In a recent New York Times column, David Brooks brought more national attention to the “Southern surge”—the rising educational performance of states such as Alabama, Louisiana, and Mississippi. Coincidentally (or not), one thing that sets apart the deep South is its aversion to unionization. In these staunchly conservative states, teachers unions have never gotten a foothold, allowing state and local leaders to mold public education in ways that prioritize student learning over adult interests.
Despite its red-state status, Ohio has allowed teachers unions to flourish. How did we get here, and how have the unions shaped Ohio schools? How could state lawmakers get control of public education back into the hands of parents, communities, and education leaders—where it belongs—and working to advance the interests of students?
Amid a nationwide push for public sector unionization, Ohio lawmakers in 1983 enacted the Public Employee Collective Bargaining Act. The legislation—still codified in statute—allows teachers (and other public employees) to unionize, at which point a school district must bargain with the union over wages, hours, and “terms and other conditions” of employment. The Act also permits teacher strikes (overturning prior law), and creates the State Employment Relations Board to implement its provisions.
The legislation threw open the schoolhouse door to the unions. And sure enough, they have had an outsized influence on education policy and school operations ever since. What has that accomplished?
- Bureaucratic schools where merit doesn’t matter. Unions have used their clout, including their ability to elect pro-union school boards, to secure lengthy, incredibly detailed employment contracts that advance their interests while tying up school leaders with red tape. These contracts include job protections (even for incompetent teachers), onerous procedural hoops that schools must follow to evaluate or discipline an employee, and benefits that exceed what many private sector employees enjoy (e.g., generous healthcare, even for retirees, and paid leave). Moreover, following a union-supported state law, these contracts require Ohio teachers to be paid according to rigid salary schedules that reward seniority and degrees instead of classroom effectiveness and individual talent—a merit-based approach to compensation that has proven to benefit students in the (few) places where it has been tried.
- Escalating spending. Never ones to shy away from more money, unions have helped drive up education spending. Adjusted for inflation, K–12 expenditures in Ohio stood at $10,959 per student in 1990.[1] By 2024, Ohio spent $16,311 per student, a 49 percent increase above the inflation rate, and far more than what Southern states spend on education. Meanwhile, expenditures in low-performing urban districts, places where unions tend to be strongest, easily top the Ohio average; Cleveland and Columbus, for instance, spent more than $25,000 per pupil last year.
- Schools tinged with progressive ideology. Teachers unions give millions to the Democratic party and other progressive groups, and their top bosses have voiced support for all sorts of liberal causes. Given these political leanings, it’s not surprising that some districts have gotten embroiled in culture-war fights with more conservative parents and communities, battles that can draw attention away from academics.
- Mediocre academic outcomes. Speaking of academics, according to national assessments, just 43 percent of Ohio fourth graders achieve a rigorous proficiency benchmark in math and 32 percent do so in reading. In eighth grade, 32 and 31 percent of students score proficient in math and reading, respectively. These are among the lowest marks on record for Ohio, reflecting in part Covid-related school closures that were prolonged in many districts due to union advocacy. Subpar outcomes may also reflect soft accountability measures, which the unions have actively worked to weaken in Ohio.
Reining in teachers unions won’t be easy. When former Governor John Kasich tried to dial back union power—not only the teachers’ but other public employees, as well—the effort was overturned via statewide referendum. That may have been a “win” for the unions, but public schools and the students they serve are still no better off.
An extended look at how to constrain unions would take pages, but a good starting point is Wisconsin, a traditionally strong-union state that rolled back union-friendly laws. Unlike Ohio’s wide-ranging effort, Wisconsin’s Act 10 (passed in 2012) focused more narrowly on teachers unions—firefighters and law enforcement were exempt—likely making the bill more politically acceptable. Since its enactment, the legislation has indeed curtailed the unions (reduced membership and revenue) and re-empowered district leaders. More importantly, research led by Yale University’s Barbara Biasi has shown that the reforms have helped schools retain effective teachers and has driven student learning gains.
Wisconsin Act 10 contains three key elements—all of which Ohio should consider adopting:
1. Dramatically narrows the scope of collective bargaining. Rather than opening nearly all aspects of operation to negotiation—salary, vacation, evaluation, discipline, etc.—the Act limits collective bargaining to base salary only, i.e., the minimum amount a teacher can receive in a district.[2] Limiting negotiation to base wages allows school leaders, should they choose, to adopt flexible compensation systems, including ones that incorporate merit-based pay. Enterprising Wisconsin districts have indeed used this newfound flexibility to attract and retain talented early-career teachers. Beyond salary, a narrowed scope of bargaining now allows school leadership to set workplace expectations and rules—likely set forth in an employee handbook—rather than having their authority “given away” to the unions during the negotiation process.
2. Requires annual union certification by a majority of teachers. In states like Ohio, a school district must negotiate with a union if teachers have certified it as their “exclusive representative.” This means that all teachers—even if they disagree with the union—must be covered under the union-negotiated employment contract. One of the problems with this arrangement is that the certification process may have occurred long ago, well before most teachers currently working in a district were around to vote. Wisconsin Act 10 changes this. Instead of giving unions permanent “exclusive representation,” the legislation now requires a majority of district teachers to annually recertify the union.[3] This restores teachers’ “voice” on whether they want representation in the first place, and teachers in many (though not all) Wisconsin districts have chosen not to recertify the local union.
3. Makes teacher strikes illegal. Wisconsin Act 10 outlawed teacher strikes, a policy consistent with dozens of other states (but not Ohio, which still allows them). The ability to strike, or the threat of it, is a formidable tool that unions can wield to gain concessions from districts and raise the cost of education. Unlike private companies, a school district cannot respond to a strike (or threat of it) by hiring non-union workers or moving elsewhere. It’s forced to negotiate, on terms likely more favorable to the union when it’s permitted to strike. While prohibiting strikes does not foreclose their possibility—“sickouts” can still happen—it does make the tactic more costly to unions, as they would be illegal and could result in fines or negative publicity.
* * *
Back in 2006, Stanford University’s Terry Moe, a renowned scholar of unionization, wrote:
The unions now shape the public schools from the bottom up through collective bargaining agreements that affect virtually every aspect of school organization and operation. They also shape the schools from the top down by influencing the education policies of government and blocking reforms they find threatening to their interests.[4]
Two decades have passed, and another generation of Ohio students have trudged through public schools that remain thoroughly shaped by the unions. Some have succeeded despite the union stranglehold, but many more have fallen through the cracks. It’s time for Ohio to move away from the collectivist, assembly-line model of education promoted by the unions, and bring excellence, merit, and personalization back into public schools—the very ingredients that are most apt to put Ohio on a new trajectory towards national leadership in public education.
[1] In actual dollars, Ohio’s per-pupil spending was $4,531 in 1990. This amount was adjusted to 2024 dollars, using the consumer price index.
[2] Even here, Act 10 restricts bargaining over base salary by limiting an increase to the inflation rate.
[3] Importantly, Wisconsin Act 10 requires a majority of all educators in a bargaining “unit” to certify the union—not just those who are union members or those who vote in the election.
[4] Quoted in Collective Bargaining in Education, ed. Jane Hannaway and Andrew J. Rotherham (p. 229).
