Reflections from watching the MFT teacher contract negotiations

* The negotiation process is unfocused and considers many things that should be addressed in other forums.

* The negotiation process lacks a sense of urgency, and generally does not acknowledge the broad challenges currently faced by the district, nor the transcendent purpose of the Minneapolis public education authority.

* The pace and content of the negotiation process is primarily driven by MFT.

* The teacher negotiators show little insight into employment issues, little interest in broader trends in education, and no interest in research-based decision-making. A majority of the MFT arguments are emotional appeals.

* MFT appears to have a motto of “Leave me alone and let me teach!”  MFT shows no indication that they understand how teacher work rules shape the character of the district, nor do they show any interest in addressing the MPS educational process in a partnership with the administration or parent groups.

* As the single representative body of all district teachers in the negotiation, MFT is inherently driven to suppress minority interests that may conflict with majority interests of the union membership.  This leads to the suppression of reform ideas and limits individual empowerment of teachers. Case in point: The plea by Montessori and IB teachers for structural reforms specific to their training seems to have been ignored by the MFT team at the negotiation table.

* The administration negotiators defend the position of the district adequately.  However, because most of the discussion is a response to emotional appeals of the teacher negotiators, this is not a hard job and does not require the presence of ten high-paid district administrators.

* The administration negotiators show little offense or strategy in the negotiation process, and do not approach teacher appeals as bargaining opportunities at the negotiating table.  Case in point: MFT wanted to write class size limits in the contract, and the administrators wrote this off, saying that the contract was not the place to address class size.  Administrators could have suggested that MPS would maintain specified class sizes, as long as the total teacher salary expense did not rise. 

* Many negotiators, both teachers and administrators, do not participate to any significant extent in the negotiation discussion.

* There is little or no effort to connect the issues discussed at the negotiating table to educational results.

* At least half of the pages in the document entitled “MFT contract” do not describe a legally binding contract.  The administration’s agreement to having the extra language in the contract document is of questionable judgment.

* An authority is needed to focus the scope of the teacher contract negotiations.  There needs to be better understanding about what topics are appropriate for the contract negotiation process and what topics should be addressed in other forums.

* There should be an obvious and accessible channel of communication about workplace concerns between MFT membership and the administration.

* A process should be developed to address concerns of minority teacher groups in the negotiation process and in routine communications with the district administration. 

* The size of the district’s negotiating team should be reduced, with district experts brought in to address specific topics.

* A sense of urgency to address the district's challenges is needed throughout the professional ranks of MPS.

* A crisis-response district action team is needed, comprised of authoritative members of the administration, MFT, and principals.  Such a team would create a unity of purpose for district professionals and would nurture the ability of each group to reach collaborative solutions.

* Teachers need to be empowered and encouraged to take individual initiative to impact their job beyond the classroom; at the school or district level.

* Teachers need consistent, reasoned, and normalized feedback about the results of their teaching.

* All of the superfluous language in the MFT contract should be removed and placed in a separate document.

* There should be at least one parent representative on the district’s negotiating team, but this/these parents need to understand the significant time commitment involved in the negotiation process.