by Lance T. Izumi, Fellow in California Studies
Pacific Research Institute
May, 1999

Announcer lead: Time for Perspectives. Lance Izumi says that it is counterproductive to force charter schools to unionize.

One of the few encouraging developments in education over the last few years has been the increasing support for charter schools. Charter schools are autonomous public schools which are given freedom from restrictive regulations in exchange for meeting specific academic goals. California now has about 180 charter schools. President Clinton has praised California's charter schools, as has Gov. Gray Davis who calls charter schools "laboratories of education innovation." Charter school teachers and officials, though, are worried that their ability to innovate will be undercut by proposed legislation from Sacramento.

San Francisco Assemblywoman Carole Migden is carrying a bill, which was recently approved by the Assembly education committee, that would force union collective bargaining on charter schools. At present, since charter schools are independent of the school districts in which they are located, they are not subject to district collective bargaining agreements.

Many charter schools have used their freedom from union contracts to institute innovative personnel practices. One charter school teacher says that at her charter school teaching assignments are based on what's best for the children, not on teacher seniority. At the Vaughn charter school, one of the top charters in the state, teacher pay is tied to student achievement.

Migden's bill, however, would put an end to all that. As Yvonne Chan, principal at the Vaughn charter school, says, if Migden's legislation becomes law, "it will be the districts and the unions that will run charter schools." And that is exactly what the bill's supporters want. Assemblyman Scott Wildman, a former teacher union organizer, says that the Migden bill would bring charter schools "into the regular education process." Yet charter schools were created specifically so they wouldn't be part of the "regular education process" -- a process that has resulted in the state's students performing at rock bottom levels.

If lawmakers really want to improve education, they should remember that the interests of the children, not the teachers unions, are the top priority.

With a perspective, I'm Lance Izumi.