By Steve Gunn
EAGnews.org

EUGENE, Oregon – Teachers unions exist to maximize pay and benefits for their most senior members.

That’s why they cling to the worn out concept of “last in, first out” during periods of layoff.

MORE NEWS: Know These Before Moving From Cyprus To The UK

The Pittsburgh school board recently asked its superintendent to beg the local union to back away from that rule, because the district is preparing to lay off hundreds and board members want to keep the best teachers.

The union president responded with a flat “no.” Seniority is and always will be the fairest way to deal with layoffs, she said.

But in Oregon the shoe is suddenly on the other foot. The Oregon Education Association, that state’s largest teachers union, is facing a $2.6 million deficit, according to a report from the Education Intelligence Agency. Layoffs are expected and member dues will increase.

Layoff notices have been sent to 7 of the OEA’s 42 professional staffers and 13 of the 40 associate staffers, according to the news report. One might expect the layoffs to be conducted by seniority, because that’s the union way, right?

Well, no. The OEA has found a way to rid itself of some of its most experienced (and expensive) employees. Layoffs are being done by position rather than person. In other words, if your job was the last to be created, it’s the first to go, along with the person filling it.

So if “Sam Jones,” a 35-year union employee, was promoted to a brand new position last year, he’s out of luck. There none of the typical seniority bumping in this union shop.

MORE NEWS: How to prepare for face-to-face classes

As it turns out, the OEA staff has its own union (which went on strike in 2008), and such a maneuver would probably violate that  union’s contract, according to the news report.

Still, we have to credit the OEA brass for finding a creative way to practice gross hypocricy without looking too obvious. The news article summed the situation up nicely:

“That’s a hell of a maneuver, and one easily replicated by school districts if they had the sand to try it. Can’t lay off your most senior employees? Merely appoint them to head the new Teacher Evaluation Center, or some other dodge. Pitch it as a promotion. Then lay them off because they hold the most recently created position.

“It’s either devilishly clever or delusional. In what reality will the staff union stand for that?”

If there’s any justice in the world, the OEA’s union will strenuously object and threaten to file an unfair labor practice. Then the union bosses will finally understand how school boards feel when they are trying to save a few bucks.

Runaway labor costs can be a real drag. Isn’t that right, OEA?