California Teachers Assn

Ralph J. Flynn, 60, executive director of the California Teachers Assn. since 1976. A native of Boston, Flynn taught briefly in Connecticut before beginning his career in teachers unions. He served as executive director of the San Francisco Classroom Teachers Assn. in the 1960s and then worked in Washington, heading the Coalition of Public Employees, an alliance that included the National Education Assn. Flynn joined the California Teachers Assn. in 1975 and was named director a year later.

Re "An imperfect union," Opinion, May 18 Troy Senik says that the California Teachers Assn. is the state's most powerful union. How does he define powerful? With pay? At an average salary of $68,000, teachers are not the best-paid public employees. Plus, starting salaries for beginning teachers average about $35,000. And our pensions? Remember, teachers kick in about 8% of each paycheck to the State Teachers Retirement System; their employers contribute another 8%. What public employees do that?

D. A. "Del" Weber, who recently served as president of the powerful 240,000-member California Teachers Assn., has died at the age of 65. Weber died unexpectedly of unknown causes Wednesday at his home in Huntington Beach. During his tenure as head of the state teachers union from 1991 until last June, Weber led the group's successful opposition to Proposition 174, the controversial school voucher initiative that was trounced at the polls in 1993.

There's a problem with California's groundbreaking "parent trigger" law. But it isn't what you might think. The law, which I wrote, passed in 2010, and it sought to give parents genuine power and control over their children's educational destiny by allowing them to force staff changes at failing schools or even to convert such schools to charters. The parent trigger law has attracted attention from legislators across the nation who are looking to put the "public" back into fractured public education systems.

Ham-fisted yet pandering, and fiscally irresponsible too, AB 114 perpetrates an abuse of state power that could wreak budgetary havoc in local school districts. But in that case, why hasn't the news been filled with details of this bad-government bill as it wended its way through the Legislature? Because it was hurriedly and secretively passed, quite literally in the dark of night, with no committee hearings and almost no public notice, and then quickly signed by Gov. Jerry Brown.

Like a diminutive general pumping up her troops before battle, Lois Tinson, the incoming president of the California Teachers Assn., stood at the podium in a hotel ballroom packed with union activists and taunted their opponents. Two years ago, the union had led the charge to defeat school vouchers. Now voucher forces are resurrecting the measure, and Tinson's job is to gird the union for battle again. "We beat you before.

There's a problem with California's groundbreaking "parent trigger" law. But it isn't what you might think. The law, which I wrote, passed in 2010, and it sought to give parents genuine power and control over their children's educational destiny by allowing them to force staff changes at failing schools or even to convert such schools to charters. The parent trigger law has attracted attention from legislators across the nation who are looking to put the "public" back into fractured public education systems.

An increasing number of California school districts are edging closer to financial insolvency, state officials reported Tuesday. One immediate effect has been teacher layoffs — probably in the thousands, although neither state officials nor the California Teachers Assn. have final numbers. Since the beginning of 2010, the number of school systems that may be "unable to meet future financial obligations" has increased by 38%, according to the state Department of Education.

About two-thirds of states have made significant changes in teacher evaluations in the last two years, with many for the first time taking into account student achievement in such high-stakes decisions as granting tenure protections and dismissing instructors for poor performance. California is a notable exception. Critics insist the state is trailing the nation in this area while others applaud California for resisting unproven strategies. The nationwide snapshot comes from a report released Wednesday by the Washington-based National Council on Teacher Quality, which compiles data and advocates for policies it favors.

On Feb. 24 The Times reported, "The California Teachers Assn. is digging deep to fight an initiative that would limit how unions and others can raise money for political campaigns through paycheck dues deductions." Prop. 226, the Campaign Reform Initiative, does not limit union fund-raising at all. It only requires permission from the union member to take his or her money for political purposes. It looks as if the California Teachers Assn. is afraid to give its membership that power.

One year ago, Gov. Jerry Brown prophesied a cataclysmic "war of all against all" in California if tax negotiations broke down with Republican legislators. They did. And now we seem to be headed into the cataclysm. But neither the Democratic governor nor practically anyone else foresaw the war being launched from the left by forces that normally would line up with him as allies — by so-called progressives and fellow crusaders for education. In an interview last March, Brown predicted the consequences of Republicans not providing the necessary two-thirds legislative majority to place his then-tax proposal on the June ballot.

About two-thirds of states have made significant changes in teacher evaluations in the last two years, with many for the first time taking into account student achievement in such high-stakes decisions as granting tenure protections and dismissing instructors for poor performance. California is a notable exception. Critics insist the state is trailing the nation in this area while others applaud California for resisting unproven strategies. The nationwide snapshot comes from a report released Wednesday by the Washington-based National Council on Teacher Quality, which compiles data and advocates for policies it favors.

Ham-fisted yet pandering, and fiscally irresponsible too, AB 114 perpetrates an abuse of state power that could wreak budgetary havoc in local school districts. But in that case, why hasn't the news been filled with details of this bad-government bill as it wended its way through the Legislature? Because it was hurriedly and secretively passed, quite literally in the dark of night, with no committee hearings and almost no public notice, and then quickly signed by Gov. Jerry Brown.

Legislation that would have allowed school districts to lay off teachers based on performance, not seniority, failed in a state Senate education committee Wednesday. The measure, proposed by state Sen. Bob Huff (R-Diamond Bar), called for school districts to create new administrator and teacher evaluations that would be partially based on student test score data. It would have allowed district officials to lay off teachers based on performance. Currently, by state law, teachers are laid off strictly by seniority during budget shortfalls.

Leaders of the Los Angeles teachers union withdrew their backing of two school board candidates Monday, leaving their political strategy in disarray while boosting the efforts of Mayor Antonio Villaraigosa to maintain an allied majority on the Board of Education. Under the union pressure, one candidate abandoned the race while the other vowed to continue. Jesus Escandon signed a letter dated Saturday saying that he was dropping out effective immediately. John Fernandez has refused to step aside in the only contest without an incumbent, resulting in a union rebuke.

For months it was hard to tell apart two of the Democrats vying to be the state schools superintendent. Tom Torlakson and Larry Aceves largely agreed on cutting-edge issues, espousing classically liberal positions, very much in sync with most of the education establishment. But after the two emerged from a nonpartisan primary in June, Aceves, 66, has carved a different path. The retired school district superintendent changed his party affiliation from Democrat to Independent and began to focus on flaws in teacher evaluations, limiting teacher tenure protections and the difficulty of firing ineffective instructors.

I find the California Teachers Assn. TV commercial featuring a little girl complaining about budget cuts to be sad. Instead of enlisting support for their opposition to spending cuts, the ad raises the question--"Is it right to exploit children to gain higher salaries when everyone should be doing their share to help balance the budget?" Teachers' unions are greedy. MARY E. DANIEL Port Hueneme

The article "Contribution Adds Wrinkle to GOP Race" (Times, May 31) incorrectly implied that Paul Horcher is being supported by the California Teachers Assn. He is not. While I believe that this was unintentional, I still thought that I needed to set the record straight. Stan Caress, the Democratic candidate in the 60th Assembly race, was officially endorsed by the CTA. He has pledged to support full funding for local schools, and he has developed several proposals for educational reform.

Underfunded and under the gun, the Los Angeles Unified School District starts the new academic year on Monday. The timing alone is telling. School traditionally begins a little earlier, but L.A. Unified worked out a cost-saving arrangement with the teachers union to trim eight days from the calendar. Some of that is being lopped off at the beginning of the school year. Reduced learning time is never a good thing, and the loss of pay is painful to the staff, but this was the best of several bad choices facing the district.

Even in good times, teachers with little experience have a hard job at low-achieving schools with disadvantaged students. They don't get paid much, and the students are more challenging to teach. And these aren't good times. Job insecurity is a serious problem. Teachers are laid off in order of seniority, so the newest teachers lose their jobs first. The situation is even harder on students. Because low-performing schools tend to be staffed by newer teachers, students don't get the benefit of experienced instructors — and then they lose more of their teachers during layoffs.