these issues and it is covered in a collective bargaining agreement, OEA believes it is appropriate for management and the union to address the issue at the bargaining table.
3) Increase and strengthen teacher membership on the School Transformation Board (STB) and the School Improvement Committee (SIC).
Input and feedback from active front-line educators will improve and inform the work of the STB and SIC as they seek to understand the barriers to learning faced by children living in poverty. Ensuring a meaningful role and a formal voice for at least one teacher on the STB and SIC will provide an important resource to these entities. This is in the interest of the students we are trying to help.
- OEA proposes that membership on the School Transformation Board should include at least one active teacher member (currently there is no active teacher member).
- OEA also proposes that the active teacher member on the SIC should have voting rights. The draft bill requires one teacher member on the SIC, but without voting rights. (Note that under current law, the designated educator member of an Academic Distress Commission does have voting rights.) The role and authority of the SIC should also be expanded, relative to the broad unilateral powers granted to the SIC Director.
In closing, thank you for engaging stakeholders in this important legislative effort to serve students by resolving problems and flaws with Ohio’s state takeover law.
Any successful legislation will reflect a recognition that state takeovers are an inherently ineffective and inefficient policy model for collaborative school improvement.
Again, thank you for this opportunity to testify. I am available for any question the Chair or the committee members may have.
Thank you.
A Seat at the Table or a Broken Promise?
OEA Blogger Julie Holderbaum, Minerva EA/OEA
Campaigning politicians often promise teachers a “seat at the table.” However, once the election is over, Ohio’s lawmakers have done too little to engage teachers in conversations about education policy.
Take, for example, the new graduation requirements passed into law via the state budget.
Many educators have been asking for a dialogue about graduation requirements for years now. Instead, legislators kept putting band-aids on the unrealistic requirements, rather than having a serious conversation with teachers about meaningful revisions.
This summer, the legislature ripped off the band-aid and passed into law what they call a permanent solution. Ohio Excels, a group primarily consisting of business leaders, created a new concoction of graduation requirements and the Ohio legislature gobbled it up.
The only education voices associated with the group seem to have been the Ohio 8 Coalition, an alliance of Ohio’s eight urban school districts. The large urban districts have unique needs and it makes sense for them to have joined together to address the challenges they face.
However, Ohio’s 612 public school districts are quite diverse, and the Ohio 8 represents only a small fraction of them, fewer than 1.3%.
The legislators who voted to accept the Ohio Excels plan have touted these new requirements, saying they reduce testing since only two Ohio state tests are required to graduate.
Don’t be fooled. There is no reduction in testing.
Kids who don’t pass the required tests the first time must retake them, and the other non-required state tests must still be offered since they are a way to prove “readiness” to graduate.
Real teaching and learning will be interrupted by test-taking and re-taking, just as it is now, and our curriculum must still focus on how to pass the state tests.
Under the new plan, high school seniors must show “competency” by earning certain scores, yet to be set, on the Algebra I and ELA II state tests. If they cannot earn the competency scores, which are being determined not by teachers, but by the Ohio Department of Higher Education and the Governor’s Office of Workforce Transformation, seniors have three additional options to show competency:
- they can earn proficient scores on the WorkKeys exam or earn other industry credentials — an option only truly available to kids who attend a vocational or career tech school;
- they can complete college coursework through the College Credit Plus program – an option most likely not realistic for kids who cannot earn passing scores on the state tests; or,
- they can enlist in the military.
Seniors show “readiness” by earning two additional “seals”, one of which is defined by the state and one of which can be locally designed and defined.
The locally defined seals will not be an obstacle for most students since they can be earned by participating in clubs, volunteering in the community, or demonstrating skill in the performing or fine arts.
The state-defined seals are much more daunting and most revolve around earning certain scores on tests — the ACT or SAT, AP or IB, the other state tests in American History, Government, or Biology; or, a very rigorous test in World Languages. There is only one other option to show readiness — join the military. Enlisting in the military is honorable and admirable, and it has been an excellent choice for many of my former students. However, it should be just that – a choice.
The timing of the state tests only exacerbates the problem.
In our district and many others, students must apply to the local career tech school by January of their sophomore year, so that the tech school has time to read applications and make program placements. However, students take the required ELA II state test for the first time in April of their sophomore year. Results are not available until late June.
I teach several juniors this year who are not going to the career tech school, and who found out this summer that they have not met the score requirements on the tests. They are now in the very dire situation of having no other choice but to join the military if they cannot raise those scores when they retake the test this year.
Not only did legislators overlook the fallout of their plan on Ohio’s students and their families, they failed to think about the mess schools are left to deal with by having THREE graduation plans in place. This year’s seniors can graduate under the band-aid plan passed last year, sophomores and juniors must meet the pre band-aid requirements, and the freshmen fall under the new plan. If older students can’t meet their requirements, they can try to meet the new ones.
Can you imagine explaining this convoluted mess to families, especially those with more than one child in high school?
The Ohio Excels motto, “Every Student, Every Day, Everybody’s Business,” is similar to my own school district’s motto, “Every Student, Every Minute, Every Day.”
In our motto, we don’t mention business because education is not a business and kids are not products moving along an assembly line. I suppose the Ohio legislature could justify accepting this business group’s plan by arguing that because graduates will enter the workforce in the near future, businesses should have some say in what kids should be able to do in order to earn a diploma. However, I would argue that educators who are working with kids in the immediate present should have an even louder voice in those decisions.
Perhaps the Ohio Excels motto means “everybody’s business” in the sense that a quality education of Ohio’s children is in the best interest of all citizens. If that’s true, the expertise of those working in the field of education should certainly count for something.
When legislators discuss educational policy at the table, shouldn’t our opinions be sought if for no other reason than to help point out the logistical problems with the proposed plan or to explain how the plan will affect real kids and their families?
Our input would allow them to see “teachers” and “students” not as mere words in an educational plan on paper, but as real people in real classrooms every day. Still, legislators fail to include teachers and principals in their decisions which affect education.
There is no college degree which qualifies legislators to know everything about the areas in which they make decisions, areas such as business, infrastructure, crime, the economy, healthcare, and public education.
Because we can’t expect legislators to know everything about the issues they legislate, we MUST expect them to listen to people with experience in those areas so that they can create realistic and beneficial policies. For example, seeking input from public school teachers could have saved the state from dealing with a plethora of messes, including the failure of the state school takeover law (HB 70), the debacle of the charter school industry, and the damage overtesting has done to our kids.
I’m tired of dealing with the fallout of poorly planned educational policies made with little to no input from those of us in the classroom.
When legislators don’t include teachers in decisions that impact our students, they are not only breaking promises to give us a seat at the table, they aren’t even inviting us to the meal. It’s time to crash the dinner party. And if we aren’t met with welcome, it’s time to quit begging for a seat at the table and instead take a stand at the polls.
— Julie Holderbaum is an English Instructor and an Academic Challenge Advisor at Minerva High School, Minerva, Ohio.
OEA Views State Budget as Mixed Bag
The Ohio Education Association (OEA) said today, July 17, 2019, that while it welcomes the progress made by state lawmakers on some fronts in the state budget, it is disappointed that more could not be achieved on important issues, notably the repeal of the failed state takeover of troubled school districts which was overwhelmingly supported by the House in its adoption of HB 154.
OEA President Scott DiMauro noted that a moratorium on new Academic Distress Commissions in the budget deal is a tacit admission of what educators, parents, students and an increasing number of legislators know to be true — that state takeovers don’t serve the interests of the students they were intended to help.
“Disappointed that more could not be achieved on important issues, notably the repeal of the failed state takeover of troubled school district….” — OEA President Scott DiMauro
“Sadly, the legislature leaves the communities of Youngstown, Lorain and East Cleveland languishing under a failing law until they can figure out how to give districts struggling with high levels of poverty the support they need,” said DiMauro. “As we continue the fight to enact HB 154 to repeal state takeovers and restore local control, I am deeply disappointed in the decision to allow CEOs to continue wreaking havoc on our schools.”
On the plus side, OEA said it is pleased to see the expansion of school breakfast programs in high-poverty districts and welcomes the significant new funding for wrap-around services in those districts that help students get ready to learn.
OEA also applauds lawmakers for taking a small but important step toward fixing Ohio’s misleading report card system by adjusting the value-added grading scale to give school districts more credit for the progress they have made with students.
OEA is encouraged by requirements that charter e-schools disclose more information about their operations. However, OEA is disappointed with budget provisions that dial-back on accountability for charter sponsors and drop-out prevention charter schools.
In addition, OEA also believes strongly that the expansion of voucher programs in the budget is unnecessary. “Ohio has no shortage of vouchers to pay private school tuition on the taxpayer’s dime,” said OEA President Scott DiMauro. “It is time to end the unnecessary and costly expansion of vouchers and focus on meeting the needs of all students in Ohio’s public schools.”
Lastly, OEA is troubled by the elimination of the requirement that teachers meet specific licensure requirements to teach in core subject areas and grades. “This removes an important protection for students and undermines the profession,” said DiMauro. “OEA is committed to serving students with highly-prepared educators.”
Former OEA Members Working to Dismantle State Takeover Law
State Representatives Joseph A. Miller III (D-Amherst) and Don Jones (R-Freeport) recently announced they will soon introduce bipartisan legislation to repeal portions of House Bill 70 — the state takeover bill.
Rep. Miller, who taught social studies at Firelands High School — and a member of Firelands E.A. / OEA — before being elected to the Ohio House, said the proposal would dissolve the Academic Distress Commissions that have “been unable to work effectively alongside the district’s teachers, school leaders and community.” He also added the proposed legislation would “give struggling schools the support they need to succeed.”
“The Academic Distress Commissions have been unable to work effectively alongside the district’s teachers…”
Rep. Jones, the pending legislation’s co-sponsor, is also an educator. Before being elected to the Ohio House, Jones was an agricultural education teacher and FFA∗ advisor at Harrison Central High School — and a member of the Harrison Hill T.A./OEA — for 23 years. In the statement announcing the proposed legislation, Jones said that Ohio schools “need more local control — not less.”
Ohio schools “need more local control — not less.”
The 2015 legislation currently requires the state superintendent to intervene via “Academic Distress Commissions” for any school district declared to be in “Academic Emergency.” Placed under state-control, the commission assumes the decision-making authority of the locally-elected school board. It also hires a CEO with broad powers to run the district, overruling the local school board’s appointed superintendent.
Miller and Jones are currently seeking additional legislative sponsors and are expected to introduce a formal bill soon. Their initiative has the support of the OEA.
∗Future Farmers of America
Related Stories
- State Takeover: OEA Comment to the Ohio State Board of Education | By Scott DiMauro, OEA Vice President
- 03.13.2019 | Columbus Dispatch: Legislators show growing opposition to state takeovers
- 03.13.2019 | Despite critique from business leaders, state school broadens road to diploma
OEA: Should We Believe What DeWine Says About Education or What He’s Actually Done?
Gubernatorial candidate Mike Dewine outlines his flawed education plan
“We welcome some of the good ideas on education offered today by gubernatorial candidate Mike DeWine – ideas with which we agree, such as reducing standardized testing and getting more state funding into our schools,” said Ohio Education Association President Becky Higgins.
As a member of Congress, he voted was voting against funding programs that would have benefited Ohio’s public schools! …. Where was DeWine to rein in ECOT?
“But, unfortunately, his record tells another story. As a member of Congress, he voted against funding programs that would have benefited Ohio’s public schools. In addition, his call for more accountability for Ohio’s e-schools begs the question of where he’s been all these years when he could have done something to rein in the abuses of the state’s most notorious e-school, ECOT.”
We think a better bet for ensuring that every student and educator in Ohio has the resources and support they need to succeed is to vote for Richard Cordray for Governor.”
Related Items
• Countdown to Campaign 2018 — OEA Endorsed Candidates
• Ohio Education Association Endorses Richard Cordray for Governor
• 08.06.2018 Columbus Dispatch: Under fire for ECOT, DeWine wants to reduce student testing in Ohio schools and establish a pay-for-performance mode
U.S. Supreme Court’s Janus Ruling Deals Blow to Ohio’s Working Families
Wednesday, June 27, 2018, the U.S. Supreme Court issued a 5-4 decision overturning a 1977 ruling that public employee unions could, without violating First Amendment free speech rights, collect fair share or agency fees. The long-awaited decision is seen as a potential blow against collective bargaining.
The National Education Association (NEA), the nation’s largest union with more than 3 million members, filed an amicus brief in the case with the American Association of University Professors to expose the truly radical nature of the plaintiff’s arguments including unsupported and audacious legal claim that public-sector collective bargaining in itself is constitutionally suspect.
OEA is the state-level affiliate of NEA.
“As a 19-year classroom teacher, I know what my students need to succeed, and strong public employee unions give educators the collective voice to advocate for smaller class sizes, safer schools, and better learning conditions for their students,” said OEA President Becky Higgins. “Keeping our union strong is important in our advocacy for our students and for our fellow educators.”
At its core, Janus v. AFSCME (American Federation of State, County, and Municipal Employees) questioned whether non-union members – who share in the wages, benefits, and other protections negotiated by collectively bargained contract – may be required to pay a share of the cost of those negotiations.
The decision is a concerted attempt to weaken collective-bargaining rights by imposing right-to-work rules on public unions across the nation, including the Ohio Education Association’s more than 125,000 members.
It also contradicts the wishes of the American public. A recent Pew Research Center study finds that 55% of Americans have a favorable impression of unions and feel the large reduction in union representation has been mostly bad for working people in the U.S.
The ruling disregards jurisprudence and national precedent established by the Court’s 1977 decision in Abood v. Detroit Board of Education. The Court ruled in favor of a shared financial responsibility for a union’s collective-bargaining activity.
The ruling is also a sweeping repudiation of the will of Ohio voters. In 2011, Senate Bill 5 (SB5), which weakened collective-bargaining rights for public employees was repealed by nearly 62% of Ohio voters after a campaign by educators and other public employees against the measure.
“Many of our schools have faced serious funding cuts that are likely to grow even worse. We’ve seen it in the resources available to our students, and we have felt it in our paychecks,” said NEA President Lily Eskelsen García. “All over the country, they are cutting funding for arts and PE, up-to-date textbooks, and class sizes that allow for one-on-one instruction. A strong union and collective bargaining agreements are what help to ensure students receive the tools and resources they need to succeed in school and in life.”
Alex Price, an instrumental music teacher at Belmont High School and Wright Brothers Middle School in Dayton, adds, “Fine arts programs were being cut from my school and students were missing out on subjects like arts and music. My union negotiated with the district to bring back music so our students could have a well-rounded curriculum.
When some school principals tried to renege on the agreement, as a union, we stepped up. We came together through our union and spoke out for what our kids need. Strong unions build strong schools and strong communities. We need unions now more than ever.”