Students, families need stability, not a strike

After two years of disrupted education, Twin Cities students and families face yet another threat to in-person learning, this time from a possible teacher strike, which unions in both St. Paul and Minneapolis districts have authorized.

Without a doubt, the pandemic has brought unprecedented challenges to staff in both districts. We are grateful for their courage and dedication to our students. But the greatest burden has been borne by our districts' low-income families and students of color, largely from the prolonged shutdown of our schools in 2020-21 and the continued disruptions this school year.

Unlike school staff, many families lack paid time off. In the event of a strike they would be forced to choose yet again between staying home with their students and earning a paycheck. And just as the omicron variant recedes, our students would face more disruption and lost learning.

Both unions seek salary increases, class-size reduction and mental-health-related staff in every school. In principle, these proposals seem reasonable and desirable. But neither district can afford these staffing and salary increases without deepening already existing budget deficits, and the proposals aren't focused on the students and schools most in need of critical academic and social/emotional support.

It is hard to overstate the impact of the last two years on our children. The Minnesota Senate recently heard testimony that students, on average, fell behind in math by 11 percentage points and in reading by 7 points during the 2020-21 school year. The pandemic was especially damaging for students of color, who were more likely to attend school in districts, like Minneapolis and St. Paul, that remained fully closed for longer than the schools attended by wealthier white children.

Nationally, research by McKinsey & Co. found that students in majority-Black schools are now a full 12 months behind those in majority-white schools, widening the achievement gap by a third.

Students of color cannot afford further disruptions to their learning, whatever the cause. Instead, students who have suffered the most in the pandemic need strategic support in order to accelerate their learning, which could include tutoring, added instructional time, culturally relevant curricula and targeted mental health services.

Committing limited district funds to pay for the unions' proposals would mean less money for such targeted interventions.

Specifically, St. Paul Public Schools (SPPS) recently projected a nearly $43 million budget deficit. The St. Paul Federation of Educators (SPFE) seeks a 2.5% salary increase in each year of the two-year contract, which is a modest proposal, but still would add an additional $5.1 million to SPPS's deficit. The additional staffing required to achieve SPFE's proposed class-size reduction of two students per class would add another $11 million to that budget deficit.

The average teacher salary in St. Paul is already the highest in the state, at $85,457 per year. (This is an average; many junior teachers make less, and educational assistants make far less). We support high wages and inflation-level increases to attract and retain the best staff. But salary increases must not displace the services needed by our most vulnerable students or jeopardize the district's long-term financial health.

Across the river, the Minneapolis Federation of Teachers (MFT) proposes a 25% total increase in salary over two years (and no, we're not missing a decimal point). A Minneapolis teacher making the district's average salary would see a total salary increase of over $18,599 to become the state's highest-paid teachers on average, at $90,134. According to the federation's own estimates, this would cost a total of over $120 million.

For perspective, Minneapolis Public Schools has allocated only about $1.8 million of its federal COVID relief dollars to literacy-specific initiatives, despite the fact that only 23% of Black MPS students read at or above grade level compared with 76% of white students. The district uses a literacy curriculum that is prohibited by a growing number of states, yet the district has no plans to replace it.

Both districts have received hundreds of millions of dollars in federal COVID relief grants (called ESSER or ARP funds), which Congress allocated to help reopen schools and support students who have been most harmed by pandemic learning pauses. These ESSER funds will expire in September 2024. If the Minneapolis and St. Paul districts use these temporary funds for permanent expenditures, the districts will be faced with even deeper deficits when the funds are gone.

Instead, the districts should focus ESSER funds on targeted, timely and temporary programs that would directly benefit students most in need.

The districts and unions should find commonsense compromises instead of closing our schools.

First, districts could award a flat-dollar raise rather than percentage-based increases as the unions propose. This strategy would more fairly compensate junior teachers, educational assistants and other support staff who are at the low end of the pay scale.

Second, districts could use a portion of their ESSER funds to provide one-time bonuses, which would recognize the incredible efforts of staff without adding to budget deficits.

Third, districts should prioritize class-size reduction and mental health support in their lowest-income schools, rather than taking the unaffordable districtwide approach the unions propose.

It's not too late for the districts and unions to get to a deal that focuses on students with the highest needs, acknowledges financial constraints and provides the working conditions staff need to be successful.

More than anything else right now, our kids and families need stability from our teachers, not a strike.

Pamela Marentette is an attorney and St. Paul Public Schools parent. Khulia Pringle is the Midwest organizer of the National Parent Union.