During the 1960s, schools in NYC have still yet been integrated to accommodate the needs to African Americans and Latinos. “People were getting anxious because their children were being sent to school at split times, no children were going full time.” More than six thousand schools kid who lived in the Brownsville and Ocean Hill neighborhood were on what the board of education called “short time”. Essentially this meant that children would go to school for a short period of time either in the morning or in the afternoon. This was a problem because it did not ensure adequate schooling for children we needed to meet the educational requirements.
After years of failed promises to integrate NY public school, activists in Brownsville and Ocean Hill, decided to take matters in their own hand. They focused on the idea of “community control” of local schools which was a proposal that allowed parents to shape the curriculum and staffing of schools in their neighborhood. This allowed parents ensure proper education was allowed. However the UTF( United Teacher Federation) believed that this proposal would threaten recently won job protection. Right off the bat, conflict was heated between the two groups. Over the course of the next few years, the UTF and the governing board had many heated battles.
Rhody McCoy, one of the leaders in charge of the board challenged the board of education and teachers. “Teachers envisioned the governing board as an advisory group that recommended—not implemented—changes in local schools.” However, the governing board made significant changes to community involvement cirriculums and how the schools were managed. Teachers ideas were ignored and not fairly represented. Under the delegation of McCoy, many teachers were on thin ice given that they wanted to challenge McCoys new policy changes but they feared of losing their new jobs. However, many teachers decide to protest McCoys policy changes and later were dismissed and services were no longer needed. This event sparked the series of teacher strikes in NYC that voiced their opinions to reinstate the teachers. However, the board refused to listen to the voices of the UTF and continued to operate with replacement teachers will strikes were going on.
Personally, the whole series of events in 1968 was such an unorganized blur of events that could have easily been resolved if both parties listened to each other. The UTF’s main concern was to ensure protection of their new jobs while the neighborhood activists wanted their children to have proper schools given the resources and integrated schools. Each party wanted different goals so they should have worked together to strive for each other’s goal. In my opinion, the governing board was at fault for ignoring the teachers opinions and not allowing them to voice their views during community involvement meetings. The fact that they did not allow the fired teachers to be reinstated made the problem worse. In modern day, I do not think teacher strikes would be this extreme because the DOE has evolved and it is actively trying to hear the voice of the parents. NYC schools will try to stop it before it gets out of control. Additionally, there more stronger teacher unions that will fight for the teachers rights.
The teachers’ strike in 1968 probably would have not been as significant if the timing was any different. I can understand teachers not wanting to give up their newly won union rights, but they should have considered if the fight for their rights as workers was more important than the right of students to a good education. The fight for community control only came after New York rejecting attempts to integrate schools. Finally, Black students were being given a chance to be given a fair chance at a good education, with community boards being more representative of the community. Ultimately, parents wanted better schooling for their children, and couldn’t rely on the city to integrate schools, so communities took it upon themselves to be in control of their own neighborhood schools.
Based on the reading I also can’t tell if the teachers had anything to really worry about. Community control boards appointing specific teachers to their schools were still choosing from the same pool of teachers, if not in the order of the list. I don’t think many of them had any risk of losing a job based on community control boards, and teachers that went on strike were all employed by these schools, so it doesn’t make much sense. When you also consider that most teachers were probably white, the protest looks less like a union concerned about their rights and more like an unwillingness to help Black and Latino students succeed in school.
I agree with you that the problem might have been able to be solved before it escalated. The teachers should have recognized that they have less to lose than these students did. This strike is what a lot of people consider to be an initial fragmentation of liberal politics, because it was seen as union workers versus minorities.
You both bring up great points. I think the fear, Christina, from the union was not about teachers losing their jobs, but rather their rights earned through collective bargaining to have a say about which schools they worked at. This might seem antiquated today, but prior to that teachers were employees of the Board of Education and could be sent to any school in the city to teach. It does seem today that the teachers’ interests and the community control activists’ interests need not have been in conflict. But at the time their differences seem insurmountable. I wonder why.