CPD IN THE NEWS

It is always amusing to be the subject of a John McClaughry jeremiad. While I don’t mind being labeled as the “foremost defender” of public education, he insists on giving me full personal credit for what is a state school board position.

In the instant case, John appears to be affronted by the suggestion that private (independent) schools that take public money must actually be held accountable for that money. This principle is at the core of the state board’s review of the independent school rules. Now this seems like a straightforward and fundamentally democratic concept that is generally accepted, but it has been a long-standing problem for some.

The law (16 VSA 166) provides a list of reporting requirements for independent schools if they want to chow down at the public trough. Unfortunately, as far back as the 1914 Carnegie Commission, we find evidence of the refusal of some independent schools to provide private school data even though it was the law of the land. (At that time, the Cubs were still basking in the glory of their World Series victory.)

The second paramount principle is that we have to educate all the children — regardless of needs and handicaps. That’s a necessity in a democracy. Denying a child admission on the basis of a handicap is, in most cases, illegal. Furthermore, it’s wrong. Public schools serve every child. The false fear John peddles is that the private school can’t afford to serve these children. That’s incorrect. It’s really quite simple. While great eruptions of umbrage are displayed, this problem has been solved for years. The private school contracts with (or hires) a specialist who bills the costs back to the public school. Approval in a given area requires that one sheet of paper be filed with the state. As simple as the solution actually is, some independent schools refuse to adopt an equal opportunity policy.

Instead, John proposes that Vermont “clone” Florida’s McKay Scholarship program where parents can choose the school for their handicapped child. That hasn’t worked out too well. If you think a “business management class” that sends students onto the street to panhandle is an acceptable education, then the McKay program may be just your thing. The Florida Department of Education has uncovered “substantial fraud,” including schools that don’t exist, non-existent students, and classes held in condemned buildings and public parks. And the state of Florida does not have the staff to adequately monitor the program. This is a recipe for abuse. Last May, the Center for Popular Democracy estimated that $216 million in charter school money went out the back door.

Finally, John raises the cost question and says private school scholarships would be “less expensive.” Yet he also criticizes the cost of the state’s excess public school capacity. Now let’s look at Vermont’s private independent school numbers. In 1998, there were 68 independent schools, and by 2016, the number had exploded to 93. In the decade 2004-14, independent school enrollments went down from 4,361 to 3,392. A 37 percent increase in schools with a 29 percent drop in students suggests somebody needs to revisit their business plan.

Taking it all together, (1) all who profit from the public treasury must be accountable for that money, (2) children have the right to be admitted to private schools, free of discrimination, on an equal opportunity basis, (3) private schools are a part of our system, (4) the public purse must be protected from fraud and abuse, and (5) directly or indirectly building and operating a parallel school system would be inordinately expensive and wasteful. Do these principles sound reasonable?

William J. Mathis is managing director of the National Education Policy Center and a member of the Vermont state Board of Education. The views expressed here are his own and do not represent the views of any group with which he is associated.

Source

“There are thousands and thousands of retail employees now working at companies owned by Wall Street and private equity firms, and this kind of financial instability in the sector makes it hard for workers to have sustainable careers,’’ said Carrie Gleason, a director at the Center for Popular Democracy, which is working on the campaign along with Organization United for Respect. “We’re organizing to ensure there’s some accountability for owners who aren’t necessarily running the businesses in good faith."

Read the full article here.

On May Day 2006, hundreds of thousands of immigrants participated in actions across the country, skipping work and school in New York, Chicago and Los Angeles to protest a bill that would have made it a felony to be in the United States without documentation. The Bush-era legislation ultimately floundered. May Day, rooted in national protests for an eight-hour workday, solidified its status as a day for immigrant action.

"Those 2006 demonstrations were huge," said Joshua Freeman, a history and labor professor at CUNY. "It was a little bit of an earthquake in several ways. Never before had so many immigrants publicly presented themselves to support their rights."

Read full article here.

Este mes, el alcalde de la ciudad de Nueva York Bill de Blasio anunció un sueldo mínimo garantizado de $15 para todos los empleados del gobierno municipal para fines de 2018. Esta es una gran victoria para más de 50,000 empleados en toda la ciudad que pasan apuros para mantener a su familia, incluidos aquellos directamente en planilla y decenas de miles que trabajan en organizaciones sin fines de lucro contratadas por la ciudad.

A diferencia de Seattle y Los Ángeles, donde los funcionarios municipales tienen el poder para aumentar el sueldo mínimo de todos los empleados de su ciudad, el alcalde De Blasio no puede aumentar los salarios de todos los trabajadores de la ciudad de Nueva York unilateralmente. El gobernador Andrew Cuomo y la legislatura estatal tienen ese poder. Los esfuerzos del gobernador por incrementar el salario mínimo a $15 se están viendo obstaculizados por el Senado estatal, que está controlado por los republicanos.

La decisión de De Blasio de aumentar los sueldos de los empleados municipales es un paso independiente crucial hacia una ciudad más equitativa y debe inspirar a otras ciudades en el país. También refleja el poder e ímpetu de un movimiento revolucionario encabezado por los trabajadores que exigen salarios más altos en todo el país.

Incluso mientras los gobiernos estatales y el gobierno federal arrastran los pies con respecto al asunto inevitable de un salario mínimo decente para las familias trabajadoras en los Estados Unidos, el audaz paso que dio De Blasio muestra que las ciudades pueden y deben tomar las riendas del problema.

El aumento del salario mínimo por el alcalde se produjo poco después de su anuncio el mes pasado de que a los 20,000 empleados no sindicalizados de la ciudad se les otorgaría seis semanas de licencia remunerada por maternidad/paternidad y hasta 12 semanas, cuando se combine con licencias existentes. El alcalde ahora ha pasado a negociar los mismos beneficios con los sindicatos de la ciudad. Nuevamente, los trabajadores del sector privado de la ciudad de Nueva York deben esperar a que Albany o Washington, D.C. tome medidas con respecto a licencia familiar pagada para todos.

Las medidas recientes del alcalde De Blasio apoyan su objetivo de sacar a 800,000 neoyorquinos de la pobreza durante los próximos diez años. Más de 20 por ciento de la población de la ciudad vive en condiciones de pobreza, un enorme sector de una ciudad normalmente relacionada con extraordinaria riqueza.

En los dos últimos años se ha visto un ímpetu sin paralelo de parte de los propios trabajadores exigiendo sueldos decentes, desde la ciudad de Nueva York hasta Los Ángeles y Chicago, lo que resultó en aumentos salariales para los trabajadores de negocios de comida rápida y otros grupos.

Los trabajadores no esperan pacientemente a los funcionarios públicos; se están organizando de manera sin precedente. Alcaldes progresistas como De Blasio están respondiendo con políticas sensatas, mientras los funcionarios que no desean responder ya saben lo que se viene. Ciudades como Los Ángeles, Nueva York y Chicago están preparando el terreno y mostrando que es posible actuar independientemente de gobiernos estatales y el gobierno federal.

Además, varios estados han promulgado leyes que aumentan el salario mínimo por encima del mísero estándar de $7.25 por hora. Actualmente se realizan campañas en 14 estados y cuatro ciudades para aumentar el sueldo mínimo y los estándares a favor de los trabajadores. El ímpetu se está convirtiendo en una avalancha que tendrá consecuencias profundas en las elecciones presidenciales del 2016.

Casi la mitad de los trabajadores del país ganan menos de $15 por hora y 43 millones se ven forzados a trabajar cuando están enfermos o tienen la necesidad urgente de cuidar a alguien, o de lo contrario, ponen en peligro su empleo. Es el momento de que las ciudades escuchen a sus trabajadores y pasen por encima de la pasividad estatal y federal a fin de permitir que millones de estadounidenses que trabajan muy duro mantengan a sus familias.

Source: El Diario