"The latter is ready to get it done. But the union - in what has become a familiar attitude - won't budge." "The latter" (BPS Administration) only wants to get it done their way; they snidely make references to the "business of education." Teachers have been without a contract for 20 months, the current BPS Administration has set up an adversarial system of manipulation, usury and frankly, disrespect that demonizes teachers, and make a hard job even more difficult for many teachers. "The Latter" knew this deadline was coming, and should have negotiated in "good faith" with the BTU, instead of trying to garner public support at the last minute for a bad proposal. The BTU represents teachers and, as a teacher in a BPS turnaround school, I say NO! Incentive money in education is insulting, and "in your face" disrespectful, to every teacher who doesn't get it; it sets up adversarial collaborative communities within a school. How will the school community be notified of who gets these "incentive awards"? Will a Court Street Crew, lead by Dr. Johnson, and followed by the Channel 7 "Spotlight Team," surprise teachers in their classroom with a giant check? Will those teachers who don't get the money, be forced to sit through an "awards celebration" at a professional development for those teachers that do? Will money be clandestinely placed, by direct deposit, in a teacher's bank account, only to surface in the Boston Herald, Your Tax Dollars at Work, "Other" Column? Previously, in the Boston Public Schools we had a system where all BPS schools, that made improvements, were awarded a flat sum of money. All teachers at the school came together and decided what to spend it on. One year my school spent our award on desperately need overhead projectors and another year on computers for the library, another year on sports uniforms and choir robes. It was a worthy endeavor and everyone in the school community was united in meeting the schools goals. "The Children" were the ultimate beneficiaries. On the teacher level, our principal would quietly give a teacher a class set of markers or a "Cram Globe" for doing extra things and going the extra mile, it was a token of appreciation and acknowledgement. I am sure that our parents, and teachers, would prefer this model of incentive.

It's laughable to claim that the teachers won't budge when it was the city which refused to meet for months at a time. I wonder if the Globe has the courage to print the number of negotiating sessions the superintendent herself has attended? (hint: less than one)

If the money is for the "recruitment, retention and training of top educators to work in the systems' toughest schools," then the Boston Public Schools is misusing the US Department of Education award from the Federal Teacher Incentive Fund and is exploiting teachers new to the system. In June 2010, one BPS turnaround school notified the 3rd year provisional teachers, that they wouldn't be given letters of "reasonable assurance" for the upcoming school year. These teachers had received "met and exceeds expectations" on their evaluations for the previous years yet, on the eve of being made permanent, they didn't have a job at this turnaround school in September. Data indicates that successful schools have a long-term stable staff, so why boot these provisional teachers? They had made a commitment to the school and were members of the school community. An inordinate amount of time and turnaround money was spent to train these teachers. It wasn't a case of permanent teachers "bumping" into these positions. That September, BPS Human Resources, assigned 38 people, who were new to teaching and new to the system to this turnaround school! How did they qualify as "top educators" under the federal guidelines? They were nice people, but why were they assigned to a BPS school with the most vulnerable children? One hundred students transferred out, the MCAS plummeted, and the graduation rate this last June was the lowest in the city! The teaching jobs, our former 3rd year provisional teachers were offered, by BPS Human Resources, were at BPS Pilot, Horace Mann, and "innovation" schools. These are schools that have a high teacher attrition rate! If these teachers wanted to stay in the BPS, they were required to sign an "election to work agreement" (giving up their contractual rights) and would be required to work an additional 95+ hours uncompensated! This happened again in 2011, at this turnaround school, and to many teachers from other BPS turnaround and closing schools.

What a fair and balanced editorial! Are you writing for the school dep't negotiating team? Or is it the boston business community? How have you been privy to this info if you are not an insider? YOU ARE SUSPECT! -Anti Union yellow journalism propaganda tactic aimed at demonizing the BTU during contract negotiations. This behavior is bullying, and if you were one of my students we would have alot of socio/emotional learning objectives to master. Try empathizing with people rather than bullying and demonizing them. Try telling the truth. But, alas, denial is not just a river in Egypt. I'm sure your bullying tactics will continue, without accepting responsibility to bargain in good faith and tell the truth. Sadly, the students and the people who dedicate their lives to WORK with them will suffer.

I'd hoped for a thoughtful objective analysis from your Globe opinion piece. This was not the case. Persuasive, yes, but not representative of the truth. Finding the facts takes time, energy, and diligence which nowadays equals a monetary cost that many newspapers don't have. Some investigative reporting on how this money has already been spent and will be spent will reveal some uncomfortable truths for the BPS administration. The money does not go to "top teachers" within Boston. As a "top educator" at a high performing low income school within the "circle of promise" my school and I will not see a dime. That's okay, though. Our school is decent and that's great in itself. If a school is really struggling a commitment should be made to turn it into a school worth attending. All Boston students and parents deserve access to decent schools. However, look into how the money is being spent. Money itself isn't what turn schools around. How has Boston recruited "top teachers" into turnaround schools? Would you feel comfortable sending your own child to be educated at these schools? Are they mostly new teachers with no experience? Does "retention" mean anything more than a small bonus if MCAS scores marginally improve or does it mean something sustainable for the school? As a newspaper you should be asking at least a few hard questions of the BPS administration. The people of Boston really deserve no less. Is the BTU president really "playing chicken with the paychecks of his hardest-working teachers"? The answer is no. The vast majority of us are unaffected by this funding, however, we are interested that fairness and common sense is implemented with the new evaluation system. Perhaps asking about the BPS administration position on this issue as would really give better insight into why this "simple agreement" is stuck. Is wanting a fair evaluation "blithely using the potential loss of funds as a bargaining ploy to squeeze the city for a richer teachers' contract?" Once again, no.

It is no surprise that the Globe, which had it's own well-documented fight against its own unionized workers, would fall lock-step into the School Committee's report about who is to blame over the possible loss of this funding. When in doubt, blame the Union! Especially if it is a teacher's union. No further reporting or investigating the depth of the matter. Just one more easy shot with no substance. The Globe's education reporting has fallen into a predictable pattern of swallowing whatever the School Committee tells them to say. There won't be any Pulitzer's for this kind of opining.