Los Angeles school officials are going back 40 years in their internal review of teacher discipline cases - perfect lie to cover firing older higher paid teachers

THIS IS IMMEDIATE FUTURE OF PUBLIC EDUCATION...

Los Angeles (CNN) -- In an expanding investigation into teacher misconduct, Los Angeles school officials are going back 40 years in their internal review of teacher discipline cases in an effort to determine whether any of the instructors should also be referred for possible license revocation, a school spokesman said Friday.

Los Angeles School Superintendent John Deasy has asked the principals at more than 1,000 schools to search the files of the past 40 years for "any cases of possible employee misconduct," spokesman Tom Waldman told CNN.

The 40-year period is a significant expansion from the past four years of misconduct cases that the system has already reviewed.

So far, Los Angeles school officials have referred the discipline cases of 604 teachers from the past four years to state authorities who have powers to revoke a teacher's credentials, officials said.

Of those 604 cases (THIS NUMBER IS FROM HR AT LAUSD, THE ACTUAL NUMBER OF TEACHERS IN LAUSD "Rubber Rooms" MAY BE TWICE THAT FIGURE. )  in which teachers were fired or facing discipline, 60 teachers were accused of sexual misconduct with pupils on or off campus or with minors who weren't students, school officials said.

The California Commission on Teacher Credentialing will investigate 366 of the 604 teacher cases to determine if licenses should be revoked, which is a six-month process, spokeswoman Anne Padilla said. Most of the cases focused on allegations of teacher misconduct that involved student safety.

Padilla said Friday that 122 of the 604 cases were referred back to the school district for further information because the state agency didn't have the authority to investigate.

She also told CNN that 103 of the 604 cases were duplicates and were already being investigated by the agency's committee on credentials. "For the vast majority, no final action has been taken. They are still in process," Padilla said about the 103 cases.

The referral of the cases to state licensing investigators comes as the nation's second largest school system deals with a crisis of teacher misconduct. The district has been reeling from a scandal at Miramonte Elementary School, where two teachers have been charged with lewd acts on pupils, including one teacher accused of putting children in adult-like bondage situations and placing semen-filled spoons at their mouths.

The state license of that teacher, Mark Berndt -- who has pleaded not guilty to 23 counts of lewd acts on pupils -- has been suspended as the state agency monitors his criminal case, and a license revocation occurs upon a conviction, Padilla said. If an appeal to a conviction is made, the suspension of teaching credentials continues, Padilla said.

This week, the California Senate approved a bill that would empower school boards to fire teachers for misconduct and expedite the firing process of instructors accused of offenses involving sex, violence or drugs, said Democratic state Sen. Alex Padilla, who authored the legislation.

The bill now goes to the State Assembly for a vote.

"Because a school board is ultimately responsible for ensuring a safe learning environment, the school board should be empowered to dismiss employees they determine to be a serious threat to the health and safety of students," Sen. Padilla said in a statement.

The lurid allegations at Miramonte prompted the Los Angeles system to do an internal review of its handling of past teacher misconduct cases, and the district determined that 604 cases needed to be referred to state licensing authorities for review, though "a substantial number" of other misconduct cases had already been reported to the state, school officials said.

One parent, Alvaro Salgero, told CNN that he was concerned about child abuse in the school system.

"It tended to be a safe place, but from what I hear, it seems that's not happening in some places," Salgero said. "There isn't sufficient security for children.

"We're able to realize that there wasn't much of an investigation with teachers and they didn't investigate them before giving them a job, and those who suffer are the children, the pupils," Salgero said.

The 604 cases include teachers who were disciplined or were about to face discipline since July 2008, according to Ira Berman, Los Angeles Unified School District director of employee relations, and Vivian Ekchian, the district's chief human resources officer.

The cases also include teachers who were fired by the school board or who left the district after termination proceedings were initiated or while an allegation of misconduct was pending, Berman and Ekchian said.

The system doesn't know whether any of the teachers who were fired or who left the district are still in the classroom in other school districts.

The 604 figure also includes teachers who were suspended for 11 days or more for a variety of reasons not involving sexual misconduct with students, the two officials said.

"The safety of our students is our No. 1 priority," Ekchian said in explaining why the system referred the 604 cases to the state.

The system's internal investigation arose after parental outrage after charges were filed against former Miramonte teacher Berndt, who resigned from the system last year but was not referred to the state for possible license revocation, district spokesman Waldman said.

Berndt, 61, pleaded not guilty in February to allegations he bound young students, then photographed them with semen-filled spoons held at their mouths and three-inch cockroaches crawling across their faces, among other graphic depictions.

"We had not informed Sacramento to revoke Mr. Berndt's credentials," Waldman said.

Berndt is being held on $23 million bond and faces 23 counts of lewd acts on a child. The 23 victims were between 7 and 10 years old, and all but two of them were girls, the Los Angeles County District Attorney's Office said.

Authorities have said they have discovered roughly 600 images allegedly taken by Berndt in his classroom. Los Angeles Unified School District Superintendent Deasy has said Berndt was removed from his teaching job in January 2011 after school officials learned of the police investigation. A teacher for 30 years, Berndt initially challenged the school district's decision to dismiss him. But he eventually dropped his appeal and resigned last spring.

His arrest in January led to broader fallout over the adequacy of safeguards for the school's students and the prospect of more victims.

Days after Berndt was taken into custody, another Miramonte Elementary teacher -- Martin Springer, 49 -- was arrested and charged with three felony counts of lewd acts with a girl younger than 14. He has pleaded not guilty.

The LAUSD board subsequently shut Miramonte for two days, during which the board reconstituted the entire staff in the 1,400-student school. Miramonte is in unincorporated Los Angeles County within the Florence-Firestone area, about six miles south of downtown Los Angeles.

"Because a school board is ultimately responsible for ensuring a safe learning environment, the school board should be empowered to dismiss employees they determine to be a serious threat to the health and safety of students," Sen. Padilla said in a statement.

READ THIS: For every seven teachers brought up on charges by the average school district, one has anything directly to do with students. However, of the former seven teachers, 90% are at or near the top of their pay scale. Of that seven less than 15% are prosectuted by police. STILL, 100% WILL BE EFFECTIVELY FIRED OR DRIVEN OFF.

While time is showing it is actually easy to fire a teacher w/o a cause that would stand up in crimminal or civil court, the same district can't keep one single high school student safe from the violence, gang activities or the drug use on its own campuses. Not a single student can be kept safe until they graduate. IS THIS ABOUT PAYROLL SAVINGS OR REAL STUDENT SAFETY?

The lurid allegations at Miramonte prompted the Los Angeles system to do an internal review of its handling of past teacher misconduct cases, and the district determined that 604 cases needed to be referred to state licensing authorities for review, though "a substantial number" of other misconduct cases had already been reported to the state, school officials said.

One parent, Alvaro Salgero, told CNN that he was concerned about child abuse in the school system.  "It tended to be a safe place, but from what I hear, it seems that's not happening in some places," Salgero said. "There isn't sufficient security for children 

"We're able to realize that there wasn't much of an investigation with teachers and they didn't investigate them before giving them a job, and those who suffer are the children, the pupils," Salgero said.

The 604 cases include teachers who were disciplined or were about to face discipline since July 2008, according to Ira Berman, Los Angeles Unified School District director of employee relations, and Vivian Ekchian, the district's chief human resources officer 

The cases also include teachers who were fired by the school board or who left the district after termination proceedings were initiated or while an allegation of misconduct was pending, Berman and Ekchian said.

The system doesn't know whether any of the teachers who were fired or who left the district are still in the classroom in other school districts.

The 604 figure also includes teachers who were suspended for 11 days or more for a variety of reasons not involving sexual misconduct with students, the two officials said.

"The safety of our students is our No. 1 priority," Ekchian said in explaining why the system referred the 604 cases to the state.

The system's internal investigation arose after parental outrage after charges were filed against former Miramonte teacher Berndt, who resigned from the system last year but was not referred to the state for possible license revocation, district spokesman Waldman said.

Berndt, 61, pleaded not guilty in February to allegations he bound young students, then photographed them with semen-filled spoons held at their mouths and three-inch cockroaches crawling across their faces, among other graphic depictions.

"We had not informed Sacramento to revoke Mr. Berndt's credentials," Waldman said.

Berndt is being held on $23 million bond and faces 23 counts of lewd acts on a child. The 23 victims were between 7 and 10 years old, and all but two of them were girls, the Los Angeles County District Attorney's Office said.

Authorities have said they have discovered roughly 600 images allegedly taken by Berndt in his classroom.

Los Angeles Unified School District Superintendent Deasy has said Berndt was removed from his teaching job in January 2011 after school officials learned of the police investigation.

A teacher for 30 years, Berndt initially challenged the school district's decision to dismiss him. But he eventually dropped his appeal and resigned last spring.

His arrest in January led to broader fallout over the adequacy of safeguards for the school's students and the prospect of more victims.

Days after Berndt was taken into custody, another Miramonte Elementary teacher -- Martin Springer, 49 -- was arrested and charged with three felony counts of lewd acts with a girl younger than 14. He has pleaded not guilty.

The LAUSD board subsequently shut Miramonte for two days, during which the board reconstituted the entire staff in the 1,400-student school. Miramonte is in unincorporated Los Angeles County within the Florence-Firestone area, about six miles south of downtown Los Angeles.

CTA the Worst Union in America!

In Response to Troy Senik’s Article: Worst Union in America

Originally Posted on May 21, 2012 by admin

caindependentteachers.com

CTA spent over $200 million on politics in the decade prior to 2010. What should be an outrage to CTA members is that it was ONLY $200 million! That is a little more than 10% of their huge budget, where is the other 90% going?

Of course, it goes to a bloated CTA and NEA organization that has hundreds of very well-paid employees. It certainly does not go towards CTA labor negotiators or attorneys. Local CTA associations rely on teachers to do the heavy lifting on bargaining and negotiations teams, getting CTA negotiators only when absolutely necessary. Discipline cases and school site problems are handled primarily by teachers (stewards) instead of CTA attorneys (they only have 11 CTA attorneys on staff and actually say on their website that they would be too busy if CTA members were allowed to call them directly with questions…!).

California teachers pay about $1,000/year in union dues and 80% goes to CTA and NEA. Of the rest that stays local, a huge chunk goes to CTA and NEA anyway, in the form of conference and training fees for CTA and NEA events.

Teachers do have an alternative. They can decertify from CTA and be independent teacher associations. http://caindependentteachers.com/

Police, fire and many other public sector employees in California often do not belong to a big union, but rather pay much more modest dues to their local association, which uses those dues to hire labor attorneys and negotiators to handle the association’s needs. There are certainly problems with California’s economy and budget woes, but public employees did not cause the recession. Public employee associations that work collaboratively with the City, County or District they work for can and have been able to keep public services working despite the economy and the state government’s ineptitude.

CTA, though, is simply sucking money from teachers without giving much in return, other than helping perpetuate a broken system statewide.

   

Read the Article below or click here http://www.city-journal.org/2012/22_2_california-teachers-association.html

TROY SENIK

The Worst Union in America

How the California Teachers Association betrayed the schools and crippled the state

In 1962, as tensions ran high between school districts and unions across the country, members of the National Education Association gathered in Denver for the organization’s 100th annual convention. Among the speakers was Arthur F. Corey, executive director of the California Teachers Association (CTA). “The strike as a weapon for teachers is inappropriate, unprofessional, illegal, outmoded, and ineffective,” Corey told the crowd. “You can’t go out on an illegal strike one day and expect to go back to your classroom and teach good citizenship the next.”

  

ILLUSTRATIONS BY SEAN DELONAS

Fast-forward nearly 50 years to May 2011, when the CTA—now the single most powerful special interest in California—organized a “State of Emergency” week to agitate for higher taxes in one of the most overtaxed states in the nation. A CTA document suggested dozens of ways for teachers to protest, including following state legislators incessantly, attempting to close major transportation arteries, and boycotting companies, such as Microsoft, that backed education reform. The week’s centerpiece was an occupation of the state capitol by hundreds of teachers and student sympathizers from the Cal State University system, who clogged the building’s hallways and refused to leave. Police arrested nearly 100 demonstrators for trespassing, including then–CTA president David Sanchez. The protesting teachers had left their jobs behind, even though their students were undergoing important statewide tests that week. With the passage of 50 years, the CTA’s notions of “good citizenship” had vanished.

So had high-quality public education in California. Seen as a national leader in the classroom during the 1950s and 1960s, the country’s largest state is today a laggard, competing with the likes of Mississippi and Washington, D.C., at the bottom of national rankings. The Golden State’s education tailspin has been blamed on everything from class sizes to the property-tax restrictions enforced by Proposition 13 to an influx of Spanish-speaking students. But no portrait of the system’s downfall would be complete without a depiction of the CTA, a political behemoth that blocks meaningful education reform, protects failing and even criminal educators, and inflates teacher pay and benefits to unsustainable levels.

The CTA began its transformation in September 1975, when Governor Jerry Brown signed the Rodda Act, which allowed California teachers to bargain collectively. Within 18 months, 600 of the 1,000 local CTA chapters moved to collective bargaining. As the union’s power grew, its ranks nearly doubled, from 170,000 in the late 1970s to approximately 325,000 today. By following the union’s directions and voting in blocs in low-turnout school-board elections, teachers were able to handpick their own supervisors—a system that private-sector unionized workers would envy. Further, the organization that had once forsworn the strike began taking to the picket lines. Today, the CTA boasts that it has launched more than 170 strikes in the years since Rodda’s passage.

The CTA’s most important resource, however, isn’t a pool of workers ready to strike; it’s a fat bank account fed by mandatory dues that can run more than $1,000 per member. In 2009, the union’s income was more than $186 million, all of it tax-exempt. The CTA doesn’t need its members’ consent to spend this money on politicking, whether that’s making campaign contributions or running advocacy campaigns to obstruct reform. According to figures from the California Fair Political Practices Commission (a public institution) in 2010, the CTA had spent more than $210 million over the previous decade on political campaigning—more than any other donor in the state. In fact, the CTA outspent the pharmaceutical industry, the oil industry, and the tobacco industrycombined.

All this money has helped the union rack up an imposing number of victories. The first major win came in 1988, with the passage of Proposition 98. That initiative compelled California to spend more than 40 percent of its annual budget on education in grades K–12 and community college. The spending quota eliminated schools’ incentive to get value out of every dollar: since funding was locked in, there was no need to make things run cost-effectively. Thanks to union influence on local school boards, much of the extra money—about $450 million a year—went straight into teachers’ salaries. Prop. 98’s malign effects weren’t limited to education, however: by essentially making public school funding an entitlement rather than a matter of discretionary spending, it hastened California’s erosion of fiscal discipline. In recent years, estimates of mandatory spending’s share of the state’s budget have run as high as 85 percent, making it highly difficult for the legislature to confront the severe budget crises of the past decade.

In 1991, the CTA took to the ramparts again to combat Proposition 174, a ballot initiative that would have made California a national leader in school choice by giving families universal access to school vouchers. When initiative supporters began circulating the petitions necessary to get it onto the ballot, some CTA members tried to intimidate petition signers physically. The union also encouraged people to sign the petition multiple times in order to throw the process into chaos. “There are some proposals so evil that they should never go before the voters,” explained D. A. Weber, the CTA’s president. One of the consultants who organized the petitions testified in a court declaration at the time that people with union ties had offered him $400,000 to refrain from distributing them. Another claimed that a CTA member had tried to run him off the road after a debate on school choice.

Weber and his followers weren’t successful in keeping the proposition off the ballot, but they did manage to delay it for two years, giving themselves time to organize a counteroffensive. They ran ads, recalls Ken Khachigian, the former White House speechwriter who headed the Yes on 174 campaign, “claiming that a witches’ coven would be eligible for the voucher funds and [could] set up a school of its own.” They threatened to field challengers against political candidates who supported school choice. They bullied members of the business community who contributed money to the pro-voucher effort. When In-N-Out Burger donated $25,000 to support Prop. 174, for instance, the CTA threatened to press schools to drop contracts with the company.

In 1993, Prop. 174 finally came to a statewide vote. The union had persuaded March Fong Eu, the CTA-endorsed secretary of state, to alter the proposition’s heading on the ballot from PARENTAL CHOICE to EDUCATION VOUCHERS—a change in wording that cost Prop. 174 ten points in the polls, according to Myron Lieberman in his book The Teacher Unions. The initiative, which had originally enjoyed 2–1 support among California voters, managed to garner only a little over 30 percent of the vote. Prop. 174’s backers had been outspent by a factor of eight, with the CTA alone dropping $12.5 million on the opposition campaign.

As the CTA’s power grew, it learned that it could extract policy concessions simply by employing its aggressive PR machine. In 1996, with the state’s budget in surplus, the CTA spent $1 million on an ad campaign touting the virtues of reduced class sizes in kindergarten through third grade. Feeling the heat from the campaign, Republican governor Pete Wilson signed a measure providing subsidies to schools with classes of 20 children or fewer. The program was a disaster: it failed to improve educational outcomes, and the need to hire many new teachers quickly, to handle all the smaller classes, reduced the quality of teachers throughout the state. The program cost California nearly $2 billion per year at its high-water mark, becoming the most expensive education-reform initiative in the state’s history. But it worked out well for the CTA, whose ranks and coffers were swelled by all those new teachers.

The union’s steady supply of cash allowed it to continue its quest for political dominance unabated. In 1998, it spent nearly $7 million to defeat Proposition 8—which would have used student performance as a criterion for teacher reviews and would have required educators to pass credentialing examinations in their disciplines—and more than $2 million in a failed attempt to block Proposition 227, which eliminated bilingual education in public schools. In 2002, the union spent $26 million to defeat Proposition 38, another school voucher proposal. And in 2005, with a special election called by Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger looming, the CTA came up with a colossal $58 million—even going so far as to mortgage its Sacramento headquarters—to defeat initiatives that would have capped the growth of state spending, made it easier to fire underperforming teachers, and ensured “paycheck protection,” which compels unions to get their members’ consent before using dues for political purposes. (A new paycheck-protection measure will appear on the November 2012 ballot.)

Cannily, the CTA also funds a wide array of liberal causes unrelated to education, with the goal of spreading around enough cash to prevent dissent from the Left. Among these causes: implementing a single-payer health-care system in California, blocking photo-identification requirements for voters, and limiting restraints on the government’s power of eminent domain. The CTA was the single biggest financial opponent of another Proposition 8, the controversial 2008 proposal to ban gay marriage, ponying up $1.3 million to fight an initiative that eventually won 52.2 percent of the vote. The union has also become the biggest donor to the California Democratic Party. From 2003 to 2012, the CTA spent nearly $102 million on political contributions; 0.08 percent of that money went to Republicans.

At the same time that the union was becoming the largest financial force in California politics, it was developing an equally powerful ground game, stifling reform efforts at the local level. Consider the case of Locke High School in the poverty-stricken Los Angeles neighborhood of Watts. Founded in response to the area’s 1967 riots, Locke was intended to provide a quality education to the neighborhood’s almost universally minority students. For years, it failed: in 2006, with a student body that was 65 percent Hispanic and 35 percent African-American, the school sent just 5 percent of its graduates to four-year colleges, and the dropout rate was nearly 51 percent.

Shortly before Locke reached this nadir, the school hired a reform-minded principal, Frank Wells, who was determined to revive the school’s fortunes. Just a few days after he arrived, a group of rival gangs got into a dust-up; Wells expelled 80 of the students involved. In the new atmosphere of discipline, Locke dropped “from first in the number of campus crime reports in LAUSD [Los Angeles Unified School District] to thirteenth,” writes Donna Foote in Relentless Pursuit: A Year in the Trenches with Teach for America. Test scores and college acceptance also began to rise, Foote reports.

But trouble arose with the union when Wells began requiring Locke teachers to present weekly lesson plans. The local CTA affiliate—United Teachers Los Angeles—filed a grievance against him and was soon urging his removal. The last straw was Wells’s effort to convert Locke into an independent charter school, where teachers would operate under severely restricted union contracts. In May 2007, the district removed Wells from his job. He was escorted from his office by three police officers and an associate superintendent of schools, all on the basis of union allegations that he had let teachers use classroom time to sign a petition to turn Locke into a charter. Wells called the allegations “a total fabrication,” and the signature gatherers backed him up. The LAUSD reassigned him to a district office, where he was paid $600 a day to sit in a cubicle and do nothing.

Luckily for Locke students, the union’s rearguard action came too late. In 2007, the Los Angeles Board of Education voted 5–2 to hand Locke High School to Green Dot, a charter school operator. Four years later, as the final class of Locke students who had attended the school prior to its transformation received their diplomas, the school’s graduation rate was 68 percent, and over 56 percent of Locke graduates were headed for higher education.

One of the most noticeable changes at Locke has ramifications statewide: when Green Dot took over, it required all teachers to reapply for their jobs. It hired back only about one-third of them. That approach is unimaginable in the rest of the state’s public schools, where a teaching job is essentially a lifetime sinecure. A tiny 0.03 percent of California teachers are dismissed after three or more years on the job. In the past decade, the LAUSD—home to 33,000 teachers—has dismissed only four. Even when teachers are fired, it’s seldom because of their classroom performance: a 2009 exposé by theLos Angeles Times found that only 20 percent of successful dismissals in the state had anything to do with teaching ability. Most terminations involved teachers behaving either obscenely or criminally. The National Council on Teacher Quality, a Washington-based education-reform organization, gave California a D-minus on its teacher-firing policies in its 2010 national report card.

Responsibility for this sorry situation goes largely to the CTA, which has won concessions that make firing a teacher so difficult that educators can usually keep their jobs for any offense that doesn’t cross into outright criminality. With the cost of the proceedings regularly running near half a million dollars, many districts choose to shuffle problem employees around rather than try to fire them.

Even outright offenses are no guarantee of removal, thanks to CTA influence. When a fired teacher appeals his case beyond the school board, it goes to the Commission on Professional Competence—two of whose three members are also teachers, one of them chosen by the educator whose case is being heard. The CTA has stacked this process as well by bargaining to require evidentiary standards equal to those used in civil-court procedures and coaching the teachers on the panels. One veteran school-district lawyer calls the appeals process “one of the most complicated civil legal matters anywhere.” As the Times noted, “The district wanted to fire a high school teacher who kept a stash of pornography, marijuana and vials with cocaine residue at school, but [the Commission on Professional Competence] balked, suggesting that firing was too harsh.” The commission was also the reason that, as the newspaper continued, the district was “unsuccessful in firing a male middle school teacher spotted lying on top of a female colleague in the metal shop”; the district had failed to “prove that the two were having sex.”

Another regulatory body dominated by CTA influence is the state’s Commission on Teacher Credentialing (CTC), the institution responsible for removing the credentials of misbehaving teachers. A report released in 2011 by California state auditor Elaine Howle found that the commission had a backlog of approximately 12,600 cases, with responses sometimes taking as long as three years. Because the CTC—which was created by an act sponsored by the CTA—is made up of members appointed by the governor, the CTA is able to bring its political pressure to bear on determining the commission’s makeup. In September 2011, for instance, one of Governor Jerry Brown’s appointments to the CTC was Kathy Harris, who had previously been a CTA lobbyist to the body.

The CTA’s most recent crusade for job security made clear that the union was prepared to jeopardize the financial future of California’s schools. Last June, it vigorously pushed (and Governor Brown hastily signed) Assembly Bill 114, which prevented any teacher layoffs or program cuts in the coming fiscal year and removed the requirement that school districts present balanced budget plans. The bill also forced public schools to prepare budget estimates that didn’t take into account the state’s downturn in revenues—meaning that schools could budget for activities even though there wasn’t money to pay for them. Since then, state officials have forecast that revenues for the 2012 fiscal year will be $3.2 billion lower than they were when the schools were making their budgets. Eventually, accommodations to reality will have to be made—at which time the CTA will, of course, use them to plead hardship.

Such pleas seem impudent coming from the highest-paid teachers in the nation, with an average annual salary of $68,000. For a bit of perspective, if two California teachers get married (not an unusual occurrence) and each makes the average salary, their combined annual income would be $136,000, nearly $80,000 more than what the state’s median household pulls down. That’s for an average annual workload of 180 days, only two-thirds of the average total in the private sector. Don’t forget retirement benefits: after 30 years, a California teacher may retire with a pension equal to about 75 percent of his working salary. That pension averages more than $51,000 a year—more than working teachers earn in more than half the states in the nation. And that’s just an average; from 2005 to 2011, the number of education employees pulling down more than $100,000 a year in pensions skyrocketed from 700 to 5,400.

With the state’s economy in tumult, however, prospects for the teachers’ retirement fund look grim. CalSTRS is now officially estimated to have about $56 billion in liabilities and about 30 years left before it runs dry, though many outside analysts think that those numbers are too optimistic. A report by the Legislative Analyst’s Office in November 2011 estimated that restoring full funding to CalSTRS would require finding an extra $3.9 billion a year for at least 30 years.

If California is to generate the economic growth necessary to mitigate its coming fiscal reckoning, it will need to retain its historical role as a leading site for innovation and entrepreneurship. But that won’t be possible if its next generation of would-be entrepreneurs attends one of the Golden State’s many mediocre or failing schools. And what little economic dynamism is left in California will be impeded if the union gets its way and the state increases its already weighty tax burden.

Meaningful change probably won’t come from elected officials, at least for now. The CTA’s size, financial resources, and influence with the state’s regnant Democratic Party are enough to kill most pieces of hostile legislation. For years, school reformers fantasized about a transformative figure who could shift the balance of power from the union through force of charisma and personality, taking his case directly to the people. Yet when that figure seemed to emerge in Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger, even he proved unable to alter the status quo, with his 2005 ballot initiatives to reform tenure, school financing, and political spending by unions all going down to decisive defeat. It’s unlikely that salvation will come from Governor Brown, either. The man who originally opened the door for the CTA’s collective bargaining has remained a steadfast ally of the union, firing four pro-reform members of the state board of education in his first few days in office and appointing a new group that included Patricia Ann Rucker, the CTA’s top lobbyist. Brown also avoided including any changes to CalSTRS in his October announcement of proposed pension reforms, probably because he had learned Schwarzenegger’s lesson that irking the CTA can lead to the demise of a broader agenda.

Parents, however, are starting to revolt against CTA orthodoxy. Unlike elected officials, parents—who want nothing more than a good education for their kids—are hard for the union to demonize. In early 2010, a Los Angeles–based nonprofit called Parent Revolution shocked California’s pundit class by getting the state legislature to pass the nation’s first “parent trigger” law, which lets parents at failing schools force districts to undertake certain reforms, including converting schools into independent charters. The law caps the number of schools eligible for reform at 75, but if early results are successful, it will become hard for Californians to avoid comparing thriving charter schools with failing traditional ones.

The CTA is fighting back, of course. In 2010, when 61 percent of parents at McKinley Elementary School in the blighted L.A. neighborhood of Compton opted to pull the trigger, the CTA claimed that “parents were never given the full picture . . . [or] informed of the great progress already being made”—despite the fact that McKinley’s performance was ranked beneath nearly all other inner-city schools in the state. Several Hispanic parents in the district also said that members of the union had threatened to report them to immigration authorities if they signed the petition. Eventually, the Compton Unified school board—heavily lobbied by the CTA—dismissed the petition signatures, with no discussion, as “insufficient” on a handful of technicalities, such as missing dates and typos. Though the union’s power had proved too much for the McKinley parents, an enterprising charter school operator opened two new campuses in the neighborhood anyway.

Institutions like Locke High School, Green Dot, Parent Revolution, and the Compton charters are glimmers of hope for California’s public school system. Despite their inferior resources, they have fought the CTA not by participating in direct political conflict but by undermining the union’s moral standing. These organizations reframe the education question in starkly humanitarian terms: In the California public school system, are anyone’s interests more important than the students’? It was a question that the CTA itself might have asked back when teachers entered the classroom to “teach good citizenship.”

Troy Senik is a senior fellow at the Center for Individual Freedom and an editor at Ricochet.com.

ADDENDEM TO "AN OPEN LETTER TO GOVERNOR JERRY BROWN"

State panel OKs demotion; fatal crash involved judge

By Onell R. Soto

SAN DIEGO UNION-TRIBUNE

September 21, 2002

(NOTATIONS IN ITALICS ARE PURELY THE OPINION OF THE POSTER)

Judge H. James Ahler, 54, of Escondido, hit and killed a pedestrian in Escondido within an hour of drinking three glasses of wine a year ago,  (BULLSHIT, AHLER IS 6'2 AND ABOUT 260 LB.S. THERE IS PHYSIOLOGICAL WAY THAT A MAN THAT SIZE COULD HAVE REACHED PT. 15 PERCENT BLOOD ALCOHOL, TWICE THE STATE LIMIT ON THREE GLASSES OF WINE. SOUNDS LIKE ANOTHER AHLER LIE: MY OPINION. AT .15 PERCENT MOST DRUNKS ARE SEEING DOUBLE AND SLURRING THERE WORDS. yet THE DA SAID ALCOHOL HAD NOTHING TO DO WITH AHLER HITTING AND KILLING THAT PEDESTRIAN. I REITERATE... BULLSHIT) according to the decision by the California State Personnel Board.

After the fatal Sept. 18, 2001, crash, he served ONE night in jail, pleaded  guilty to "misdemeanor drunken driving," paid $1,200 in fines and had to  attend counseling and ONE session in which victims described the impact of drunken driving on their lives and those of their loved ones, court records show. Ahler has been an administrative law judge with the Office of Administrative Hearings in San Diego since 1994, typically hearing  similar cases in which professionals have their licenses suspensions or revoked

BUT HOW AHLER  SUFFERED HE CLAIMS!
 Because of his conviction, Ahler – who had been promoted in June  2001 from a position paying $102,614 annually to a higher rank as an  administrative law judge specialist, which pays $107,641 – was demoted. HE HAS SINCE MADE UP THAT SALARY DIFFERENCE MANY TIMES OVER - UNLIKE the "discipline" shoveled out to MOST OF AHLER'S VICTIMS OTHER WISE KNOWN AS  "DEFENDANTS" when FORCED INTO AHLER'S KANGAROO COURT. 

WWHATEVER  THE AGENCY WANTS.  PAID FOR BY HUGE LAW FIRMS FOR THESE "Agencys" i.e. Government or school district employees. 

But H. JAMES AHLER KEPT HIS JOB!  How many paychecks a month does Alher get? (Or perhaps he's paid in cash for his services to these agencies and their attorneys?) Ahler told officers when he was arrested that he drank three glasses of  wine within an hour of the crash, according to documents from the  personnel board, which hears appeals from state employees who feel they've been wrongly disciplined.

In Vista Superior Court, Ahler admitted his blood-alcohol level at the time of the crash was .15 of a percent, nearly twice the .08 of a percent at which California motorists are presumed to be too drunk to drive.

Compare "Dickless" James Ahler's own behavior with the average "discipline" afforded most drunks who kill another human while driving intoxicated! Don't take my word look this up yourself. But don't bother asking Sacramento! No one seems to want to talk about Ahler's Behavior. This includes the AG's office, Jerry Brown's office, the supervising ALJ appointed by Brown.

Ahler was not charged with killing 67-year-old Charles Ames of Escondido because his drinking didn't contribute to the death, said prosecutor Evan Miller. He admitted to being drunk while driving but that drunken driving didn't contribute? WOW, I want to be President of a local bar, no pun intended, association.

Miller said Ames (the pedestrian), whose own blood-alcohol level was reported to be .28, crossed against a red light in a dark corner wearing dark clothing. None of a half-dozen witnesses to the crash saw him before impact, he said. (Sorry but that  sort of surprise on the road happens 2-3 times in the experiences of most drivers ,SOBER drivers and in similar circumstances almost NEVER end up in a COLLLISION LET ALONE A FATALITY involving a pedestrian at an intersection. Most are lit anyway.)  How the hell were there six witnesses at four A.M. anyway? Were they all
NNorth County San Diego attorneys?

Defense lawyer Daniel Cronin said Ahler was "not responsible for the death." )

"The pedestrian ran out in front of him,"Cronin said. "It would have happened if he was stone cold sober." (AND NOT PAYING ATTENTION TO THE ROAD, TRAFFIC LIGHTS OR HIS VEHICLES SPEED.)

Ahler challenged the demotion, which took place during the standard probationary period relating to the June 2001 promotion (SO INSTEAD OF REMORSE, ALJ H.JAMES AHLER IMMEDIATELY STARTED TO WHINE AND BITCH IN PUBLIC ABOUT NOT GETTING A $102 DOLLAR A WEEK RAISE)

In his defense, Ahler argued that his supervisors should have simply written a letter disapproving his actions, not taken away his promotion.  He said that, except for the conviction, he continues to do his job well.

Lawyer Everett Bobbitt, who represented Ahler before the personnel board, said the demotion was too harsh, especially because Ahler continues handling complicated cases and deserves the higher rank.

"It's really not a demotion. They're just taking money away," Bobbitt said. "The work hasn't changed at all." But an administrative law judge with the State Personnel Board ruled Ahler violated his duty as a judge by driving drunk. (Yep, he's still doing a piss poor job  that his reputation demands)

"Such conduct does not comply with the law, does not promote public confidence in the integrity of the judiciary and demeans the judicial office," Judge William A. Snyder wrote two weeks ago, paraphrasing the Canons of Judicial Ethics in his decision upholding Ahler's 

demotion.

Snyder said some of the people coming before Ahler might question his impartiality. He noted that Ahler and his colleagues decide whether OR NOT TO FIRE AND DESTROY THE LIVES OF AHLERS JUCICIAL VICTIMS IN MUCH THE WAY HE KILLED THAT PEDESTRIAN - WITH IMPUNITY.

WHY DOES JERRY BROWN AND KAMELA HARRIS ENDORSE THIS FOOL'S BEHAVIORS BOTH ON AND OFF THE BENCH... PROBABLY BECAUSE THEY DON'T WANT TO ACKNOWLEDGE HE AND HIS BEHAVIOR ON THE BENCH EXIST AT ALL. IGNORE IT AND IT WILL GO-AWAY. 

H. JAMES AHLER IS NOT GOING ANYWHERE HIS PRESENCE WITH OAH IS THE FAULT OF THE GOVERNOR AND  ATTORNEY GENERAL KAMELA HARRIS. AHLER WILL BE THEIR RESPECTIVE LEGACYS IN MY MIND WHEN I THINK OF JUDCIAL MISDEEDS

.http://schoolcounselingvideocast.blogspot.com/2012/09/blog-post_14.html

OPEN LETTER TO GOVERNOR JERRY BROWN - FIRE JUDGE H. JAMES AHLER

August 12, 2012

Honorable Governor Jerry Brown,

Honorable Kamala Harris, Attorney General of California

Honorable Linda Cabatic, OAH supervising ALJ

PRA coordinator

Full Disclosure, Chief News Editor

CNN Regional News Editor

Let me ask what I am sure is and has been known in Sacramento for a decade. What circumstances has allowed a man convicted of killing a pedestrian while driving intoxicated, (by State standards), to remain as an Administrative Law Judge until now? To my knowledge, he was never disciplined for the manslaughter of the pedestrian in Vista, CA where he sits at the head of the North County Bar Association. 

In my opinion, he unofficially sits as paid "in-house Judge" for the likes of a private law firm, Friedman, Fagan and FulFrost. This firm represents almost 420 school districts. Ahler has the well-deserved reputation as executioner over the lives and careers of hundreds of educators. Almost all of these educators are denied the legal due process demanded by law, contract, the CTC and California Ed Code standards for disciplining educators. 

Ahler appears oblivious. Yet H. James Ahler's victim's family is denied closure or justice because Ahler appears to have skated under the radar by virtue of his office and connections made while in that office, according to The San Diego Tribune. Governor Brown, how can someone convicted of a misdemeanor for killing a man walking home while Ahler was about on a drunken stupor - BEHIND THE WHEEL - ever sit in judgment of anyone’s employment?

I have started investigating Judge Ahler’s association with large law firms representing (Government funded) public schools and against educators all at the top of their districts pay scale. Ironic? I am sure I will have a considerable amount more to ask once the investigation is concluded. However Governor Brown Sir, the question remains. How does a man like Ahler sit as lawfully employed Judge in any venue in California under your watch?

Under your watch Sir, you appointed Linda Cabatic to replace the former OAH supervising judge. I am sure you saw the need for change of the quasi-constitutional and quasi ethical tribunal. Despite your efforts, nothing of substance has changed and Administrative Law Judges like James Ahler sit in judgment and in Ahler's case specifically; while having escaped fair judgment himself. Ahler is an example why the OAH is universally seen as the new extension to Public School District’s hiring and firing process and their ability to cull highly paid Educators from the payroll. In turn more educators are having to sue their districts in Civil court to find a remedy. Ultimately, this ends up costing the local tax payers hundreds of thousands of dollars in unnecessary attorney’s fees and judgments every year.

 No Educator enters this process expecting any semblance of 'justice,' especially when agency attorneys can depend on the strategy of a last minute motion to remove a presiding ALJ and without notifying the defendant, pull Ahler in. 

Ahler himself has been suspended for his overt acts to control the outcome of OA hearings in favor of the agency (e.g. OAH hearing Maura Larkins, San Diego.) As Governor, why would you allow the likes of H. James Ahler to represent the OAH of our State? Yet, Ahler remains a dirty little secret of California's legal system. Ahler represents a significant stain on your administration and bane to the CTC's efforts to keep good educators. I hope you will order an investigation of H. James.

FDN’s video “The Cost of Courage.” Richard I Fine's fight against judical corruption, Los Angeles and California.

Thank you for your personal attention to this matter.

Sincerely,

IMAGINE!

Imagine…  union leadership that truly represents rank-and-file interests and those of students...instead of themselves and the school district. 

Originally posted by Leonard Isenberg
Perdaily.com

posted in LAUSD,UTLA

Strike Continues as Chicago Teachers Mull Contract's Gains and Losses

Theresa Moran

|  September 17, 2012

Striking Chicago teachers will remain out of the classroom until Wednesday at least, after delegates decided to give union members time to debate the tentative contract negotiators brought to them on Sunday.

Delegates said that all members of the union--not just elected representatives--should get a chance to review and weigh in on the proposed agreement before a decision was made to go back to work.

The agreement makes significant gains on many key issues for the union, including how teachers are evaluated, while accepting concessions in health care and job security. Still left to be determined is how the city will find the funds needed to overhaul crumbling schools and pay for the libraries, health, and social services that the union demands for schoolchildren.

The school board has been trying for the past week to isolate the union negotiating team from the Chicago Teachers Union's broader membership, going so far as to tell the press that a settlement was sure to be in place by the beginning of this week, long before delegates, let alone rank-and-file members, had even seen contract summaries.

But CTU's leadership refused to push the tentative agreement on members without letting them decide for themselves whether it was acceptable. "I'm not going to say this is the greatest thing since sliced bread and try to sell it to them. I'm not a marketer," said union President Karen Lewis. "Our people know how to read, they know how to do math, and they understand these things."

According to Vice President Jesse Sharkey, "the board forgot to do one thing: bring along the people who actually do the work."

MOMENTOUS DECISION

Delegates agreed. High school history teacher Jen Johnson, a member of the team coordinating strike logistics, said even though delegates could have decided on ending the strike themselves, they didn't think it was fair to make such a "momentous decision" without broader member input.

"It's not just a contract vote," she said. "We're on strike and it's a different context. People felt very strongly about having a little time with their members."

At Hibberd Elementary, picket line chants were replaced with murmurs and questions this morning as teachers huddled in groups of three and four to peer over contract summaries circulating through the crowd.

"Morale is much higher today than it was last week because now we have a framework and something tangible in our hands," said kindergarten teacher Emily Gann.

After the morning picket, Hibberd teachers filed into a nearby church for a report from delegates on yesterday's meeting and a discussion of members' opinions on the tentative agreement.

Union delegates held similar meetings with their members today across the city.

Delegates will meet again Tuesday night to vote on the tentative agreement.

WHAT'S IN IT

The tentative agreement contains some bright spots. Not only was the union able to stave off merit pay, but it maintained raises based on education and experience that Mayor Rahm Emanuel (and corporate education interests nationwide) have vowed to end.

Student test scores will now comprise up to 30 percent of a teacher's evaluation, the minimum allowed by state law. Mid-year evaluations, which principals often use to oust teachers, have been disallowed.

The union also gained ground on recall rights, a key concern for teachers as the city is poised to close some 200 schools. Laid-off teachers would have full recall rights if their old jobs are reinstated within 10 months. At least half of all positions that open up must now be filled with a laid-off teacher.

At the same time, the agreement is by no means perfect. Keeping teacher health care contributions low required the union to sign off on an unpopular "wellness program" that uses carrot-and-stick incentives to force members to participate in diet, nutrition, and disease monitoring.

The evaluation system will include a "needs improvement" category that makes it easier for teachers to be let go.

And not much progress was made on an issue considered vital to the union's community supporters, reducing class size. School officials had attempted to gut the contract language that governed class size, which CTU fought off. But the language as it stands has proved insufficient and difficult to enforce. Current policy requires the district to take action when class size exceeds 35, but teachers have reported kindergarten classes over 40 and high school classes over 50.

Perhaps most worrisome to teachers anticipating school closures, though, is the fact that laid-off teachers would now receive only six months of severance pay as opposed to a year, the current practice.

While she's encouraged by the progress that's been made, Johnson says she's still "very concerned about teacher evaluations, the length of the displacement pool, and the lack of movement on wraparound services."

The board agreed to increase those services by hiring more social workers, psychologists, counselors, and nurses, but only if new revenue became available. The union has campaigned to redirect millions of dollars in tax breaks handed to downtown business interests to schools.

Johnson hopes that by staying out longer, more progress can be made on these key issues. "This is a game of chess and it's the board's move. We've shown our strength."

COURT-SIDE

Emanuel tried to make his next move today by filing for an injunction against the union, claiming members were striking over illegal non-economic issues like class size and recall rights.

The union, though, has announced legal reasons for the strike since the beginning. When the strike was announced last Sunday, union leaders gave evaluation procedures and policies as their major reason for going out.

In deciding to continue the strike, delegates said only that they wanted to give members the chance to review the agreement.

The injunction request also says CTU is putting the city's children in danger by closing down schools and leaving them nowhere to go.

The Chicago Sun-Times rebutted the idea that children were in grave danger, reporting that homicides in the first four days of the strike were even down from the same dates last year.

The district's "spur-of-the-moment decision to seek injunctive relief some six days later appears to be a vindictive act instigated by the mayor," said CTU spokeswoman Stephanie Gadlin.

Cook County Judge Peter Flynn seemed to agree this morning. He moved to delay a hearing on the board's request for an injunction until Wednesday, saying he wanted to speak with the union first.

To change the terms of the deal, the union's membership would have to reject the tentative agreement and send negotiators back to the table.

Gann, for one, is happy with the deal as is.

"There are a lot of things in the contract we didn't think we were going to get," she said. "No one thought we'd get them down to 30 percent" on evaluations.

Nonetheless, she's glad members get the chance to do a close reading.

"We want to make sure things are set up to benefit students and get the educational system more towards the way we want it to be," she said. "If it's not, we'll just keep fighting."

18

09 2012

by Leonard Isenberg
posted in LAUSD,UTLA
No Comments

‹ LAUSD: THIS AMERICAN LIE