Skip to main content

Mobile Navigation

  • National
    • Policy
      • High Expectations
      • Quality Choices
      • Personalized Pathways
    • Research
    • Commentary
      • Gadfly Newsletter
      • Flypaper Blog
    • Events
    • Scholars Program
  • Ohio
    • Policy
      • Priorities
      • Media & Testimony
    • Research
    • Commentary
      • Ohio Education Gadfly Biweekly
      • Ohio Gadfly Daily
  • Charter Authorizing
    • Application
    • Sponsored Schools
    • Resources
  • About
    • Mission
    • Board
    • Staff
    • Career
Home
Home
Advancing Educational Excellence

Main Navigation

  • National
  • Ohio
  • Charter Authorizing
  • About

National Menu

  • Topics
    • Accountability & Testing
    • Advanced Education
    • Career & Technical Education
    • Charter Schools
    • Curriculum & Instruction
    • ESSA
    • Evidence-Based Learning
    • Facilities
    • Governance
    • Personalized Learning
    • Private School Choice
    • School Finance
    • Standards
    • Teachers & School Leaders
    • Think Again
  • Research
  • Commentary
    • Gadfly Newsletter
    • Flypaper Blog
    • Gadfly Podcast
  • Events
  • Scholars Program

Contract for Failure: The Impact of Teacher Union Contracts on the Quality of California Schools

Terry Ryan
3.20.2002

Should teacher unions be given a bigger say on academic issues? This is the question that the California Assembly is grappling with as they debate Assembly Bill 2160. The 300,000 member California Teachers Association and its allies are pushing hard for passage of the bill, while policymakers and administrators argue that the proposal is a power grab that, if passed, would block needed reforms. The Pacific Research Institute's (PRI) Center for School Reform jumped directly into the debate with the release of this report, which argues that California's public schools are near the bottom in student achievement despite record spending levels because unions perversely influence classroom instruction through the collective bargaining process. Although the report's evidence is skimpy in terms of showing a direct correlation between collective bargaining and deteriorating academic achievement, it does show that collective bargaining in California has resulted in education costing taxpayers far more than it would without unions and the bargaining process. For example, in an average California school district, 85 percent of the district's operating budget is tied to teacher and employee salaries. Such huge labor costs obviously constraint school system leaders from using resources to try innovative projects or technologies. Collective bargaining agreements-which reward experience over expertise-also make it harder to fire ineffective teachers and reward good ones. The report contends that teacher unions in California have been a major obstacle to urban school reform. It is for this reason that even those with a history of supporting teacher unions are troubled by a bill that would strengthen their grip on things like curriculum and instruction. Los Angeles superintendent (and former Democratic Colorado governor) Roy Romer recently told Education Week that if Assembly Bill 2160 had been in effect when he took over the running of L.A.'s troubled schools, "much of the recent reform in L.A. would not have occurred." In summary, collective bargaining may or may not have played a role in precipitating the decline of California's once vaunted public education system, but there is little doubt that union power and influence have made it far more difficult to resuscitate the state's sickest schools. The report is available at http://www.pacificresearch.org.

Tags: California California Teachers Association Colorado Democratic Party Roy Romer

Terry Ryan was Vice-President for Ohio Programs and Policy at the Thomas B. Fordham Institute, and a Research Fellow at the Hoover Research Institution.

He is the author, with Chester E. Finn, Jr. and Michael Lafferty of Ohio’s Education Reform Challenges: Lessons from the Frontlines (Palgrave Macmillan, 2010).

Fordham Logo

© 2026 The Thomas B. Fordham Institute
Privacy Policy
Usage Agreement

National

P.O. Box 110
Burke, VA 22009

202.223.5452

[email protected]

Ohio

P.O. Box 82291
Columbus, OH 43202

614.223.1580

[email protected]

Sponsorship

130 West Second Street, Suite 410
Dayton, Ohio 45402

937.227.3368

[email protected]