Reader responds to CTA coverage, letter to editor

Dear Editor:

I’d like to counter some of the biases published in two pieces that depicted the participation of the Canton Teachers Association at the June 16 School Committee Meeting: the letter from Ms. Schutt and the cover story by Mr. Berger. The headline to Mr. Berger’s story is fully biased and inaccurate; Ms. Schutt admits that her view is colored by her own bias — her love for her mother Reuki Schutt, who serves on the School Committee. So let me begin by acknowledging my own bias: my wife, Barbara, teaches fourth grade at the JFK and she was one of the teachers who spoke at the meeting.

I attended the meeting as well. Contrary to Ms. Schutt’s letter, there was no picketing; and contrary to the Citizen’s headline for its story, there was certainly no storming of the meeting. The CTA asked the School Committee if they could be put on the meeting agenda to address the committee on contract issues. The School Committee agreed. The CTA asked teachers to attend to support colleagues who were speaking; no one knew how many would attend, but roughly 200 came. They carried 10×12-inch posters listing their years of service in Canton schools and the degrees they held. The meeting room is small, and so the room was full. The areas — halls and staircases — leading to the meeting room were full, as teachers waited for the meeting to start.

Teachers were not yelling or marching in protest or walking a picket line to block entry, but waiting. As members of the School Committee entered, some teachers may have been quiet or looked to see who was coming in; others perhaps didn’t even know that the person was on the committee. I saw teachers smile and said hello, genuinely, to members who passed. Some committee members accepted the smiles, stopped and chatted; others averted their gazes and hurried by. No doubt School Committee members were surprised by the number of teachers present; I know teachers certainly were.

When the doors were opened to the meeting room, the teachers filed in quietly, trying to make sure everyone got in, though not everyone fit, coming to their seats before the committee arrived. The one gesture of protest was to stand silently and hold up their posters when the School Committee entered. When the meeting was called to order, those with seats sat, the signs were placed on tables, and the meeting commenced with full decorum.

In short, contrary to claims (of the headline writer) and perceptions (Ms. Schutt), the town’s teachers did not picket; they waited for the doors to open. The meeting was not stormed; it was attended. The School Committee members were not bullied; they were respected when they spoke.

After the teachers spoke, Mr. Bonnanzio said in reply that were the SC to meet the CTA proposal, taxes would have to go up or teachers laid off, but not one teacher had demanded that the CTA proposal be accepted. The teachers I heard spoke to say what the committee’s proposal would do to their livelihoods and to the town. Yet no one on the committee replied to explain why their fears were unfounded, to present an argument that lower pay will not cause teachers to leave, or that moving Canton’s support of schools to the bottom for surrounding towns will not have adverse effects. Instead, the committee responded by taking offense that teachers have come to believe the committee no longer supports teachers and values what they do, and then called the teachers’ presence and statements unproductive and unprofessional.

That the School Committee does not agree with teachers’ perceptions does not make the teachers’ participation at the meeting unprofessional. The teachers in attendance were very professional. That some members of the committee teared up to learn how their actions are perceived does not make teachers bullies. They were the opposite of bullies. They treated the committee members as adults and spoke honestly and frankly about their concerns.

The teachers spoke as professional educators in professional tones. Those who spoke, spoke not primarily as town employees with a contract at stake, but as teachers who love their profession, who work year round and full-time at improving their teaching, who love to see children learn, who enjoy working for the families of those children and the community at large. They spoke as parents of children in, or recently graduated from, Canton schools. The teachers also spoke with a deep understanding of our current economy, of also being under financial stress, also having homes worth less than the mortgage owed, and as people with spouses and children who are unemployed.

They spoke as fellow citizens who fear, with good logic, that if the School Committee’s proposal were accepted as given, it would trigger the decline of Canton schools, and to the extent that health of schools is related, to the town’s finances.

Nick Carbone

Share This Post

Short URL: https://www.thecantoncitizen.com/?p=6218