Bill on teacher union rights heads to governor

Back to TopCommentsE-mailPrintBookmark and Share

A bill to restrict Indiana teachers' collective bargaining rights has cleared its final legislative hurdle, becoming the first part of Republican Gov. Mitch Daniels' sweeping education agenda to make it to the governor's desk.

The GOP-led Indiana Senate voted 30-19 Tuesday in favor of a House-passed version of the bill, which would prohibit contracts between school districts and teachers unions from including anything other than wages and wage-related benefits.

The limits would affect contract agreements between districts and unions for teachers and any other school employees, such as bus drivers, custodians and nurses, starting July 1. Contracts reached before July 1 couldn't extend beyond June 2013.

Supporters of the proposal argue that teacher contracts shouldn't include details that do little to improve academics, such as requiring comfortable teachers' lounges. Daniels has pushed for the bill, saying in his State of the State address that collective bargaining agreements go too far.

Opponents — including the Indiana State Teachers Association — point out that the contracts are negotiated locally. They say school district leaders should have the power to agree to the contract provisions they want.

The Republican-controlled House had previously voted for the proposal, which now heads to Daniels for his signature.

Other big pieces of Daniels' aggressive education agenda face key votes this week.

Daniels also wants to:

— Create the nation's most expansive voucher program directing taxpayer money to private schools. The bill could get a Senate vote as early as Wednesday. On Tuesday, the Senate amended the bill to address concerns from Sen. Brent Steele, R-Bedford. Steele has said he doesn't want tax money to religious schools, saying some Muslim schools teach extremism. The amended bill states that private schools participating in the voucher program — along with public schools — shall not "teach the violent overthrow of the government of the United States." The Senate also included in the bill a tax deduction of $1,000 per child for parents who home-school their children or send them to private schools.

— Expand charter schools. A version of that bill has passed both the House and Senate. House leaders are now determining whether to agree to the Senate version or try to hammer out a compromise.

— Implement merit pay for teachers by requiring student achievement to account for part of teacher evaluations. That bill could get a House as early as Wednesday.


  • The fine print
    Whoa, "The Senate also included in the bill a tax deduction of $1,000 per child for parents who home-school their children or send them to private schools."

    EVERY taxpayer that does not have a child in school (e.g., seniors, childless couples, singles) should be OUTRAGED that they are not allowed to claim this deduction, too!!

    So, let me get this straight, not only are MY tax dollars going to send someone else's kid to private school, but, that kid's parents get a deduction, too??

Post a comment to this story

We reserve the right to remove any post that we feel is obscene, profane, vulgar, racist, sexually explicit, abusive, or hateful.
You are legally responsible for what you post and your anonymity is not guaranteed.
Posts that insult, defame, threaten, harass or abuse other readers or people mentioned in IBJ editorial content are also subject to removal. Please respect the privacy of individuals and refrain from posting personal information.
No solicitations, spamming or advertisements are allowed. Readers may post links to other informational websites that are relevant to the topic at hand, but please do not link to objectionable material.
We may remove messages that are unrelated to the topic, encourage illegal activity, use all capital letters or are unreadable.

Messages that are flagged by readers as objectionable will be reviewed and may or may not be removed. Please do not flag a post simply because you disagree with it.

Sponsored by

facebook - twitter on Facebook & Twitter

Follow on TwitterFollow IBJ on Facebook:
Follow on TwitterFollow IBJ's Tweets on these topics:
Subscribe to IBJ
  1. Can your dog sign a marriage license or personally state that he wishes to join you in a legal union? If not then no, you cannot marry him. When you teach him to read, write, and speak a discernible language, then maybe you'll have a reasonable argument. Thanks for playing!

  2. Look no further than Mike Rowe, the former host of dirty jobs, who was also a classically trained singer.

  3. Current law states income taxes are paid to the county of residence not county of income source. The most likely scenario would be some alteration of the income tax distribution formula so money earned in Marion co. would go to Marion Co by residents of other counties would partially be distributed to Marion co. as opposed to now where the entirety is held by the resident's county.

  4. This is more same-old, same-old from a new generation of non-progressive 'progressives and fear mongers. One only needs to look at the economic havoc being experienced in California to understand the effect of drought on economies and people's lives. The same mindset in California turned a blind eye to the growth of population and water needs in California, defeating proposal after proposal to build reservoirs, improve water storage and delivery infrastructure...and the price now being paid for putting the demands of a raucous minority ahead of the needs of many. Some people never, never learn..

  5. I wonder if I can marry him too? Considering we are both males, wouldn't that be a same sex marriage as well? If they don't honor it, I'll scream discrimination just like all these people have....