Sign up for our newsletter

Support for Rebecca Friedrichs: Rally Unites Those Standing For Teacher Freedom

“We trust the teachers!” “Stand with Rebecca!” “Do it for the kids!” These were the overwhelming chants heard from the small but mighty forces of the rally on the steps of the Supreme Court this morning. These supporters came out and bared the freezing temperatures to stand by Rebecca Friedrichs, the public face of the heavily discussed court case, Friedrichs V. California Teacher’s Association. Teachers, political figures, and different organizations all spoke valiantly this morning to state why they “Stand with Rebecca”. Even though the numbers were few, those who were physically on Capitol Hill this morning stood to represent the innumerable other supporters across the country.

IMG_0994

These past few weeks have been filled to the brim with several different people looking to show their support for this case, all leading up to the hearing this morning. If you didn’t already know at this point, Rebecca Friedrichs is an elementary school teacher from California working to exercise her First Amendment right. She, along with many other teachers, wish to have the ability to choose where the money in their paychecks go. The point that was continuously reiterated in this morning’s rally, and what many people don’t seem to fully understand, is that this case isn’t about the unions. It’s about allowing the teacher’s the choice to either join the union, or opt out. Currently, even those teachers who choose not to participate in the union still have to pay agency fees for the collective bargaining of the unions, even if they don’t agree with the union’s policies.

IMG_0976

While the union argues that the money they collect from their non-members goes towards their efforts in supporting all teachers, Friedrichs counters by saying that this money is still being used to push items that she, and the other teachers, may not believe in. This morning it was made clear by several different speakers at the rally that when their money goes into those unions that they don’t support, their efforts as teachers continue to be limited. And unfortunately, the ones who pay the price of this limitation are the children. One prevailing theme that arose from the forces on the steps of the Supreme Court this morning was that these efforts are being pushed because teachers deserve to be treated the same as any other professional, with the right to choose the way in which they can be most effective at their job. If that is as a member of the union, great, if it isn’t, that’s still great.

IMG_1243

Regardless of the teacher’s affiliation, they deserve the right to choose whether or not they want to participate in the union, so that they can continue to have the ability to do their very best in priming this nation’s future. So, hopefully when the decision is finally made later this year the judges choose to “Do it for the kids!” and “Stand with Rebecca”..

IMG_1335

Written by:  Hanna Socha CER Intern


Additional Resources:
For more information on the rally and the case, click here

Press Release: Teachers Rally As Supreme Court Hears Teacher Freedom Case
High Court Takes on Teacher Freedom, National Review, January 11, 2016

Teachers Rally As Supreme Court Hears Teacher Freedom Case Today

January 11, 2016
Washington, D.C.

Teachers and parents from around the nation today at 9:00 am will gather outside of the U.S. Supreme Court in support of 10 California teachers as oral arguments are heard in their challenge, Friedrichs v. California Teachers Association et al., against the state requirement that they must fund their teacher’s union, even if they aren’t members.

“Paying fees to a union should not be a prerequisite for teaching,” said Jeanne Allen, Founder and President Emeritus of The Center for Education Reform. “Teachers – like all other Americans – should be permitted the freedom to join and choose to pay for the option of joining any organization, union or not.”

The plaintiffs in Friedrichs are asking the High Court to strike down Abood v. Detroit Board of Education, a 1977 case that permitted hundreds of dollars per teacher of “agency fees” to be deducted automatically from teacher paychecks regardless of whether or not they have chosen to be a union member. The 10 teachers in the California Friedrichs case, along with countless of their colleagues nationwide, believe they do not benefit from collective bargaining agreements because not only is it inherently political, but it actually hurts the potential to improve schools.

“Research indicates that next to parents and family, a teacher is the most important influence in a child’s life,” said Allen. “Laws that ensure teachers are rewarded, retained and advanced based on how they perform in adding value to the students who they teach, along with skills and responsibilities, have the potential to recapture and retain our high quality educators who want to be treated as professionals. The political clout behind unions however – with the smaller of the two teacher’s unions, The American Federation of Teachers, contributing $20 million this year’s election cycle – has sadly prevented real change from happening to policies like collective bargaining and agency fees at the state level.”

“This year, workplace freedom may become reality for teachers,” Allen continued, “but the first victory has already been achieved. These courageous teachers have exposed the public to the issue of education union collective bargaining power, something known only outside of education to all but the elite.”

More than fifty percent of the general public do not know how teachers are paid, how they are hired and retained, or that unions are even part of influencing mandates about all aspects of education’s human capital supply.

“Whether one agrees or not with the premise at the heart of the Friedrichs case, with education central to our personal productivity and our global success, we should welcome the controversy and the debate as a pathway to progress,” noted Allen.

The Supreme Court is expected to make a decision at the end of June 2016.

School voucher programs need to tread lightly on private schools

by Jason Russell
Washington Examiner
January 4, 2016

Louisiana’s school voucher program is actually harming students academically, according to a new working paper published by the National Bureau of Economic Research. While the paper will surely be used by school choice opponents to call for an end to the program, a detailed look shows that school choice advocates should instead use it to call for program reforms.

The paper showed that attending a private school participating in the Louisiana Scholarship Program would increase the likelihood of a failing math score by 50 percent. “Voucher effects for reading, science and social studies are also negative and large,” researchers wrote. “The negative impacts of vouchers are consistent across income groups, geographic areas, and private school characteristics, and are larger for younger children.”

The paper was authored by Atila Abdulkadiroglu with Duke University, Parag Pathak with MIT and Christopher Walters with the University of California at Berkeley.

The trio explained that students were learning less because the private schools participating in the voucher program were so bad, while high-quality private schools wouldn’t participate. Researchers found that private schools entering the program were quickly losing students, seemingly showing that schools enter the program in a last-ditch effort to maintain falling enrollment numbers.

If that’s the case, Louisiana needs to improve the program to ensure high-quality private schools are interested in participating. “These results suggest caution in the design of voucher systems aimed at expanding school choice for disadvantaged students,” researchers wrote.

School choice advocates have long urged school choice programs to regulate private schools only lightly or else high-quality schools would keep their distance. The Louisiana Scholarship Program has “significant regulatory intrusion on private school autonomy,” according to the Center for Education Reform. The problems include “required open enrollment for voucher students, mandatory state testing, and exclusion of new private schools from participating.” If a high-quality private school is doing fine without voucher students or those burdensome regulations, it has little reason to join the program. Overall, the group gives Louisiana’s voucher law a C grade, behind five other states and Washington, D.C.

Read the rest of the article here.

Who Is Rebecca Friedrichs?

Who Is Rebecca Friedrichs?

You keep seeing the name in regards to the #SCOTUS case being heard January 11, now get to know the veteran school teacher fighting for individual rights. 

(Thanks to ReasonTV‘s video!)

In a nutshell… she is:

  • A veteran teacher whose cause is for all teachers to have the right to decide for themselves whether or not they want to belong to and financially support a union.
  • Once a union rep, Friedrichs tried to work with the existing system and encountered tough opposition time and time again in dealing with her union, the CTA.

  • Rebecca is the lead plaintiff for 10 California teachers challenging the state requirement that they must fund their teacher’s union, even if they aren’t members of the union. On January 11, 2016, the US Supreme Court will hear oral arguments in her case, and she has the support of teachers, parents, students, and civil rights advocates nationwide in her fight.

Governor Doug Ducey Announces First Arizona Supreme Court Appointment

January 6, 2016

Office of the Arizona Governor Doug Ducey

PHOENIX – Governor Doug Ducey today announced the appointment of Phoenix attorney Clint Bolick, an independent, to the Supreme Court of Arizona.

This is Governor Ducey’s first appointment to the Supreme Court of Arizona.

Mr. Bolick specializes in United States and Arizona constitutional law, and also handles cases involving state and federal regulatory law, business and property regulation, health care, education, public pensions, family law and election law.

Mr. Bolick has served as vice president for litigation at the Goldwater Institute since 2007. Previously, he worked as president and general counsel of the Alliance for School Choice and as vice president and director of litigation for the Institute for Justice.  Mr. Bolick also worked as an attorney for the Landmark Legal Foundation, the United States Department of Justice, Civil Rights Division, the United States Equal Employment Opportunity Commission and the Mountain States Legal Foundation.

Mr. Bolick’s distinguished legal career has been devoted to advancing economic liberty, expanding educational choice, promoting freedom of speech and expression, and the fulfillment of the American Dream for individuals and small businesses.

“Clint is nationally renowned and respected as a constitutional law scholar and as a champion of liberty,” said Governor Ducey. “He brings extensive experience and expertise, an unwavering regard for the rule of law and a firm commitment to the state and citizens of Arizona. I’m confident Clint will serve impartially and honorably in this important role.”

“I am deeply honored by Governor Ducey’s appointment from a stellar group of nominees to the Arizona Supreme Court,” said Clint Bolick. “I cherish Arizona, our Constitution, and the precious freedoms it protects. I look forward to serving all of our citizens with integrity, fairness, compassion, and a devotion to justice.”

During the selection process, Governor Ducey and the Commission on Appellate Court Appointments received numerous letters, emails, and phone calls from Arizonans and national figures supporting Mr. Bolick’s nomination to the Supreme Court.

According to Melissa Penniman, director of curriculum and instruction in the Alhambra School District, “The school district in which I work is a high poverty, urban school district.  A year and a half ago, I reached out to Clint multiple times to ask assistance and advice regarding issues affecting our school district.  He listened to all sides of the issue and quickly understood the heart of the issue.  Clint was happy to oblige and provided an impartial perspective and reasonable course of action to take.  He demonstrated concern and compassion for our students, and advocacy for public education as a whole.”

George F. Will, national news columnist and public affairs commentator, wrote: “As the prime mover in landmark litigation, [Mr. Bolick] has repeatedly won from courts victories that have firmly established the constitutionality of programs that empower parents to make the choices directing the education of their children in public or private schools.”

G. Marcus Cole, Professor of Law at Stanford University, wrote: “I think that many Americans, including myself, view Arizona as a bastion of freedom in our country, and an example of how a state can promote the general welfare by respecting and protecting the freedom of its citizens.  But liberty is a fragile condition, under assault at all times from those with an interest in restricting it.  If my own liberty were under assault, the very first person I would seek to defend it would be Clint Bolick.  The people of Arizona could not have a better defender of their precious rights and liberties than Clint.”

Mr. Bolick graduated from the University of California at Davis School of Law and from Drew University with a Bachelor of Arts in Political Science and History.

Clint Bolick’s appointment to the Arizona Supreme Court was made to fill the vacancy created by the retirement of the Honorable Rebecca White Berch.

###

Teachers to Rally for Freedom at US Supreme Court Steps

January 6, 2015

On January 11, 2016, the US Supreme Court will hear a case brought by 10 California teachers challenging the state requirement that they must fund their teacher’s union, even if they aren’t members of the union.

Paying fees to a union should not be a prerequisite for teaching in a public school. Teachers deserve a choice. This year, workplace freedom, that choice, may become reality for teachers, and for all public employees.

I Stand With RebeccaHere’s why:

Why Teachers?

Why the Courts? 

Why Now?

(via The Center for Individual Rights)

Join us to show your support for California teacher Rebecca Friedrichs and teachers across the country who deserve the right to decide for themselves whether or not they want to belong to and financially support a union.  We would love to have your school and your educators represented to show the public and the media that this issue is about teacher freedom and professionalism first and foremost.

RALLY AT 9:00AM on the Supreme Court steps, 1 First Street NE.

LOCATION & DIRECTIONS
The Supreme Court of the United States is located on First Street NE between East Capitol Street and Maryland Avenue, adjacent to the U.S. Capitol and the Library of Congress. View area map.

By Metro (Subway):
The closest Metro stops are:
Capitol South (Orange, Blue and Silver Lines, 0.3 miles)
Union Station (Red Line, 0.5 miles).

By Metro Bus:
The Circulator (Navy Yard Line), 96, 97, and A11 buses all stop in front of the Supreme Court Building. The 32, 34, 36, and 39 buses stop at First Street and Independence Avenue, a two block walk from the Building.

Additional information on riding the Metro is available at the Washington Metropolitan Area Transit Authority.

By Train:
Amtrak, VRE, and MARC trains service Union Station, which is located approximately 0.5 miles from the Court.

By Car:
Street parking is extremely limited near the Supreme Court. The closest public parking garage is located at Union Station.

Please note that the Supreme Court is not accessible by private bus or passenger van. Please see designated bus routes and restrictions.

We hope to see you Monday!

More ways you can show your support for teacher freedom:

More information about the rally.

NEWSWIRE: JANUARY 5, 2016

Vol. 18, No. 1

ALL EYES ON THE SUPREME COURT. Next Monday, January 11, 2016, the Supreme Court will hear oral arguments in the Friedrichs v. California Teachers Association et al. case, which will give teachers the right to decide for themselves whether they want to belong and financially support a union.

WHY I’M FIGHTING MY TEACHERS UNION. Mr. Elrich, a math teacher in the Sanger Unified School District in California, writes in the Wall Street Journal that 82% of the public agrees that “no American should be required to join any private organization, like a labor union, against his will. “That’s all we’re asking,” he says regarding the Friedrichs case.

TEACHER FREEDOM. Research, data, and personal anecdotes on teacher freedom show teachers are interested in initiatives that advance their careers and explore innovative pay raises.

A TEACHER’S LEGACY. A fitting first public event by Acting Ed Sec John King was his visit today to a school recently re-named in honor of an amazing teacher and school leader. JoAnn “Jody” Leleck helped transform her Title 1 school into a place that not only attracted national attention because of its achievement and turnaround, but also had a lasting effect on the students and community at large. Those who knew her before she lost her battle to cancer know she put kids and education first before any consideration for adults.

OPPORTUNITY LEGACY. The fight for opportunity for those most disenfranchised from society lives on, thanks to the activities of the Jack Kemp Foundation and the Kemp Forum on Expanding Opportunity being held this weekend in South Carolina. A true pioneer of school choice, the Late Jack Kemp, former Congressman, US Housing Secretary, Champion of Civil Rights and Football star was revered by people on both sides of the political aisle for his service and impact on empowering the poor, fighting poverty and reducing injustice in housing, education, and in work. The forum in Columbia on January 9 includes a majority of presidential candidates who will join House Speaker Paul Ryan, Senator Tim Scott and the Morning Joe anchors in discussing how they might address the opportunity gap. “The Kemp Foundation is honored to provide this Forum for candidates to address issues that have too often been relegated to the ‘back of the bus,” said Foundation president Jimmy Kemp.

JOIN US! We’ll be rallying at the Supreme Court steps, 1 First Street NE Washington DC beginning 9:00am Monday Jan. 11 to show support for Rebecca Friedrichs and teachers across the nation who just want the right to choose. RSVP or for more info contact 202-750-0016 or cer@edreform.com.

Screen Shot 2016-01-05 at 2.34.58 PM

NEBRASKA’S TURN. A state that ranks near the bottom on Parent Power has a new statewide effort – Educate Nebraska – to create new opportunities for kids. Get involved here.

MILWAUKEE VOUCHERS PREVAIL. DOJ quits its investigation into the nation’s oldest voucher program. Kevin P. Chavous, executive counsel to the American Federation for Children and CER board member said, “this is another example of the U.S. Department of Justice trying to interfere with the parents’ right to choose the best school for their son or daughter, and similar to the outcome in Louisiana – parental choice prevailed.”

Why I’m Fighting My Teachers Union

I don’t want to be forced to pay for a political agenda I don’t support. Now the Supreme Court will rule.

By Harlan Elrich
Wall Street JournalOpinion
January 3, 2016

I am one of 10 California teachers suing to end compulsory union dues in Friedrichs v. California Teachers Association, which will be heard by the Supreme Court Jan. 11. Our request is simple: Strike down laws in 23 states that require workers who decline to join a union to pay fees anyway. In our view, paying fees to a union should not be a prerequisite for teaching in a public school. No one in the U.S. should be forced to give money to a private organization he or she disagrees with fundamentally. Teachers deserve a choice.

I have taught in public schools for nearly 30 years, mostly in California. I grew up in the Central Valley, and though I’m the son of two teachers and related to eight more, I didn’t think I’d choose a career in education. But when I went off to college, I started tutoring other students in math and realized that I was good at teaching and I really enjoyed it.

I’ve never regretted my decision. Sunday nights are joyous because I know I’ll be going to work in my classroom, with my students, on Monday morning.

I was a member of the union for years and even served as a union representative. But the union never played an important role in my school. When most teachers sought guidance, they wanted help in the classroom and on how to excel at teaching. The union never offered this pedagogic aid.

Instead, the union focused on politics. I remember a phone call I received before a major election from someone in the union. It was a “survey,” asking teachers whether they would vote for so-and-so if the election were held tomorrow. I disagreed with every issue and candidate the union was promoting. After that conversation, I thought about what the union represents. Eventually, I realized that my dues—about $1,000 a year—went toward ideas and issues that ran counter to my beliefs.Screen Shot 2016-01-04 at 6.03.29 PM

So I opted out of paying the portion of union dues that is put toward political activities. The Supreme Court requires unions to provide this option, but I was surprised by how difficult this is. To opt out you have to resign from the union and relinquish all benefits—insurance, legal representation, maternity leave. Although you are prohibited from voting on any new contract, you are still forced to pay for the union’s collective bargaining, on the theory that the union negotiates for everyone.

But over time I’ve learned that the union’s collective bargaining is every bit as political. The union is bargaining for things I’d never support. For example, in my community, the union spends resources pushing for ever-higher teacher salaries. I’m in favor of a decent salary for teachers, but I think we are already well paid compared with everyone else in the Central Valley.

The area has endured hard times in the past few years. Parents of my students have been laid off, and many are still unemployed. Some have moved in with grandparents or other family members to stay afloat financially. Families struggle to make ends meet. That the union would presume to push, allegedly on my behalf, for higher salaries at the expense of smaller class sizes and avoiding teacher layoffs is preposterous.

The union also negotiates policies on discipline, grievances and seniority that make it difficult—if not impossible—to remove bad teachers. Over three decades I’ve seen my share of educators who should be doing something else. One example that sticks with me involved a colleague whom everyone, students and faculty, knew was incompetent. All on campus knew that he was biding his time until retirement.

These situations are sad. Students were relying on this teacher for an education, and he did not deliver. Yet he could do exactly as he pleased because the union had negotiated protections based on seniority. Sometimes the very teachers who shouldn’t be in the classroom are protected from layoffs thanks to seniority rules, while slightly younger but more competent colleagues are given the ax—again, thanks to collective bargaining.

The teachers in my family disagree about the union. Some support it and others don’t. But everyone agrees that each of us should have the right to decide whether to join. So I’m not against the union; I’m against the state forcing me to pay union fees against my will.

Most Americans agree. Harvard’s Kennedy School of Government recently released its ninth annual “Education Next” opinion poll. A majority of teachers who had an opinion, 50% of those surveyed, favored ending mandatory agency fees. Most Americans, regardless of political persuasion, are also on our side. A Gallup poll last year found that 82% of the public agrees that “no American should be required to join any private organization, like a labor union, against his will.” That’s all we’re asking.

Mr. Elrich is a math teacher in the Sanger Unified School District.

New initiative vows to bring charter schools to Nebraska

By Kristyna Engdahl
KETV.com
January 3, 2016

An aggressive new initiative vows to bring charter schools to Nebraska. The only problem is that the state is one of seven where they’re not allowed.

Educate Nebraska, which launched Sunday, wants to change that. Officials said the competition created by charter schools increases performance by both teachers and students.

“This is all about freedom,” Educate Nebraska Executive Director Katie Linehan said. “No one’s forced to go to a charter school, no one’s forced to work at a charter school.”

Linehan said it does, though, give parents a choice.

A charter school is a public school without being part of the public school district. It’s monitored by a state-appointed group, but families get more say in performance.

“If a charter school is not performing, it closes, as it should,” Linehan said.

Under the charter model, state funding would follow the student, which Linehan said comes at no extra cost to taxpayers.

There are about 500 schools in Nebraska. According to data from the Nebraska Department of Education, some of the lowest-performing schools are within a 5-mile radius in Northeast Omaha.

“We have a school up the street, an OPS school, that has 12 percent proficiency in math,” Linehan said.

Read the full article here.

Who Gets To Teach The Children?

At a major EdReform.com event, former U.S. Education Secretary, once CER board member and now radio personality William J. Bennett asked the big question that’s at the heart of what we do every day:

“WHO GETS TO TEACH THE CHILDREN AND WHAT DO WE TEACH THEM?”(Plato)

The answer might seem complicated to many but for us it’s fairly straightforward – The “who” is those schools and educators to whom the parents entrust their children. As for what we teach them, we share the philosophy of most reformers that the content should be deep, rich and rigorous.

For twenty-two years, The Center for Education Reform has championed policies that allow for parents to direct the education of their children, and for content and standards that represent the bedrock principles of our democracy. How we get them, who tests them, who holds them to account and many more related issues are often controversial. We believe it’s okay to have controversial debates when we are dealing with education. And we know that when we empower parents, communities and educators with the freedom to innovate and the choice to engage together, substantive educational outcomes occur.

As the Founder and President-Emeritus of the Center, I’m enormously proud of the education reform movement and its success all these years in ensuring that collectively we keep our eyes on the most promising and important work we can do to ensure great education for children. Organizations such as Students First, American Federation for Children, FOCUS, Building Hope, Getting Smart, and literally hundreds of others have kept the nation’s attention focused on the most essential issues.

As we enter another New Year full of promise and hope, we invite you to engage with us in ensuring that the most fundamental questions facing our nation – Who gets to teach the children and what do they teach them? – are answered clearly and forcefully in state halls and communities nationwide.

All the best for a Happy, Healthy and Impactful New Year!