Legacy Laws Hurt Providence Public School Students. Question 1 Offers a Solution

Get stories like these delivered straight to your inbox. Sign up for The 74 Newsletter

This article is part of The 74’s EDlection 2024 coverage, which takes a look at candidates’ education policies and how they might impact the American education system after the 2024 election.

The tug-of-war between the city of Providence and the Rhode Island Department of Education over the latter’s takeover of the city’s public schools, now in its fifth year, would be humorous if it weren’t so ugly for the kids.

But on Nov. 5, voters have the power to give the situation a makeover.

Failing urban students is a time-honored habit in Rhode Island, first documented exhaustively in the 1993 ProBE report. The equally depressing 2019 Johns Hopkins report also focused on toxic provisions in the Providence teachers contract.

But unlike those two reports, the May 2024 legislative commission report, led by Sen. Sam Zurier, a Providence Democrat, dug deeper, delving into certain state laws that function like concrete shoes, drowning any hope for pro-education teacher contracts.

Most of these laws are antiquated legacies from the 1960s and 1970s when teachers first unionized. They wanted better pay, but also protections from insults like getting fired for being pregnant. At the time, unionization advocates turned to the already established labor contracts in the auto industry for examples they could adapt.

Back then, the historical context was radically different. In 1950, the public school dropout rate was 52%. But, no problem. Young people with limited education could get good middle class jobs in the then-booming manufacturing economy. No longer.

Auto labor and management negotiated salary, benefits and work conditions. But most work conditions were built into the design and function of assembly lines. Loyal, competent workers, doing similar if not identical work, got annual step raises as well as assurances that senior members had first dibs on advancement. Fair enough.

But teachers are college-educated professionals whose work conditions are unique to each school and its student population. Most of their work conditions should be decided by them, in conjunction with the school community.

The Zurier commission heard expert testimony about how these tired old laws prevent unionized schools from entering the 21st century. Schools can’t improve the quality of their personnel or deploy resources to meet the needs of their kids.

As a result, it doesn’t matter who controls Providence’s ungovernable school system.To stay focused on the city’s kids, the commission’s legislative recommendations apply only to Providence schools. They are:

General Law Title 16-13-6. Suspension because of decrease in school population — Seniority — Reinstatement.

For unionized teachers, hiring by seniority is the law. When the student population decreases – which is happening nationally – or a district’s budget is stressed for whatever reason, administrators have no say over who stays or goes.

This practice is also known as LIFO, or Last In, First Out. Usually awarded after three  years of teaching, tenure gives solid job security to sub-par teachers. LIFO can also erase efforts to diversify the workforce because many teachers of color are new to the profession.

Wise, willing labor and management leaders can negotiate whatever they want in a three-year contract, but the law makes their decisions easy targets for lawsuits. One expert told the commission about how a new Providence superintendent dismantled Hope High School’s lauded redesign to appease those who resented Hope’s flexibility and subsequent success. The law was on their side.

RI General Law Title 16-7-29. Minimum salary schedule.

Municipalities and their school districts must establish “a salary schedule recognizing years of service, experience, and training for all certified personnel regularly employed in the public schools and having no more than twelve (12) annual steps.”

Also known as “lock-step” pay, each year teachers get a “step pay” bump (as well as a raise, usually), no matter the teacher’s performance, which the law makes irrelevant.

Administrators can’t adjust salary to make hard-to-fill positions more attractive or reward teachers for taking on more responsibility. Choices about deploying fiscal resources are off limits for incentivizing or, yes, disciplining anyone on staff.

RI is only one of 14 states that still has a lock-step salary statute.

Title 16-13-4. Statement of cause for dismissal — Hearing — Appeals — Arbitration.

Under this law, terminating a non-performing teacher opens a Pandora’s box of such onerous demands that efforts to dismiss are literally not worth it. The sub-par teacher holds all the cards, forcing administrators to choose between putting up with a “bad apple” or spending their career trying to remove a dead spot in kids’ education.

The commission cites an example of a teacher terminated for cause in 2014. After the initial, evidence-laden termination letter, the case went to a second district hearing and then “an appeal to a hearing officer, a review by the Commissioner, a second review by the Commissioner, an appeal to the Council on Elementary and Secondary Education and an appeal to the Superior Court which upheld the termination.”

The matter might still go to the Supreme Court.

Little has changed since the 1960s, thanks to these legacy laws.

So, given the legislature’s reluctance to free schools from these laws, the only avenue forward is to approve Ballot Question #1, which asks voters if Rhode Island should hold a constitutional convention. The question comes up every 10 years. The last such convention was held in 1986.

Bear in mind that the “Vote No” fliers coming to our houses are funded by teachers unions, mainly the D.C-based Sixteen Thirty Fund, run by a former leader from the National Education Association, the largest public-services union in the U.S. Teachers unions wield much power in Rhode Island.  Their job is to fight for the adults, even at the expense of the kids and the state’s workforce.

I’m voting yes on Question #1.  How else are we ever going to get rid of those terrible laws?

Rhode Island Current is part of States Newsroom, a nonprofit news network supported by grants and a coalition of donors as a 501c(3) public charity. Rhode Island Current maintains editorial independence. Contact Editor Janine L. Weisman for questions: info@rhodeislandcurrent.com. Follow Rhode Island Current on Facebook and X.

Get stories like these delivered straight to your inbox. Sign up for The 74 Newsletter