Go to the mobile version of this Web site.

Login | Contact Us | Site Map | Paid archives | Electronic edition | Subscription Questions | Extras

Union misleading public regarding original intent of ProComp

Rocky Mountain News

Published August 21, 2008 at 12:05 a.m.
Updated August 21, 2008 at 2:13 a.m.

Text size  

More Editorials

More stories »

In purely economic terms, it's hard to understand why the Denver Classroom Teachers Association and Denver Public Schools remain at loggerheads as they argue the details of a new contract before a federal mediator.

The union would offer slightly higher base salaries to beginning teachers (roughly $1,300 more), while 25-year veterans would earn about $1,000 more under the district's proposal than they would from the DCTA's plan. The district says that, once incentives from its ProComp performance-pay system are included, average teacher pay may go up by as much as a jaw-dropping 18 percent.

Philosophically speaking, however, the sides remain miles apart. And union officials have ramped up the rhetoric in recent days. The union purchased radio ads accusing the district of pushing a system that would "reduce accountability." Union members greeted parents at East High School Wednesday, handing out fliers urging parents to back the union in its battle against the district.

The union's radio ad is correct to say that the district wants to change ProComp. What the union won't admit is that those changes would bring ProComp more in line with the program voters were promised in 2005, when they passed the mill levy funding the incentive-based pay system.

The district would funnel a much higher share of ProComp money into bonuses for early-career teachers who agree to tackle difficult courses and work in hard-to-staff schools. The union wants that money more evenly distributed to teachers of all experience levels - whether they're recent graduates or 20-year veterans.

The union's stance is difficult to square with ProComp's initial objectives.

If you don't believe us, consider the report released earlier this month on ProComp by a committee of A-Plus Denver, the 125-member citizen panel that advises DPS.

The report, available at aplusdenver.org, noted that ProComp's primary goals were: "Linking teacher compensation more closely to the district's academic goals," "rewarding and recognizing teachers who meet and exceed expectations in performance and student academic growth" and "enabling DPS to attract and retain the most qualified and effective teachers through robust incentives and a competitive earnings package."

It concluded that ProComp has failed to live up to its potential. More than 60 percent of its money is spent on "base-building" salary hikes that go to all teachers. And it is building up a large trust fund instead of spending the money as promised on teachers.

To remedy that, the report says payments to teachers should rise dramatically, they should be targeted to performance incentives rather than across-the-board raises, and they should focus on the retention of early- and mid-career teachers.

Those recommendations essentially repudiate the union's approach.

In fact, A-Plus Denver actually suggested the district proposal may be too timid. Even more aggressive incentives may be needed before ProComp can fully redeem its promise.

If the mediator hammers out an agreement later this week, teachers are expected to vote on it Sunday. We hope union members will acknowledge how generous an offer the district has made in a troubling economy. For ProComp to accomplish its goals, teachers who take on the greatest challenges must reap the greatest financial and professional rewards.

Comments

  • August 21, 2008

    1:39 a.m.

    Suggest removal

    jacka writes:

    Amendment 47 (Right-to-Work) for all Coloradans will help reform our public schools byt bringing the Unions to the table.

    Union political influence stops public education reforms.

  • August 21, 2008

    6:45 a.m.

    Suggest removal

    VVVV writes:

    I guess late career teachers that agree to take difficult courses or work in hard-to-staff schools are not welcome and need to be replaced by younger, less paid, less experienced, and probably less loyal up-and-coming teachers. Or maybe old teachers are just considered too timid to take their talents elsewhere when their performance incentives are handed to newcomers. I guess those noobs will have to glean their skills from thin air once the experience starts to flee to greener pastures.

  • August 21, 2008

    8:26 a.m.

    Suggest removal

    JimmyB writes:

    What....you thought a union would tell the truth?

  • August 21, 2008

    8:50 a.m.

    Suggest removal

    PI writes:

    did the superintendent write this himsel? or did he just call his best pal john temple and ask that it be published today? aplus committee nothing more than a panel of administration supoorters hand picked to be yes men and puppets for the district.

  • August 21, 2008

    9:14 a.m.

    Suggest removal

    tchoupitoulas writes:

    It would be great if DPS focused on teaching instead of political lobbying. Teaching is a tough profession that unfortunately (and traditionally) underpays its educators and para-professionals. This has been true from the beginning of the 'teacher boom' that followed the 'baby boom' after the second world war.

    I'm under the impression now that the teachers union will be unhappy with any contract that is presented to them. My sincere hope is that they can put their political agenda aside and start focusing on Denver's children.

  • August 21, 2008

    9:31 a.m.

    Suggest removal

    jacka writes:

    YES on Amendment 47 to stop Unions from using forced member dues to slow k-12 reform.

    They start late and end early ... why "work rules" mandated by the Unions.

  • August 21, 2008

    9:49 a.m.

    Suggest removal

    dilligaf writes:

    jacka
    This where you have it all wrong. The Union can't force anyone from joining a union now even without the right to work law. It is called if you don't want to be in a union GO FIND A JOB IN A NON-UNION SHOP!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! And we all know there are plenty of them.

  • August 21, 2008

    10:58 a.m.

    Suggest removal

    timeandagain writes:

    Hey PI - you just don't want any accountability! Get a new job!!!

  • August 21, 2008

    11:45 a.m.

    Suggest removal

    mikeyg writes:

    Unions blow!

  • August 21, 2008

    12:04 p.m.

    Suggest removal

    PI writes:

    hey timeandagain, I believe you should be held accountable for your ties to The Independence Institute and for your complete ignorance on the issue. If I was the old teacher you think I am, which I'm not, than I am the teacher responsible for photography 101 and when your mother was my student she was so fat that we had to take her yearbook photo from a cessna.... now put back in ur dentures that just fell out because I said something about 147 year old mom.

  • August 21, 2008

    12:10 p.m.

    Suggest removal

    BetterEducated writes:

    Jacka, what is the MATTER with you?!!!!!
    You have been told MANY times that non-member teachers do not pay dues to a union. Can't you read?
    It's true that all teachers must accept the union as their "exclusive representative." However, to the extent you keep harping on the "mandatory dues" argument......I will tell you ONE MORE TIME, you are factually incorrect on this issue so your posts insisting that non-union-member teachers pay dues make you sound like an idiot.

  • August 21, 2008

    3:03 p.m.

    Suggest removal

    PI writes:

    Maybe MikeyG wouldn't have to blow his boss if he had a union to support him against management. Oh ya, forgot to mention the whole forty hour work-week, weekends, a minimum wage....etc. Maybe not even that A**-kissing Association of America was willing to have him in their ranks.

  • August 21, 2008

    5 p.m.

    Suggest removal

    mikeyg writes:

    unions still blow - if they were around before the light bulb was invented cities would still have hundreds of lamplighters on taxpayer-funded payrolls - making $60/hr. I'll concede some of the employment safety and benefits they led the nation on back in the early 1900's. But their usefulness has come and gone. They're about power struggles now between owners and employees, not safe work environments or sweatshops. Sorry, teach, you don't work in a sweat shop, even in the worst inner city school. And jobs are plentiful if you can't handle where you're at.

    Whether it's private employers who have a right to protect their capital investment in paying fair, but not excessive wages, or public employers who the taxpayers have a right to protect themselves from excessive confiscation of their personal wealth in paying fair, but not excessive wages, I'll always put the employers interest's first.

    Unions today truly do blow and are led and supported by anti-capitalists (aka socialists/communists) who think they know how to run an enterprise. Nice job the "employee-owned" United Airlines did running that into the ground!

    Support Amendment 47 to finally kick these anti-job, anti-business, anti-free economy, anti-private property corrupt and petty union bosses to the curb!

  • August 21, 2008

    7:03 p.m.

    Suggest removal

    woodwose writes:

    A couple of comments.

    ".....the report released earlier this month on ProComp by a committee of A-Plus Denver, the 125-member citizen panel that advises DPS....."

    Since when has a 125 member committee been able to accomplish ANYTHING. This is another insane result in the crazed swamp that has become Public Education since John Kennedy allowed teachers unions to be recognized.

    Gosh, standards have been falling at public schools since that very day, and our politicians are too stupid or too afraid of the monster that Kenneday and his Democratic cohorts created back in the early 60's to even recognize that.

    Next.

    "We hope union members will acknowledge how generous an offer the district has made in a troubling economy."

    Give me a break, what in the world does a "troubled economy" have to do with teachers? They never get laid off, and it takes an act of God to fire an incomptetent one. If the union wasn't so darn busy trying to shovel every penny it can grab into it's maw and spending it to elect Democrats that will keep the gravy train rolling, they might want to ask their members to get down on their knees and thank the stars they don't work in private industry.

    A monopolistic union in a monopolistic industry like public education is a complete farce, and it is long past time to disband the cabal of leaches who's only apparent purpose in life is to vacuum the cash out of our wallets.

    Get rid of those vipers, and then let's start whacking the bureaucrats and administrators, and spend our money where it counts, on our teachers and in the classrooms where our kids spend so much of their lives.