INDIANAPOLIS – Local educators worry a bill intended to help schools fill hard-to-hire positions would actually lead to more teacher turnover and undermine teacher unions’ collective bargaining rights.
The state House of Representatives has yet to vote on Senate Bill 10, which would allow school administrators to offer supplemental pay to certain teachers, adding up to 50 percent of the boost to their base salary. The bill passed the House education committee Monday, after the Senate had previously rejected it.
Area teachers traveled to the statehouse Tuesday as part of an Indiana State Teachers Association lobby day to let the General Assembly know they oppose the bill that they say would open the door for unequal pay and promote unproductive competition among teachers.
“Each year there are bills that get proposed that the bottom line is to reduce or eliminate collective bargaining,” said Scott Thompson, president of the Peru Community Education Association, referencing SB 10 and House Bill 1004, which contained a similar provision for supplemental teacher pay. “They’re under the guise of trying to get more teachers into the profession. ... But neither bill is written very well to address that. Quite frankly, in my opinion, that’s not the way to get more people to enter the high-need teaching areas.”
Instead, Thompson would like to see an overall increase for teacher salaries.
“I feel if you start to establish a field of some [teachers] are more valuable than others, you totally un-level the playing field, which is unfair,” added Thompson, who teaches at an alternative high school at Peru Community Schools. “I think every teacher will admit they probably think they work as hard as any other teacher.”
But Rep. Mike Karickhoff and Sen. Jim Buck, both Republicans who represent Howard County, see supplemental pay as another tool school corporations could use – if they choose – to attract and retain teachers in high demand.
As a Northwestern High School teacher who leads dual credit courses, Tica Rogers is one of those high-demand teachers Buck and Karickhoff envision helping with SB 10. But Rogers, who is co-president of the Northwestern Corporation Education Association, thinks the bill ultimately would lead to more teacher turnover.
“It can become each individual person going out for themselves – almost like we’re sports stars needing our own sports agents,” Rogers said. “We’re going to be jumping ship, perpetually. ... If that happens, that’s not good for the students because there’s actually higher teacher turnover, especially in lower-income schools because they won’t be able to compete with … schools that have more money.”
Buck sees that competition for higher-paying jobs as a positive.
“That’s what we’re trying to create is an environment where the best are rewarded,” said Buck, who voted in favor of the bill when it was in the Senate. “When you set a bar, we all seem to try to rise to it. This isn’t meant to replace collective bargaining. This is a tool which school corporations can utilize if they want – they don’t have to.”
Teresa Meredith, president of the Indiana State Teachers Association, doesn’t think SB 10 is necessary, and she would like to see lawmakers withdraw the proposal.
“We think what they’re wanting to do with this bill is something that is already allowed through the current collective bargaining process,” Meredith said.
In some situations, teachers unions can authorize a superintendent to offer higher salaries for certain positions, above where that person would typically fall on the pay scale.
But late last year, a case involving the Jay County School Corp. and Jay Classroom Teachers Association questioned that type of agreement, and the Indiana Court of Appeals found that giving school superintendents that authority conflicts with current state law requiring collective bargaining.
That case prompted some legislators to support SB 10, because they don’t believe current state law affords all districts that option.
“With the [Jay County] court case, it really does require some proactive legislation,” Karickhoff said. “I understand a first grade teacher is as valuable as a physics teacher. In those dual credit courses, in those hard to place AP courses, if they’re going to have that curriculum, they may have to pay more money. How else do we go about doing that?”
Eastern Howard School Corp. has that type of agreement. Under the contract teachers adopted going into the 2014-15 school year, the union authorized Superintendent Tracy Caddell to offer salaries beyond the typical pay scale twice a year if necessary in order to be competitive when hiring for high-demand positions.
Western School Corp. Superintendent Randy McCracken also would like to see any supplemental pay for individual teachers handled within the regular contract negotiations. It would be more helpful, he said, if the state simply provided additional funds for schools to use for high-demand positions within the terms of their existing teacher contracts.
“[SB 10] would make hiring teachers a nightmare. It would create competition and animosity, not only within a school but for the whole area,” McCracken said, adding that school corporations would become increasingly competitive with each other if they had the option to negotiate with individual teachers. “It’s going to make it really tough for smaller schools or schools with less revenue.”
Republican Rep. Heath VanNatter, who also represents Howard County, came out of Tuesday’s session to speak with local teachers, but he was not available to elaborate further on his thoughts about SB 10. Education-related bills introduced in the House aimed to offer more flexibility in terms of their career path and retirement options, VanNatter pointed out.
“Our efforts in strengthening our schools through bills like 1002, 1004 and 1005 reflect the emphasis we have placed on empowering teachers and supporting students this session,” he said in a statement “It is my hope that our work will encourage more people to consider the teaching profession as a long-term career.”