The Haves and Have-Nots of Employment Tenure | Eastern North Carolina Now

    Publisher's note: The author of this post is Donna Martinez, who is the co-host Carolina Journal Radio for the Carolina Journal, John Hood Publisher.

    RALEIGH — After years of rejecting progressives' class warfare argument about "the haves" and the "have-nots," I'm a bit embarrassed to acknowledge they've been right all along. Not only that, I've been a member of the "have-nots" and didn't even realize it.

    I'm one of the hundreds of thousands of North Carolinians whose job performance and value to my employer determines whether the boss keeps me or shows me the door. There are no special protections for we "have-nots." We're evaluated on the quality and quantity of what we produce, and on what our customers have to say about us.

    Not so for North Carolina's "haves." It was only a few months ago that I discovered public school teachers enjoy a heaping helping of job protection pixie dust. Back in 1971, the General Assembly deemed public school teachers with four years on the job to be immune to the accountability we "have-nots" are saddled with. That's when legislators used the power of government to bestow on teachers the muscular job protection known as "career status." Otherwise known as tenure, career status cemented teachers as the state's most powerful special-interest group.

    Because of this special distinction, the No. 1 factor for a "have" in staying employed isn't performance; it's how long he/she has been on the job. After four years, "career status" kicks in and virtually guarantees that "haves" keep their jobs for as long they want them.

    Are you a stellar teacher whose students are achieving? "Career status" means you keep your job. Are you a mediocre teacher who needs more training or content knowledge? "Career status" means you keep your job. Are you an ineffective teacher who should be fired? "Career status" ensures that firing you is laborious and tedious. Every member of the "haves" is the same in the eyes of the "career status" law: a permanent fixture.

    What a shame, and what an obvious misrepresentation of reality. Work a week in any industry, and you'll spot the co-workers who are top-notch and the sandbaggers who don't pull their weight. "Career status" protects the sandbagging "haves" and penalizes effective professionals whose students demonstrate measurable achievement. The very people who should be fired — ineffective dabblers whose students languish because of the teacher's inability to lead a classroom — are rewarded for their failure.

    You won't find me circling the Capitol and ranting and chanting about being a "have-not." That would make for great theater, but no progress. I've chosen instead to applaud the state's legislative reformers for their courageous fight to end tenure and replace it with long-term contracts that will align the teaching profession with the expectations and accountability we "have-nots" navigate each day.

    Media coverage of this debate would have us believe the public is outraged at the prospect of changing how teachers are evaluated. Among those who muscle their way into lawmakers' offices with sleeping bags in tow, it clearly is. But that view is far from representative. Education Next's 2013 PEPG Survey showed that, nationally, teachers are split on tenure, tilting in favor of it. Fifty-eight percent of teachers favored tenure, according to the survey, while 35 percent opposed it. Earlier this year, a Civitas Institute poll of North Carolina's registered voters showed a virtual tie over tenure: 45 percent saying yes and 45 percent saying no.

    Then there are the parents. Just 25 percent of parents favored tenure in Education Next's national survey, 55 percent opposed it, and the rest neither favored nor opposed it. Why would so few parents express support for blanket job protection? Simple. They know when their kids have a "good" teacher and when their kids are stuck with a "bad" teacher. And they don't want them stuck with a bad one again.

    The consequences of continuing to protect bad teachers are steep. As I detailed last year, North Carolina's 2013 math scores reveal that just 34 percent of eighth-graders scored high enough to be called "proficient" in math. Reading scores were better, but barely. Only 41 percent of eighth-graders were "proficient" in reading. We cannot afford another year of protection for ineffective teachers who enjoy "career status."

    Staggering numbers of North Carolina children are being left behind. Add them to the pot of North Carolina's "have-nots."