L.A. Must Take a Stand on Schools

The lessons of the Los Angeles teachers’ strike, now in its second week, have been difficult to learn. But given some attention, they can have lasting consequences.

Students have learned that they truly prefer to go to class and do their schoolwork rather than play hooky and hang out at the mall. A comment from a student at Manual Arts High School is typical of those being heard across the school district: “I want school back to normal.”

Teachers have learned to stand up for their dignity. This new-found energy will undoubtedly make them better teachers when they return to the classroom. They will bring new lessons about union activism, about personal anger, about the attributes of a democratic society, about values and about relationships with people. The students, too, will benefit from these lessons.

Supt. Leonard Britton has learned what it takes to run the Los Angeles Unified School District. Never again will he be accused of being a newcomer, or being unfamiliar with life in Los Angeles. The lesson only clarifies the challenge he has ahead of him, most particularly the challenge of making the word unified a reality.

The Board of Education has perhaps had the hardest lesson, and I am not sure we have learned it. Working with a restricted, politicized budget makes it difficult to care intensely about improving working conditions for teachers, improving the level of instruction, providing safe schools and raising the quality of education for children of all races and nationalities. The clearly outlined box of funds inevitably pits one concern against another. In order to provide for one priority, you must forgo another. The choice is not easy or final.

The contract negotiations that have lasted so long are only a reflection of the difficulty the board and its seven individual members have had in making clear choices. And it is a no-win situation. Four votes can resolve to make one priority more important than another. The consequence is that the three losing members can label the majority as “anti-teacher” or “anti-children.” This school district cannot survive for the present or for the future on such win-lose decisions. This community will not move forward socially or economically with such a “we against them” environment in its public schools.

This brings me to the lessons learned by the community. The most obvious is that Los Angeles cares about its schools. During the strike, you have not been able to ride the bus, lunch at a restaurant or go to a movie without hearing comments and opinions about contract negotiations. Numerous unscientific surveys have been taken on which side is right.

The second clear lesson is that Los Angeles does not like and does not want a teacher strike. School district offices have received hundreds of calls, but the message is the same--settle the dispute.

But the community has not been a player in this drama. The average citizen is not involved in our schools. We have not done a good job of informing parents, students, business people, civic volunteers and other interested individuals about how schools are funded, how negotiations take place and what role the city can play in shaping school policies.

This lack of understanding has allowed those on both sides of the strike to take hard-line positions without the support of the community. The teachers’ union President Wayne Johnson has said that “teachers are prepared for the siege. The district’s crippled schools may be closed for the rest of the (school) year.” School Board President Roberta Weintraub quotes the fact-finder’s report, which concluded that the district’s offer is the best in the country. Striking teachers rally that they will not capitulate. Substitute teachers resolve that they are doing the best for the children by keeping the classroom open.

Wake up, Los Angeles. These are our schools, these are our children. We cannot afford to not know how much money the district has, we cannot afford to ignore the politics of those on both sides of this issue, and we cannot afford to be absent from the negotiations. We can have higher teacher salaries. But we will also have to accept budget cuts in reading programs, textbooks and school maintenance. In the end, one side will win, one side will lose.

When a sufficient number of community members (parents, business leaders, state legislators, the state schools superintendent, community organizations and the media) choose a side, we will know which side is the winner. At that point, the contract dispute will be resolved. From there, we can move forward--perhaps with a new resolve to be involved in our schools in such as way as to know that this city’s future success, or its demise, will be in the classrooms.