Wisconsin collective bargaining bill already making a difference?

When Wisconsin Governor Scott Walker threatened to push through a collective bargaining restriction bill the country stopped and listened.  Every media outlet, blog and casual politico had an opinion.  Suddenly experts on Wisconsin teach salaries, school rankings and the Wisconsin budget appeared out of nowhere.  It seemed like everyone had an opinion and it broke down along two simple lines. 


Either you welcomed the change because you felt the concept of public unions to be offensive and silly or you were against the change because any attempt at perceived union busting was met with hostility.  At the end of it all, like so many political discussions in America the fight turned into another bitter partisan slug fest.  After all said and done the wounded unions walked away with promises of revenge, recall petitions and an angry and energized Democrat voting bloc.  Most have now forgotten about the Wisconsin budget battle, but there are some stories emerging from the aftermath that may be of interest.  


Keep in mind, the primary argument against Walker was that he was trying to destroy the teachers and that his actions would seriously undermine the very people we are trying to protect - our children. 


In a very straightforward piece from the Washington Examiner it would appear that exactly the opposite has happened. 

The Kaukauna School District, in the Fox River Valley of Wisconsin near Appleton, has about 4,200 students and about 400 employees. It has struggled in recent times and this year faced a deficit of $400,000. But after the law went into effect, at 12:01 a.m. Wednesday, school officials put in place new policies they estimate will turn that $400,000 deficit into a $1.5 million surplus. And it's all because of the very provisions that union leaders predicted would be disastrous.

As the proponents of the bill suggested, by removing the ridiculous hurdles set forth by the unions it would provide for a mechanism to negotiate with teachers on a more level playing field.  Because unions generally try to provide the least amount of services for the most amount of money, it does not take a math wizard to conclude that an absence of union bargaining would materially improve one's bottom line.   So what is the outcome of such a financial surplus?

The changes mean Kaukauna can reduce the size of its classes -- from 31 students to 26 students in high school and from 26 students to 23 students in elementary school. In addition, there will be more teacher time for one-on-one sessions with troubled students. Those changes would not have been possible without the much-maligned changes in collective bargaining.Teachers' salaries will stay "relatively the same," Arnoldussen says, except for higher pension and health care payments. (The top salary is around $80,000 per year, with about $35,000 in additional benefits, for 184 days of work per year -- summers off.) Finally, the money saved will be used to hire a few more teachers and institute merit pay.

Reducing class sizes, more one-on-one time and hiring *more* teachers.  It would appear that the fundamental beneficiaries of this bill are none other than children.   Yes some teachers have to contribute more money to their pensions, but their contributions still give them a significant advantage over private workers.   With a combined salary of 115k for a non-full year the compensation is not exactly terrible. 


It is a shame that these kinds of stories will go un(der)reported and most of the individuals participating during the peak of the argument will have walked away with the opinions thereby learning nothing of substance.   We can only enhance our collective wisdom if we are to learn from our experiences, whether they be mistakes or otherwise.  So far it would appear that if one school district can reverse its fortunes then many others will follow for the greatest benefit of all - improving our education.