Allegheny Institute Blog

After seven days on the picket line, Baldwin-Whitehall teachers announced they are returning to work a day earlier than they are required by law to do. A union spokesman, in what appears to be a feeble attempt at humor, was quoted as saying, “We could be on strike until Friday, but our team felt that this was in the best interest of students.”

Now what in the union’s recent behavior, including walking off the job for seven days, would incline anyone to believe that the union really has the students’ interest at heart? From their point of view nothing was accomplished. They were not able to rally community support for their desired contract terms, and in bargaining terms they are no closer to getting what they want than before the walkout.

Let’s be clear. The teachers went on strike for one reason and one reason only. They wanted to poke their figurative finger in the figurative eye of the school board and taxpayers. And under Pennsylvania’s egregiously misguided law that allows to teachers to strike and still get a full years pay, the union can, with relative impunity, disrupt the lives of parents, students and other non-union employees.

Contract talks remain at a stalemate as the school board held firm in the face of the union’s demands and walkout. Baldwin-Whitehall, along with many other Pennsylvania communities, simply cannot afford to raise school property taxes, which are already very high. The cost to the community in terms of becoming less attractive to homebuyers and the consequent effect on home prices just cannot be lightly dismissed.

The game played by teacher unions is despicable. They use wages paid in other much higher salary districts to argue for big increases. If they are successful, then other district unions will follow their lead, with the end result that virtually all districts are paying more than they would in a purely free market driven environment. When there are 1300 applicants for each teacher position opening in Allegheny County, there is only one inference to be drawn. Teacher pay and benefits are way out of line with other occupations and teachers in other states.

Local politicians have been looking for the next new growth industry, ever since the decline of the steel industry, that will propel the Pittsburgh area into prosperity. They have focused on computer technologies and biomedical sciences as areas to focus their efforts and subsidies. While there have been some successes, economic growth in these sectors has been slow. But they have missed on a sure-fire job growth strategy: illegal aliens. Instead of throwing millions of dollars in subsidies at businesses that have shown little or no real job growth, why not shift the focus toward illegal aliens?

Immigration boosters have always looked favorably upon illegal aliens as people who will do jobs that Americans will not, such as agriculture, custodial, and other service sector jobs. But what they fail to mention is the myriad of spin off jobs that illegals create. For example, it has been well documented, by border states such as Arizona and New Mexico, that illegals increase the demand for health care at local hospitals. While those states bemoan the strain illegals put on health care resources, local officials can use this opportunity to increase the number of people on hospital payrolls.

Last month’s tragic accident on the PA Turnpike, that involved an illegal alien hired as a truck driver, has immigration opponents clamoring for tougher laws to prevent this sort of occurrence. If illegal aliens were to locate to the Pittsburgh area, communities can take the opportunity to hire more police to patrol the streets and investigate accidents.

Illegal aliens tend to move into areas with their families in tow, which often means more children. An influx of children will mean that more teachers will be needed for our public school system. As it is, for every one public school opening in Allegheny County, there are hundreds of applicants. As illegal aliens and their families move to the Pittsburgh area, many of these applicants can finally land jobs as public school teachers.

If area leaders would devote more time and energy into recruiting illegal aliens—who by some estimates number more than 10 million in the United States and growing daily—they could easily boost the region’s employment numbers. Of course the downside is that most of these jobs are public sector government jobs which are supported by tax dollars. It is unlikely that these illegals would pay enough in taxes, if any at all, to cover the increased costs to government entities.

The Tribune Review reports some alarming statistics on college-level remedial learning at the Community College of Allegheny County (CCAC). In the fall of 2003, 62 percent of students took a remedial class because they placed too low on college level placement exams. For black students, the percentage was a stunning 88 percent at the Community College’s main campus on the North Side.

Those numbers are part of a five-state study examining what it will take in order to reduce minority enrollment in remedial classes. That study has so far found that 77 percent of minority students take remedial math compared to 67 percent of white students. The state and non-profits are now sponsoring a program called “Achieving the Dream” to understand how to better educate minority students.

This information is especially damning considering the fact that here in Pennsylvania we are endlessly bombarded with the claim that our public school teachers are among the nation’s best and deserve their high salaries. They hold strikes to prove it. The Allegheny Institute’s most recent Policy Brief highlighted the disparity between public school salaries and those for white-collar workers.

Wonder what highly-paid teacher was involved with these students, some of whom told CCAC officials that “we didn’t read a book in high school”.

Of course, the teachers would likely say that that is the exception to the rule. The question is, how can anyone graduate from high school having never read a book? Despite all their whining about being underpaid and for the great job they are doing, when confronted with such obvious examples of their shortcomings, they have no good answers. Union solidarity and browbeating the taxpayer. That is their answer to any criticism.

Here’s a fantasy about how parents and taxpayers can turn the tables on striking teacher unions. Wouldn’t it be marvelous if the overwhelming majority of parents and students in a district suffering through a strike were to decide that when the teachers come back to work, they will go on strike? Students would stay away from school for the same number of days the teachers were out on picket lines. The students and parents could march around carrying signs demanding more respect from the teachers who should be more professional than to maliciously foul up their education and disrupt their lives.

If this were to catch on, it could force the legislature into finally putting an end to the teachers’ right to strike in Pennsylvania, the worst state in the union for teacher strikes.

To enhance the fantasy, wouldn’t it be tremendous if taxpayers in the school district were to pro-rate their school taxes and withhold payment for the days teachers are out. If teachers walk out for 10 days, then the taxpayer would hold back 10 divided by 180, or 6 percent of their school tax.

Granted, none of this is likely to happen because of the coordination it would require. But at some point, maybe parents and taxpayers will simply get mad enough to demand an end to the enormous advantage in bargaining power the right to strike gives the unions.

Back in early January the Penguins’ ownership made headlines by visiting Kansas City to discuss relocating the team. They toured the under-construction Sprint Center and listened as City and arena officials made a pitch to lure the team. The team’s owners allegedly came away impressed with the offer and said they would give Kansas City an answer in thirty days.

Well, thirty days (and then some) have passed and there still has been no decision. The team has obviously used Kansas City as a pawn to put pressure on Governor Rendell, who is leading the negotiations on the arena deal. If Kansas City’s offer of a rent-free, 50-50 partnership were really superior, the team would have committed to move by now. Maybe the realization has set in that Pittsburgh is the better hockey market. Or maybe the offer given by Pittsburgh officials really is the best they’re able to get and moving to Kansas City is a fool’s errand.

One thing’s for sure, there is no help coming from the NHL Commissioner. The Commissioner was steadfast in denying the team the approval to move when they were up for sale last year. Now that the sale has fallen through, he has flip-flopped and now supports ownership’s decision to relocate if a suitable arena deal cannot be reached in Pittsburgh. But who will decide what “suitable” deal is. Sounds like the Commissioner is in Lemieux’s pocket.

Either way the team’s saga is frustrating not only local hockey fans, but officials in Kansas City as well. As one Kansas City reporter noted, as the deadline approached it was “…just another day in the continuing story of ‘As the Penguins Turn’”.

To repeat our earlier admonition; let the Sports and Exhibition Authority (SEA) take the promised Plan B money, issue arena revenue bonds for the remaining $62 million needed to build the new facility. If the Penguins want to stay they can negotiate a rental agreement with the SEA. If they leave, Pittsburgh can easily recruit a replacement team from the financially struggling franchises around the country to play in the new arena. It is by all accounts a great hockey town. Or is it only a good hockey town when it has attractive young stars?

Officials at the State Department of Education might soon find themselves in the thick of a dispute between the Pittsburgh Public Schools and the independent, public charter schools that seek approval to operate within the school district’s boundaries. The core of the issue is the belief on the part of charter school officials that have been denied approval that the Pittsburgh Public Schools don’t want competition.

Of course, there are six charters located in the Pittsburgh school district (according to the Department of Education’s list) and there is a formal appeal process in place in the Education Department (the Charter Appeals Board, which has heard four appeals for schools related to the Pittsburgh Public Schools going back to 1999). But look at the rationale for the Pittsburgh School Board denying a charter to the latest applicant: “a lack of community support, incomplete curriculum and failure to offer anything the district doesn't already provide city students”.

That last reason is outlandish—so what if the charter does not provide anything not currently offered by the school district? That’s the same rationale used by Pittsburgh taxicab companies to keep competitors out of the market and that the Port Authority does to keep its monopoly hold on mass transit. And it is probably the same argument that used to be made by natural gas suppliers, electric companies, and airlines. Competition has tremendously remade those industries, and education is not exception.

Maybe the City schools are just hoping that the appeals process drains some applicants of resources or they get discouraged and go away. But if the Pittsburgh Schools have the ultimate confidence in their product, then denials ought to be made only on issues related to health and safety of the location, not on the product itself.

After all, why would any parent send a child to a charter school if the alternative City school is doing such a good job?

Allegheny County voters will once again be asked to decide the fate of an elective row office this May. If the ballot question is approved, the Sheriff will become an appointed position and its duties will be folded into the County Police Department. Clearly, the legal issues surrounding the Sheriff’s office have helped moved the proposed elimination along, as did the fact that “sheriff's deputies decided to support the measure after learning that they would make $4,000 more a year once merged with the county police and that instead of having to wait until 55 to retire, they could retire at age 50”. Cost efficiency for Allegheny County was once again at the top of the list!

It is probably a good thing that the changes, if approved, don’t go into effect until 2010 because the County Executive is going to need the time to figure out how to squeeze some savings out of this merger. The ordinance notes that once the elected office is abolished and the Executive appoints a new Sheriff, whose office will then be merged into the County Police Department, there might be one person serving as both Sheriff and Police superintendent, or there may not be. Also, the ordinance guarantees that the seniority, sick time, and vacation benefits of Sheriff’s deputies and County police officers will be retained. After the merger, the collective bargaining practices of the County police will cover all employees, but the training of new hires will include that training subject to state laws governing Sheriff’s deputies.

This looks like voter approval might lead to a significant institutional clash over turf and responsibility. Let’s hope the goals of efficiency and economical service don’t get lost.

The General Assembly is once again at work trying to change the collection scheme for the Emergency Services Tax—the $52 tax that is levied on employees in the municipality in which they work. Because the $52 bite can be taken all at once at the beginning of the year, hitting many low-income earners especially hard, Senate Bill 218 would change the collection to a $1 per week deduction to be sent to the municipality by the employer quarterly.

A bill similar to this passed the legislature last session, but it was ultimately vetoed by the Governor because he felt that municipalities would not have enough time to adjust to the new collection method and were counting on the money. Too bad such sentiments were never extended to the taxpayers, especially in Pittsburgh, where the City is deducting the money from everyone’s paycheck, then forcing those making under the exemption level of $12,000 to prove they are entitle to a refund.

In the vetoed bill Pittsburgh would have been allowed to keep collecting the tax the way they were until 2010, basically saying a little bit of beating up on low wage earners is not too bad if the City is on hard times. But that same exemption was not given to any other municipality in financial distress.

Presumably the new bill will eliminate the Pittsburgh exemption.

Suitors for the Pittsburgh Penguins keep surfacing. Kansas City officials met with team owners and discussed a possible relocation. But other cities have surfaced as well. Even though Houston, Oklahoma City and Tulsa have not been in contact with the team, each has expressed an interest in luring the Penguins should arena talks in Pittsburgh fall apart. A Tulsa investor, who would lead the pursuit for the team to play in the under construction BOK arena said, “Pittsburgh has Sidney Crosby, the brightest young star in the NHL in many years. They have great young players and they should be a strong team for many years to come.” He goes on to say that two or three teams have expressed interest in Tulsa.

While the young talent on the team bodes well for its future, if that is what is driving the interest, it is incredibly short-sighted. Even the most talented athlete retires and in the era of free agency, rarely does one athlete stay with the same team over their career. An arena, however, is a long-term commitment of at least thirty years.

As the Penguins’ franchise can attest, a lot can happen in thirty years—including bankruptcy (1971, 1975, and 1998). Will the fan base be able to support the team when it has losing seasons? Penguins’ fans have endured many stretches of losing seasons. These losing seasons are responsible for bringing the current crop of young talent to town. When fan support wanes, revenues from ticket sales and merchandise fall.

Will Crosby be enough to fill the seats initially in Kansas City, Tulsa, or Houston and will fans support the team when winning stops or when Crosby leaves the organization? That is a big question that team ownership must ask before it pulls up stakes and relocates. Pittsburgh has supported the Penguins for more than thirty years—through winning and losing seasons. They have shown a loyalty that should be reciprocated. Instead ownership appears to be using Crosby as a bargaining chip between the Governor and other cities.