PSRP leaders from around the country share ideas on state issues

Strong and vibrant local unions have long been the backbone of the AFT’s national-state-local structure, and PSRPs have worked hard to build many of those local affiliates. As the AFT has sought to strengthen its state federations, PSRP leaders have been right there, pressing to make sure their voices are heard and their concerns are addressed.

Significant progress has been made in this area, especially in recent years, to the point where almost all of the union’s largest state federations have state PSRP committees crucial to representing the diverse interests of school support staff. Moreover, two state federations are now headed by leaders from the PSRP ranks: Lorretta Johnson (also an AFT vice president and chair of the national union’s PSRP division) in Maryland and Debbi Covert in Oregon. And on an individual level, dynamic PSRP leaders are playing leading roles in their state organizations.

The AFT PSRP department brought together the chairs of various state-level PSRP committees in October for the first time. It quickly became clear that PSRP state leaders face similar challenges, and it was equally evident that they have been central players in many state-level successes. One aim of bringing the leaders together was to help them share ideas about how to deal with issues back home—issues that often move across state lines or filter out from Washington, D.C. “The more we can coordinate things in the states,” says Johnson, “the better off we’ll be.”

Without question, the No Child Left Behind (NCLB) law and its impact on PSRPs—paraprofessionals, in particular—is the biggest challenge right now for state PSRP leaders. “It bites everybody,” as Jimmie Blake, vice chair of the Florida Education Association/United committee, puts it. Helping tens of thousands of paraprofessionals around the country meet the law’s new job standards (which we’ve covered extensively in past issues) is a mammoth subject because, for affected staff, it could mean the difference between keeping a job or standing in line at the unemployment office.

At the same time, many state leaders have followed the AFT’s lead in approaching NCLB as a positive force for upgrading the status of paraprofessionals in schools. “As bad as this is, we need to capitalize on it,” says Ginny Lynch, who chairs AFT Connecticut’s state committee. “This is a foot in the door for certification, for job equity and for more professional recognition and pay.” Nationally, the AFT probably has been the best source of information about how NCLB affects paraprofessionals. That expertise has helped AFT state and local leaders educate their own policymakers about what the law really says about paraprofessionals, as well as the best ways to implement it.

Ideally, on an issue like NCLB, the information the union has gathered gets sent to state-level PSRP leaders, who can then share it with the locals representing paraprofessionals and other staff. (The AFT PSRP department has compiled a huge amount of information not only on the law but also on what states are doing as far as testing paras, developing standards, looking at alternatives to traditional tests and related issues.)

That’s where a well-functioning state committee comes in. In states with a manageable number of PSRP locals, between about 10 and 30, each local might be represented on the committee. Whether they can all get together in one place regularly is another matter, but that structure promotes the flow of information to local unions and members who can use it. A larger state such as New York, which has hundreds of PSRP locals, uses more of a regional approach to move information from its state leaders to affiliates, many of them quite small.

A broader focus

The intense spotlight on NCLB and paraprofessionals can have a down side, as well. While the impending threat the law poses to paraprofessional jobs has pushed the issue to prominence in state federations, it also can draw attention away from issues of concern to the whole range of PSRPs who aren’t paraprofessionals. Even in calmer times, with no massive threats, striking the balance among PSRP issues is a constant challenge not only at the state level but also in locals that represent many job classifications.

Many of the leaders at the AFT meeting said they work hard to focus on hot topics for different groups and address them as much as they can. “It’s not enough just to say we should all be interested in each others’ issues,” says Lynch. A custodial union leader concerned about his members’ jobs being taken over by a private contractor is certainly a sympathetic listener and supporter, but he won’t want to hear only about the concerns of classroom paraprofessionals.

In addition to regular committee meetings, one way that state PSRP leaders address various members’ agendas is through state professional issues conferences. A growing number of AFT state federations now put on a conference just for PSRPs, while others set aside some PSRP-specific portions of a larger meeting. By offering a variety of workshops, such conferences can address a wider range of topics in addition to the broad issues that affect all PSRPs in a state.

A small number of state affiliates publish a newsletter just for PSRP members, while other publications cover PSRP issues along with teacher issues or include a column from the state committee chair. Some state chairs at the AFT meeting said they would like to start a PSRP-only publication, while others are looking at technology and the Internet for new ways to broaden communication with leaders and members. In Michigan, for example, state committee co-chairs Ruby Newbold and Lenora Starks talked about their plans to have an interactive section of the state federation Web site where leaders of smaller locals—Newbold and Starks both represent large Detroit locals—could ask questions and get advice.

A political force

Politics and legislative action are other arenas where PSRPs at all levels have made their mark. In many places, PSRPs are known as the ones who turn out in the greatest numbers to staff phone banks, distribute literature and do all the other grassroots work that drives political campaigns.

Voters in New Mexico recently approved a ballot initiative that will transfer millions of dollars from the state’s permanent fund into education. In an election decided by less than 200 votes out of more than 184,000 cast, the active role of the New Mexico Federation of Educational Employees was crucial. Kathy Chavez, the state federation’s top PSRP leader, is quick to point out that support staff across the state—and especially in her local of Albuquerque education assistants—have run the union phone banks in the last three elections. “We participate in politics all the time, and we’re very well supported” by the state federation, she says.

In state legislatures, PSRP-specific issues can sometimes move through more easily than teacher issues because they tend to be less costly and lower profile. In the most recent legislative session in Connecticut, for example, the only labor bill the state federation pushed through allowed PSRPs who work less than 12 months to have their paychecks spread evenly across the year. Not only does that make it easier to budget for living expenses, but is also makes employees eligible for public assistance, which isn’t the case if they work only 10 months. The fact that PSRPs are even eligible for assistance is a sad commentary, but boosting salaries and benefits is a legislative priority for PSRP leaders in virtually every state.

Six years ago, an AFT executive council task force took a detailed look at a whole range of PSRP issues and issued many specific recommendations. One recommendation called for greater PSRP representation in all phases of union decision-making and another said state affiliates should integrate PSRPs into their main governance structures. As with most task force reports, not all the recommendations have been implemented, but a number of PSRP state leaders keep pushing hard to bring the proposals to life.The Michigan Federation of Teachers and School-Related Personnel, for example, has added more seats for PSRP leaders on its state executive board. In addition, PSRPs sit on every committee, says Newbold, an AFT vice president who probably serves on more committees than any other AFT leader in the state. “We are just as much a part of things as our sisters and brothers who are teachers and higher education employees,” she says. “We speak up.” High on Newbold’s wish list—and something other state leaders also mention—is to have one state federation staff person, preferably a former PSRP, dedicated solely to PSRP issues. A couple of AFT state federations already have such a person on staff.

Committee chairs at the AFT meeting who are brand new to their positions and to state-level issues found lots of advice and support simply from listening to the veterans. Betty Grawe-Hodson, who has served only a few months as chair of the Ohio Federation of Teachers PSRP committee, received invitations from other AFT leaders to attend their meetings and get an idea of how things work in their states.

Others couldn’t wait to apply what they learned. “I’m eager to go back home and get some new things going,” says Joan Allivato, a member of Education Minnesota’s council of local PSRP presidents. “I can see that our problems and concerns are universal.”