Wow!
A Very Bad Bargain
A Cornell study says students suffer from collective bargaining.
Betsy DeVos, U.S. Secretary of Education, speaks in Washington, May 24, 2017. PHOTO: ZACH GIBSON/BLOOMBERG NEWS
By
The Editorial Board
Jan. 16, 2018 6:45 p.m. ET
279 COMMENTS
On Tuesday at the American Enterprise Institute in Washington, Education Secretary Betsy DeVos kicked off the New Year by calling for a rethink of the federal approach to education that has failed over both Republican and Democratic administrations. Sounds good. But to her list of questions that never even get asked, we’d add: Does collective bargaining by teachers help or hurt students?
Two Cornell academics— Michael Lovenheim, an associate professor of policy analysis and management, and Alexander Willén, a doctoral student—have recently completed a study that tries to answer it. In “A Bad Bargain: How teacher collective bargaining affects students’ employment and earnings later in life,” the professors conclude: “We find strong evidence that teacher collective bargaining has a negative effect on students’ earnings as adults.” Given that 34 states since 1959 have mandated collective bargaining with teachers and only seven prohibit it, the finding is also a call to reform.
The study compares outcomes for students in states that mandate collective bargaining before and after the collective-bargaining requirement was imposed to outcomes for students over the same period in states that did not require collective bargaining. It also adjusted for the share of the student’s state birth cohort that is black, Hispanic, white and male.
Students who spent all 12 years of their elementary and secondary education in schools with mandatory collective bargain earned $795 less per year as adults than their peers who weren’t in such schools. They also worked on average a half hour less per week, were 0.9% less likely to be employed, and were in occupations requiring lower skills. The authors found that these add up to a large overall loss of $196 billion per year for students educated in the 34 states with mandated collective bargaining.
All of this bolsters the accumulating evidence that collective bargaining may be profitable for the teachers and staff of public schools, but the price is being paid by the students. One solution is reforms like Governor Scott Walker’s in Wisconsin that diminish the power of collective bargaining in education. If that’s too hard politically, the alternative are charter schools or vouchers that give parents the option of avoiding the damage to their children from collective bargaining.
Appeared in the January 17, 2018, print edition.
A Very Bad Bargain
A Cornell study says students suffer from collective bargaining.
Betsy DeVos, U.S. Secretary of Education, speaks in Washington, May 24, 2017. PHOTO: ZACH GIBSON/BLOOMBERG NEWS
By
The Editorial Board
Jan. 16, 2018 6:45 p.m. ET
279 COMMENTS
On Tuesday at the American Enterprise Institute in Washington, Education Secretary Betsy DeVos kicked off the New Year by calling for a rethink of the federal approach to education that has failed over both Republican and Democratic administrations. Sounds good. But to her list of questions that never even get asked, we’d add: Does collective bargaining by teachers help or hurt students?
Two Cornell academics— Michael Lovenheim, an associate professor of policy analysis and management, and Alexander Willén, a doctoral student—have recently completed a study that tries to answer it. In “A Bad Bargain: How teacher collective bargaining affects students’ employment and earnings later in life,” the professors conclude: “We find strong evidence that teacher collective bargaining has a negative effect on students’ earnings as adults.” Given that 34 states since 1959 have mandated collective bargaining with teachers and only seven prohibit it, the finding is also a call to reform.
The study compares outcomes for students in states that mandate collective bargaining before and after the collective-bargaining requirement was imposed to outcomes for students over the same period in states that did not require collective bargaining. It also adjusted for the share of the student’s state birth cohort that is black, Hispanic, white and male.
Students who spent all 12 years of their elementary and secondary education in schools with mandatory collective bargain earned $795 less per year as adults than their peers who weren’t in such schools. They also worked on average a half hour less per week, were 0.9% less likely to be employed, and were in occupations requiring lower skills. The authors found that these add up to a large overall loss of $196 billion per year for students educated in the 34 states with mandated collective bargaining.
All of this bolsters the accumulating evidence that collective bargaining may be profitable for the teachers and staff of public schools, but the price is being paid by the students. One solution is reforms like Governor Scott Walker’s in Wisconsin that diminish the power of collective bargaining in education. If that’s too hard politically, the alternative are charter schools or vouchers that give parents the option of avoiding the damage to their children from collective bargaining.
Appeared in the January 17, 2018, print edition.
