News

February 19, 2008

Verbal darts fired over unionizing

Bishop: Financial gain spurs teachers. Union head: Martino misunderstands us.

By Mark Guydish mguydish@timesleader.com
Education Reporter
Mark Guydish on Facebook   |   @TLMarkGuydish on Twitter

SCRANTON – Diocese of Scranton Bishop Joseph Martino fired back at those trying to unionize Catholic school teachers, contending they are motivated by “self-interest” and seek “the acquisition of the greatest financial gains.”

The salvo came in a letter printed as part of full-page newspaper ads Sunday.

The union wasted no time returning fire, quickly posting an “open letter” to Martino on its Web site and sending it to newspapers (it is on today’s editorial page). Signed by union president Michael Milz, the letter says “You suggest that our leaders seek only financial gain, but how would you know that without talking to us?”

The Scranton Diocese Association of Catholic Teachers (SDACT) has sought recognition as the bargaining agent for teachers ever since Martino announced a restructuring of Catholic schools in 2006 that wiped out existing union contracts and formed four regional school boards. The diocese rejected the request last month and set up an “Employee Relations Program” instead, prompting the union to launch an escalating battle for public support through rallies and letters, most recently calling for parents to withhold contributions to church collection baskets and give it to national Catholic charities instead.

Through it all, Martino remained silent until Sunday’s letter, which accused the union of making claims that “are misleading, inaccurate or simply false.” Martino wrote that he is “disappointed by the invective and disrespect that have been unleashed against me through public statements and quotes in the media” from union leaders.

Martino denies the union claim that he is ignoring a century of Catholic Church teachings regarding organized labor, saying: “I wish to allow no doubt that I uphold and teach the principles of Catholic doctrine on the right of people freely to choose and form unions for the purpose of collective bargaining.”

He cites a passage from the Second Vatican Council’s Pastoral Constitution on the Church in the Modern World that says humans have a “basic right … of freely founding labor unions.”

But that right “is dependent on factors which must be considered by all concerned parties,” and Martino wrote that parents “make significant financial sacrifices to obtain a Catholic education” for their children.

“I have the most serious obligation to establish the requirements for Catholic education and to see that they are accomplished in our schools. If I fail to do so, the rights of parents are grievously violated,” Martino wrote. “Labor unions seek to obtain increased benefits for their members. They should also seek, however, to act in a way that does not hinder the apostolic endeavor that provides their livelihood.”

Before rejecting the union, Martino wrote, it’s history, contract negotiations “and public statements were reviewed. It became clear that … the primary goal of SDACT’s leaders has always been the acquisition of the greatest financial gains and other contractual concessions it could obtain.”

Martino also wrote that the U.S. Supreme Court “has exempted the Church from the requirements of the National Labor Relations Act and its provisions concerning unions in Catholic schools,” that there are many dioceses without teacher unions, and that Church Canon Law does not require recognition of unions in schools. “A union, then, is not required, essential or mandated.”

The union written response notes that the Supreme Court decision, known as National Labor Relations Board vs. Catholic Bishop of Chicago, didn’t “exempt” the Church, but ruled that Congress did not intend to include the Church under the Act when it was written. “By comparison, the laws of New Jersey and New York require the church to bargain with their teachers.”

The union letter also says “we offered to save the schools upward of $600,000 in accumulated sick pay and severance that came due when the schools were closed to form the new systems,” and that in negotiating contracts during the last 30 years, contract settlements “were never one-sided negotiations, they were agreements for mutual gain.”

Martino’s letter, the union claims, shows the bishop’s “interests are our interests: quality Catholic education for our children, increasing the number of children in our schools, and providing that service at a price our parents can afford. We are parents too.”

In a phone interview, Milz called Martino’s letter “very enlightening,” and said it shows the bishop is “getting bad advice … It’s obvious they paid to have a union avoidance firm to come into the picture. Google ‘union avoidance,’ look up any firm that deals with it, and you can see he was coached to hit every point they say to hit: It’s the greedy union’s fault, it’s only about sustaining their own power, it’s only about money.”

Milz has conceded that, by definition, the Scranton Diocese Association of Catholic Teachers can ultimately only exist if it is recognized as the bargaining unit for diocese teachers – it has never represented teachers, or had members, outside the diocese. But he repeatedly insists this is about social justice and fairness for all teachers, not about his organization’s survival.

The struggle is shaping up as the proverbial immovable object and irresistible force. Martino wrote that “While unions are appropriate in some situations, they are not the only means to achieve justice for workers. Therefore, the decision to implement the Employee Relations Program will not be revoked.”

“That is unacceptable,” Milz said, “And will forever be unacceptable. If it comes down to it, we’ll do whatever we have to do.” The union has increasingly talked of calling for some type of work stoppage.

“Our options are getting narrower as the days go by,” Milz said, “but it’s not us who are unwilling to talk.”

On the Net:

Read the union and the diocese letters, the “Pastoral Constitution on the Church” and the U.S. Supreme Court ruling at www.timesleader.com

Mark Guydish, a Times Leader staff writer, may be reached at 829-7161

Tweet	Follow @TLnews