Utah's lawmakers have a right to be upset by the Utah Education Association's decision to stage a one-day teachers' strike on Tuesday. Is this what they get for increasing the basic school funding formula by 5.5 percent last year?
Remember, this is the second one-day job action since the Legislature approved that generous increase. Teachers in the Granite District staged a one-day strike earlier this year.
No wonder House Majority Leader Kevin Garn, R-Layton, was moved to say, "It seems we can't ever do enough." Indeed, the union has not made it clear exactly what it wants.
Not only are state lawmakers under-appreciated, they are being stereotyped. The strike sends the message that the teachers' union doesn't think lawmakers understand the needs of education; that, somehow, they don't get it. That message is being absorbed by the public. A recent opinion poll found that 71 percent of Utahns believe lawmakers are not addressing school needs.
But they obviously do get it. Addressing school needs in Utah never has been easy. This is a state with large families, where a population of 2 million includes nearly a half million public school age students. Already, state lawmakers have devised a system in which all the income-tax revenue goes toward education. In fact, about half of all state revenues are earmarked for schools of one sort or another. Utahns spend a larger percentage of their incomes in school-related taxes than residents in virtually any other state. Real answers don't come as easy as the strike would suggest.
Why not work with lawmakers to draft an acceptable plan instead of walking off the job one month before the legislative session begins? And why not acknowledge that local school boards have as much, if not more, responsibility for giving teachers what they want?
This strike seems to be based on the recommendations of a legislative task force, not on any official action by lawmakers. But even that doesn't seem a satisfactory explanation. What was it the task for did that was so offensive? It was charged with recommending a long-term plan for education funding, and it came up with some reasonable proposals, including some the union had suggested. Why not build on those and negotiate something better in a spirit of cooperation?
What is the union's alternative plan? Union leaders have suggested allowing school districts to increase their revenues each year based on the inflation rate. Currently, they have to either accept the same revenues as the previous year or call for a tax increase. The task force actually recommended looking at this alternative. Union leaders also have suggested the state tax Internet purchases and give that money to schools.
In other words, their ideas are little different, and certainly no better, than any state lawmakers have suggested.
The simple truth is that Utah's long-term education challenges can't be solved simply by taxing and taxing some more. Education officials have to spend money more wisely and find ways to relieve the demand that burdens the public school system.
The time has come to at least consider a strong merit-pay system that would reward good work, as well as a tuition tax credit or voucher system that would make private school a more attractive alternative. This would relieve some of the demand on public schools while increasing their efficiency through competition.
Those are difficult solutions worthy of a difficult problem. A one-day strike does nothing but trivialize a complex issue.