Union Endorsement Transparency

Not that long ago, the Maine Education Association addressed criticism that they were out of touch. In a release entitled “Is the MEA out of touch?“(pdf warning), the teacher’s union defended their position on the Race to the Top, performance pay, and charter schools. Though the document is slim, it is welcome peek inside the MEA. These sorts of explorations into the mind of the MEA leadership are all too infrequent. When an influential organization like the MEA is less than forward with the public, the decisions they make become shrouded in mystery. The MEA should know that this lack of clarity is a breeding ground for questions about one’s grip on reality. One area where transparency would have worked to the MEA’s advantage would have been in their gubernatorial endorsement process. In fact, the MEA could have taken a page from another state union, the Maine State Employees Association.

At the end of June, the MEA endorsed Libby Mitchell for governor. Given the positions of the other candidates, and Mitchell’s record as a legislator, this was no surprise. Still, there is the lingering question of what made Mitchell so deserving of the MEA’s support? The MEA has not made the criteria used in their endorsement process public. We don’t know who was involved in the decision process. What members were allowed to attend? Were union teachers allowed to provide their input? If the MEA leadership is concerned about their image and not being seen as “a whiny self-serving union”, then they should be upfront about these sorts of procedures.

So again, what makes Mitchell so deserving? The MEA leadership’s public answers were vague at best.

from Dirigo Blue:

When Libby Mitchell is elected Governor, our students and our communities will have a real friend in the Blaine House. As a former classroom teacher, Libby understands the challenges and the rewards of teaching in a public school. She understands that educators must be partners and collaborators in making sure all of Maine’s schools are successful.

Our state faces difficult times ahead. We expect to have to confront some tough choices as a State during the next four years. The Federal Government continues to experiment with “contests” to decide which public schools get funding. While the majority of Maine’s schools continue to perform well, some are showing signs of falling behind. As many of our educators near retirement, we must make sure that our state is attracting the best and the brightest young teachers who are well prepared to teach our students and prepare them for their futures.

Maine needs an experienced, competent, and committed leader. Maine needs someone with proven leadership skills and a bipartisan track record. Maine needs someone focused on improving our great public schools.

How does the MEA think we should “attract the best and brightest”? What are the “tough choices” Mitchell has the skills to tackle? The only thing abundantly clear is that the MEA really can’t stand the Race to the Top. The best that can be done is to make inferences as to what those answers are. What does it mean that Mitchell will be a “real friend” in the Blaine House? What that means to one person could mean something completely different to someone else. This is by no means a slam on Mitchell’s record on education. While I don’t agree with all of her positions, we do have some common ground. I agree that partnering local businesses with schools can create some great learning opportunities and that instilling life-long learning is essential, for a few examples. No, this is about the MEA leadership working behind the curtain. If they really wanted the trust and respect of Mainers, including their own members, the MEA leadership wouldn’t just pay lip service to being for Maine’s students. They’d open up their doors and prove it.

If the MEA was public with their endorsement questionnaire and interview process, we could sit and compare why Mitchell received the support and the other four candidates did not. There would be no guessing. What was most important to the MEA would be on the table. We could see what this endorsement really means. There could really be some meat, rather than just a thin broth. A name on a list.

A recent op/ed by Eliot Cutler gives us our only public look at the process.

Throughout four pages and eight long questions, the word “student” appeared twice in just one question, and even then only in asking whether teacher evaluations should be based upon measures of student performance (of course they should, but the teachers’ union says no.) There was not another mention of students or any reference to parents, taxpayers or creating jobs.

Here is what the MEA wanted to talk about: raising taxes, protecting the union’s first-class health plan, easing working conditions, higher teacher salaries (regardless of competence and performance) and a tax exemption for retired teachers.

There was one other question: Would I support or oppose the establishment of charter schools in Maine?

That is all we get. If it were not for this editorial by Cutler, neither the public nor most of the MEA members would have any idea what was asked.

The MEA also has never publicly corrected Cutler, so this is the only impression of the event there is. You would think the MEA might want to address Cutler’s claims. This makes the MEA seem disconnected and isolated. Yes, it makes them look out of touch. If we had had a public explanation from the MEA there would be no room to question. If their questionnaire was public, we could have a better understanding of the process and what they believed was relevant in Maine’s educational system.

One could ask the candidates to further explain the endorsement questions, but that shouldn’t be necessary. A quick trip to the MEA website should contain this information for the public to disseminate. The MEA leadership only need to look to another Maine union, the MSEA, for a lesson on how to accomplish this.

On July 9th, Eliot Cutler wrote a letter(pdf warning) to the MSEA-SEIU stating that he would not participate in their endorsement process. Cutler believed that because of Libby Mitchell’s “decades of work in Augusta on behalf of the [MSEA]” she had earned the endorsement and would certainly receive it. He goes on to tell the union he will work with them, include them in the decision-making process, and change the perception that “state employees put up unnecessary barriers to growth”. The union responded a few days later, asking Cutler to apologize for “accusing [the MSEA] of running a sham gubernatorial endorsement process”. This may be a harsh reaction to a fairly benign letter, but at least it was something. The MSEA took the time to briefly explain the content of their questionnaire. They even provided a link to the document itself(pdf warning). There are 19 questions total. Here are some highlights.

• Please explain your position on taxes, tax breaks and the general question of generating revenue. What would you do to balance the State budget?
• Public attacks on State workers and other publicly funded employees, combined with the steady erosion of their standards of living and job security, have undermined morale and harmed efforts to recruit and retain a new generation of public servants. As Governor, what would you do to reverse these trends and restore respect and pride in Maine’s public service?
• How have you demonstrated your ability to elicit cooperation and compromise from those who disagree with you, while maintaining the focus of the ideas you campaigned on to get elected?

There are some broad based questions and specific policy questions. You get a clear view of what the MSEA considers most important in this election.

Some items are available on the MEA’s website. The current MEA website, based on their parent NEA site, is a minor improvement over the previous version. The dreaded 404 “page not found” error was common. To navigate the old site was a chore at best. The current MEA site is easier to navigate and does include a search feature, but it is still lacking. A quick search of “school consolidation” shows a few recent articles. Missing is a proper archive of MEA statements, research, and news. Another disappointing misstep. The MEA could have shown their commitment to being open by providing easy access to their history. Again, the public and MEA members are left wondering. There are no dates on any of the articles. You just have to make inferences based on what the article is discussing. Most of what appears on the MEA’s website has been published in the Maine Educator MEA newsletter. However, the Maine Educator can not be found on the website as a whole. If the MEA leadership considers the articles featured in the Educator relevant for members, they are relevant to Maine at large. The lack of regular updates also shows a lack of commitment toward keeping channels open with the public.

The MEA neglects a great deal of what most of us consider common technology. Like to follow an RSS feed from the MEA’s site? There isn’t one. The MEA does not maintain a presence on either Twitter or Facebook. MEA President Chris Galgay does however use Twitter and Facebook. Galgay’s Facebook profile is protected.

An organization that doesn’t leave the public wanting is the Maine Heritage Policy Center, specifically Stephen Bowen. Recently Bowen has completed the admirable task of critiquing Maine’s Race to the Top application. Bowen has pour over the application in a thirteen part series. He has given praise and criticism were it is due. There is no question what pieces of the RttT app that Bowen thinks is successful, which pieces fail, and why. The MEA is not a dedicated research, so to present the same level of information that the MHPC does would be unreasonable. However, the MEA does have someone on staff for research, Brian Kilroy. Having updates from Kilroy available to the public would further debate and also a willingness to work together on solutions for Maine’s educational system.

There is another site that provides an invaluable service to those who follow Maine education. MDI Schools , run by Brian Hubbell, has archived a wealth of education news. Hubbell’s site contains press releases, news stories, and other education related links for the ed policy wonk. You can also find an excellent history of Maine school consolidation law. What you will not find a great deal of are articles directly from the MEA. There are related articles from Matthew Stone, news outlets, and myself, but few releases directly from the MEA.

Again, consider who attended the MEA’s endorsement meeting. Since there were roughly 200 people at the past MEA 82nd annual Representative Assembly, let’s assume 100 people were invited to attend this middle of summer event. Let’s also assume Chris Galgay and executive director Mark Gray were in attendance. Add the deputy director Rob Walker, Steve Crouse (Government Relations), Keith Harvie (Communications), Brian Kilroy (Research), their assistants Jamie Daggon, Hilda Grant Jones, and Cynthia Fabbricatore. That leaves 91 spots. There are 25,000 members of the MEA. The MEA represents not only K-12 teachers, but also school support staff (librarians, learning specialists, custodians, etc.), university faculty and staff, retired members, and MPBN. All of these groups have their own various interests. 91 non-MEA staff members out of 25,000 decided what is best for a wide variety of groups. That is very little representation for each affected group, each with members that pay dues to the union for proper representation. Without know who attended, members have no way of knowing if their interests were properly represented.

The MEA is a private organization so they are under no obligation to inform the public. Their influence does reach into the public sector, so the public does have a right to know what the MEA’s positions are and where they are using their influence. One would expect MEA members would be privy to their inner workings. Not so. The public believes that the MEA speaks as one voice for all members. This is not true. MEA members receive an e-newsletter. There is no archive of this letter, so those hoping to investigate if the MEA has fulfilled past promises to members cannot. During the vote to repeal the current school consolidation law last fall, many MEA members expressed not only their wish to see the law repealed, but to have the support of the MEA. The MEA however remained silent throughout the election.

The attitude from the MEA leadership fertilizes the gap between the union, its members, and the public. Their disconnect breeds the very attitudes toward their organization they seem to be so concerned about. The MEA wish to not be constantly on the defensive, yet they put Mainers in a position to constantly question them. They want Mainers to be respectful of them, yet they do not extend the same courtesy. The MEA wants Maine to work with them and be open to their ideas, yet they are almost a completely closed book to the public at large. In the 21st century, it is not difficult to be even the slightest bit transparent. If the MEA leadership really want to provide a valuable service to their members and Maine students they would open the doors. Honest debate and work is best accomplished with a healthy dose of transparency from everyone involved. We all want the same end, a quality education for Maine students. Planning how to get there should happen in the daylight.