Tattersall 2006

Tattersall, Amanda. 2006. "Bringing the community in: Possibilities for public sector union success through community unionism." International Journal of Human Resources Development and Management 6(2): 186-199.

• public sector unions are starting to lose out to conservative governments (187)
• this paper is describing the New South Wales Teacehrs Federation experiments with community unionism (187)
• tough to really define community unions 9187-188)
• can be understood as the intersection of unionism and three types of commnity:
• community organizing
• people with common interests (sort of identity)
• and geograhic areas
• literature says community unionism works best when there is a relational component, a shared interest, and a shared goegraphy (188)
• geographers say community unionism is most likely to happen when there is a spatial fix on capital (it can't run away)
• article is about a campaign from 2001-2004 (188-189)
• went for school improvement through a borad-based campaign in favor of public education after big budget cuts (189)
• three major innovations: (190)
• a fee to fund proactive campaigning
• create education lobby groups that cover an electoral area
• find common ground with principals
• an inquiry into public education included tight cooperation between unions and parent groups, which paid dividends (191-192)
• out of this grew a public education alliance that included principals and administrators (192-193)
• needed careful balancing to make sure teachers till got salaries, but other alliance members weren't feeling like they were just helping improve teachers' salaries (192)
• these sorts of internal demands that alliance member-groups had were dangerous to the alliance, need to remember alliance members were autnomous organizatiosn with their own goals (193)
• at one point the parent's group voted to support s NSWTF strike! (194)
• but alliance foundered a bit after winning stuff, and split once salary negotations started (195)
•  

Wilson 2007

Wilson, Fiona. (2007). "Transcending race? schoolteachers and political militancy in andean peru, 1970-2000." Journal of Latin American Studies, 39(4), 719-746

• In Latin America the school has been important to nation formation since teh 19th century, it is the space for social reproduction, but also the production of the state (719-720)
• education was the way to achieve citizenship (720)
• great lit review on the importance of the state to social formation (719-722)
• "My research in teh Peruvian central sierra in teh 1990s suggested that teachers felt teaching had been reduced to a profession of last resort ad this, in turn, reflected back on their racial identity in that they risked being defined as mestizos of last resort too." (722)
• most teachers in Peru held the mestizo identity partially because they were agents of the staet (725)
• they were expected to be more than teachers, and to perform a host of functions apart from teaching
• they were a civilizing force
• but as members of this civilizing avant garde, teachers have at times organized against the state, and have often been repressed (726)
• SUTEP was founde din 1972, led by Marxist university teachers, held that there was no racism in their ranks (728)
• teachers were very important memebrs of Sendero Luminoso (728-729)
• at times teachers would side with the peasants, especially int eh areas of agrarian reform in the 1970s, because they felt it was an important step in civilizing the indgenous populationj (731-33)
• but then this resulted in teachers being cast out from the white society from which the originally came (733)
• SUTEP became more popular among teachers as teachers began losing status through the massification f their profession (734)
• but this also had the danger of making teachers seem eve less cultured and sophisticated
• 1978 strikes won a few demands, but when the state started to back away from these in 1979, new strike which was repressed and meant teachers working conditions and salaries were reduced (735)
• the union became a haven of mestizaje for the teachers, though outside society branded the union as the opposite, cholos and firebrands
• now teachers became potential subsersives, coudl no longer be trusted to represent the state (736)
• many teachers may have suported Sendero Luminoso, but after the real fighting began many tried to abandon the group and take up a middle space between the state and the Maoists, which was difficult to do given the polarization of society (744)
• teaches who didn't toe the state line were cholos, which disheartened many techers who had become teachers specifically to avoid/overcome this low racial status (745)

Jacoby and Nitta 2012

Jacoby, Daniel F., and Keith Nitta. 2011. "The Bellevue Teachers Strike and Its Implications for the Future of Postindustrial Reform Unionism." Educational Policy: 533-563

• Reform unionism: moving away from adversarial relationships, by breaking down barriers between workers and managers, including "management prerogatives" (536)
• in teaching this idea meant organizing around education quality, and professionalism whereby the union would police its own standards (537)
• teachers unions used this to immunize themselves against the critiques of industrial unionism and its adversarialness (537)
• reform teacher unions redefine management and labr such that teachers are uderstood as porfessionals whose particiaption in school governance is essential (538)
• but postindsutrial unionism might just be a panopticon, says some critical theorists (539)
• What they found in Bellevue was that teachers started focusing/bargaining over wages specifically becaues they had no say in teh curriculum, or lost their say there, and without that what's left to bargain over? (547)
• union went from helping promote, taking responsibility for student achievement to demanding a greater role for teachers' invovlement...change from helpful to a bit more advesarial in doing so (553-554)
• 
  

Moore Johnson and Kardos 2000

Moore Johnson, Suan and Susan M Kardos "Reform Bargaining and Its Promise for School Reform"
in

Loveless, Tom. 2000. Conflicting missions. Teachers Unions and Educational Reform The Brookings Institution, Washington, DC.

• reform Bargaining: teachers unions recognizing common interests with schools, working collaboratively with school administrators (8)
• in teh US, there was teh factory model of schooling, which has since been replaced by the professional model of schooling (8-9)
• "Teachers must approach their work as a craft or prfession rather than as routine labor, and schools must be organized to encourage them to do so." (9)
• bureaucracy, union or otherwise, can stifle innovation and make teachres and schools unable to respond to the varied needs of students and communites (11-12)
• but importantly one urban principal once declared that the thick, phone-book size contracts were actually an indictment of past administrations, namely their wilingness to abuse teachers (12)
• industrial bargaining led to better pay and faier, more reasonable work environment, yet they also limited the roels teachers could play, overly supported weak teachers (tenure), etc (17)
• good for dividing resources, bad for facing educational challenges (19)
• negotiators who improved edcuation suggested it was only possible once unions/teachers had already attained bread adn butter items that regulate basic working conditions (25)

never really gets into community, but one could see how industrial bargaining would limit community interaction as well...though reform bargaining may also limit this, if the community isn't specifically invted to be invovled

Donaire 2012

Donaire, Ricardo. 2012. Los docentes en el siglo XXI: ¿empobrecidos o proletarizados? Buenos Aires: Siglo Veintiuno Editores.

• Introduction
• while education coverage has increased greatly since 1960, we are also seeing more people with precarious work relations (23)
• between 2002 and 2007 22% of protests have included "intellectual" workers, including teachers (23) citing another report
• 2009 Ministry of labor report: 454 000 teachers in the the 5 national teachers unions, 2/3 of which are in CTERA (24)
• teachers have done about 1/4 of all strikes between 1994 and 2008
• check out the "Programa de Investigacion sobre el Movimiento de la Sociedad Argentina
• but traditionally teachers aren't thought of as the working class, yet they are going on stikes and stuff
• the governemnt then and now has tried to delegitmize teachers strikes as an attack on the poor (by the teachers), thereby separating teachers from the identity of "poor" (25)
• ARGUMENT: showing teachers have descended to become a proletariat, but not just because they have a union or don't make as much money as they used to. Rather, this is a larger story abuot how this middle class was turned into a proletariat, and how many other of the middle/intellectual classes are also being turned into proles (25-6)
• chapter 2: theories of proletarianization
• proletarianization as deskilling, Braverman (30-34)
• ideological proletarianization, where proles lose the ability to choose how to do their work, has a lot more to do with proeltarianization of the middle class (Derber)
• teachers are becoming de-skilled due to the number of pre-made lessons and the rules set out by the state that teacher smust follow (37-38)
• but specialization could mean actually GREATER skill for teachers, rather than a deskilling (39)
• then something about ideological proletarianization that i didn't understand...i think it's something about misunderstanding WHY they do work (think they are helping, but actually just recreating classes and their own domination, despite being a middle class)
• chapter 3: lit on what class teachers on in
• generally they are seen as part of the middle classes, in Marxian thought
• some studies note that at teachers are making less money, that poorer people are becoming teachers, but still see teachers as middle class, just not doing as well as they used to (47-49)
• in major part this is happening thanks to precarious contracts, and worsening labor conditions (45-46)
• though some scholars still see teachers as a privileged middle class, relative to workers (47-8)
• but importantly there are lots of teachers who are identified as part of the "new poor" (51), those who lost out (in terms of salary and working conditions) a lot during the 1990s
•  
• in the official classifications, docentes de primaria y secundaria are technical workers, whereas university profs are the only professionals (73)
• teachers make up about 30% of formal wage workers that have professional or technical expertise in the country (74)
• in 2001 CABA teachers were about 55% public, 45% private, rest of the country was more like 76/24 (75-77)
• to decide whether or not teachers are becoming part of the proletariat, subseuquent chapters will look at : living conditions, working conditions, work process, and perceptions of class among teachers (79), going to look at primary and secondary, private and public, did data gathering in 2007 (80)

• Chapter 6: condiciones de vida
• overall this chatper suggests that teachers are getting poorer, even when they come from middle class backgrounds (which most do), but can’t quite prove they are becoming proles (103)
•  chapter 7 working conditions
• a report from 2008 said that 65% (460) of the school buildings in CABA were deteriating, 50 of which were totally ununsable (105)
• 52% were older than 50 yrs (106)
• the poorest neighborhoods tend to have the wrost schools (106
• there is a syndrome or burnout that has affected teachers and been noted by pyschiatrists (107-8)
• tables on precarity 128, 125
• 141-143: teachers are in more precarious work relationships becaues they are being proletarianized
• public school teachers earn less than other public sector workers of similar qualifications, and private school teachers earn even less than that (147-148)
• labor process, chapter 8
• teachers haven’t lost the skills of teaching, their jobs haven’t been deskilled, but they have experiecned a sort of “ideological proletarianization”, where they have lost control o the politics behind what they teach, essentially they seem to be passing on the norms without being able to fight them (152-3
• issues facing teachers in teh classroom, including what to teach, what to do when students don’t care, etc (153-167
• perceptions of teachers of theri class location, chapter 9
• most teachers 59.6% think they are part of middle class, but only 46% think teachrs in general are in middle class...for working class it is 12 and 14% resectively (181)
• 2004 study found 63% thought they were in middle class, but 28% thought working class (182)
• many teachers think strikes are fine to use (186) and about 33% said they would g out with a spontaneous strike, while 11% they wouldn’t and the rest had no opinion (185)
• 58% of teachers suggested that teachers were like “salaried workers”, and thus close to the working class if not exactly a part of it (195)
• sees tehe strike as an important symbol of teachers as working class as opposed to anything else
• history of teachers unions 197-204, with data on memebr #s on 200
• teachers at least seem to be moving closer to identifying with the working class, even if they see themselves as professionals/workers (206), it seems like teachers aren’t actually ebing robbed of their ideologies, but rather their ideologies are moving closer to those that favor the working class (207)
• conclusions
• 60% of teachers can be removed at will (210-211)
• it doesn't seem like teachers have lost control of their work process in a real, fundamental way, but they do have a lot fo expectations about student achievement and subjects taught that is at les enchroaching on these things (214-2158), meaning teachers aren't whollyautonomous
• teachers are being proleatrianized, though they aren't there fullly yet (234-238)

Gentili, Suárez, Stubrin, and Gindín 2004

• Introduction
• teachers have gone on strikes a lot in LA recently, as have university students (1252)
• these fights and negotiations happened in places where the economy was in crisis, the education sector wasn't in great shape, and many went through processes of reform to improve education system (1253)
• authors suggest that the conflict over education system is about the fact that many of the reforms were very ambitious and didn't take into account economic crises that came or traditions of the sector
•  these authors want to create an integrated theory about teacher protest, not just assume it's all about salary (1253-4)
• it seems cyclical (1254)
• it's hard to divorce it from larger economic crises that occurred
• but a big part of the problem is that tensions would arise with any reform, but in this case most of the reforms didn't include teachers at all, which provoked greater protest (1256-7)
• the lack of democratic discussion about education reform was a common issue throughout the region (1257)
• Education conflict: creating a definition is theoretically ambitious
• thinking about education conflict as a place for active adn dynamic contestation that creates the agents and strategies of the agents....that is to say, it's not a place of pure reaction due to sructural factors (1258)
• obviously this also means that interests will conflict and will be complex, even within what one might imagine would be a similar group....it's economic and poltiical but also has to do with cultural and psychology of a person/group
• aha....1257-1260 is sort of relating the various theories of social conflict, transplanting them to education a bit, and then saying the authors are going to look across LA to see which themes come up most often (1260)
• 1998-2003: a chronology of union action around education reforms in LA
• education reform processes have generated a lot of conflict in LA, pretty much across the board, though reactions to this conflict have differed (1261)
• 863 conflicts during this time, 40% of which were started by base-level unions (1262)
• during this time 54% of the conflicts were aimed at teh central government, while 31% were at provincial governments (the latter usually from decentralized education systems
• none were exclusively against private schools!
• private school unions tend to be less combatitive
• when they are combative, it's usually as part of larger confederations that are dominated (in numbers) by public school teachers (1263)
• private-school battles are usually very small and circumscribed
• most often working conditions and salary are basically set by the state anyway, so it makes more sense to go after government, and to do so you need lots of help, not just private sector (1263)
• Argentina had the most conflict, with 1491 days lost in this time period (1264)
• data! (1265)
• the reforms were not undertaken in a democratic way, which resulted in higher levels of conflict, though all the governments who undertook these reforms were certainly democratically elected (for the most part) (1266)
• of the actiosn taken
• 79% had labor demands
• 28% were based on larger demands of education politics, like those against decentralization
• 12% were against teh political system en total
• usually salary demands were linked to larger, more theoretical demands
• teachers strikes have a very high level of adhesion in teh region (1266-7)
• unions led practically all the manifestations, and a lot of them included wage/pay demands (1268)
• Conclusions
• much of the traditions and norms of education and education politics were greatly changed by the reforms across LA, and they did so with very little consultation with the teachers (1269)
• this resulted in a lot of conflcit aroudn education, which tended to become the center of even larger social conflcits (1270)
• 
  

Betancur 2008

Bentancur, Nicolás. 2008. "La nueva agenda de las políticas educativas en el Cono Sur (Argentina, Chile y Uruguay 2005-2008)." Revista Debates 2.2: 272-298.

• Introduction
• reforms of the 1990s tended to
• involve centralization of curriculum creation, but decentralization of administration (273)
• schemes of "positive discrimination" in favor of the poor
• introduction of business ideas into education
• expansion of the role of families and businesses in education
• Argentina: decentalization of secondary teachings and teacher training (273-4)
• Chile: introduction/perfection of market regulation of education (275)
• Uruguay: maintained the national state as central head of education
• recently all these countries have begun to talk/change these reforms again, thanks to left of center governmetns (274)
• Argentina
• 2006 law came out of Néstor having a big open discussion with large numbers of people in society (275)
•  2006 law rescinded parts of 1993 law, resulted in
• returning federal state as the guarantor of access to and right of education (276)
• made secondary school obligatory, and created systemwhere provinces can choose to do 6 years each of primary and secodnary, ot 7 and 5 (respectively)
• created a Consejo Federal de Educacion, with consultative councils that include teachers (276-7)
• this reform didn't roll back decentalization totally (277)
• nor did it end the financing of private education
• CTERA like this reform, law included a lot of things that CTERA suggested should be in there, and it got a lot of things it has watned for a while, like (278)
• declaration that education is a right and should be free
• growth of financing of schools to 6% GDP (PBI)
• the right to free teacher training
• the right of colelctive negotiation at the provincial AND national level
• Catholic schools were also a fan of the bill (279), more or less
• Chile
• student protests in 2005 demanded free schooling and transportation to school (280)
• teachers eventually joined protests and there was a national strike
• there was a council to solve these issues, that woudl include students, but at first it was stalled because students became a bit radicalized, and strike grew as more social groups joined the students' cause (280-1)
• once the council finally got together, including social groups, parties, and student representatives, it became clear that everyoen was unhappy, but great divergence in ideas on how to fix the system...some wanted more martket, some wanted less (281)
• Colegio de Profesores, union, was with the students (282) they wanted more centralization, better pay, shorter hours
• on the other end of the spectrum, private schools wanted fewer laws, more flexibility
• teachers groups did make some deamdns on private schools, not that thy be nationalized, but at least that they would be regulated more closely, including their entrance requirements (284)
• government in Chile did not try to replace the private system set up by Pinochet and perfected in the 1990s, but it dis try to smooth out some of the issues with it, make it a bit more equitable (286-287)
• Uruguay
• new law in teh 1990s didn't change tehcentalized, hierarchical nature of education, but was undertaken without any input from social groups, and the unions were against it, so a new law in the 2000s with the new left government was likely (287-8)
• the government convened a large Congress to figure out the new education law, parties were not allowed to be involved, only social actors, though unions were allowed and they tended to hav ea large say in the matter (288-290)
• new law reaffirmed much of old law, and said that funding could not go below 6% GDP (292)
• created autonomy and co-governance of schools by parents, teachers, students, and administrators (293)
• Conclusion: is there a new paradigm of education politics in teh Southern Cone?
• none of these reofrms were massive changes, refoundations (294)
• non of the reforms really chagne public/private relationship in their country (295)
• all reformers seem preoccupied with making the porcess inclusive of social actors
• teachers and students growing in power, technocrats and private sector losing power
• see tables on page 296 for some quick conclusions

Tello 2013

Tello, César. 2013. "Las políticas docentes y la perspectiva sindical en Argentina, México y Chile: debates y negociaciones. Los casos de CTERA, SNTE y el Colegio de Profesores en los últimos veinte años." Educar em Revista, (48), 149-166.

• Introduction
• in the 1990s education systems started being changed to follow neoliberal ideas, but in the 200s some governments began putting the state back in charge of education (150-151)
• Chávez (2010) showed:
• continued neoliberalism: Mexico, Peru, Costa Rica, Colombia, and others (151)
• concertacion: Arg, Brazil, Guatemal, Uruguay, Paraguay (152)
• rupture from neoliberal: Bolivia, Ecuador, Venezuela
• argument seems to be that the historical relationship between the unions and government in Mexico and Chile can help us understand what happened in those cases, but that in Argentina the more recent political scenario is explanatory (152)
• the debate: World Bank versus the unions
• teachers unions said reforms would make teaching worse, make salary go down, working conditions worse
• IFIs thought teachers needed someone to hold them accountable, finally, like parents, pushed for school autonomy (154)
• specifics of each case
• Chile
• has had decentralized education since 1990, thanks to the military dictatorship (156)
• unions helped kick out Pinochet
• the Colegio de Profesores was traditionally a group that sought to limit conflict, negotiate, but started acting more like a real union when they got some ability to do so after Pinochet left in 1991 (156-157) 
• the union traded improved salaries for some accountability measures with Lagos, but then subsequently demanded Bachelet and Pinera change the education system (157-9)
• but suggests this is more about the awakening of the union and its demanding what it was promised at the start of democracy (159)
• Mexico
• SNTE is super powerful in education sector, thanks ot historic relations with the PRI (160)
• change in relations and mobilization with SNTE came when PAN in power, though union tried to make-up with PRI in 2012, article doesn't know about EEG getting arrested, but it sstill uncolear ot author if old allinace will be renewed or not (161)
• Argentina
• anti Menem hard in 1990s (162)
• Marcha and Carpa Blancha made thema national force (162)
• friends with Ks, for a while, thanks to laws that gave them tons of money and national negotiations, but when this started to break down they had more strikes (162)
• Conclusions:
• in Chile, union was against the dictatorship and onyl after 20 years of alliance with those parties decided to break from them (163)
• in Mexico union never conronts the government, except as an oligarchic group
• in Argentina union was agisnt the government but has now been friends with Ks and moderated between 2003 and 2011

Nardacchione 2012

• In Neuquen in 1997 protets against Menemismo came through alliances between piquteros and teachers (2)
• on the one hand they were unhappy with unepmloyment, etc
• on the other hand they were trying to defend public education
• this allowed the union to push against provincialization in a national way, create a political movement, and demand national support for public edcuation as a universal justice demand
• provincialization caused
• wages to go down (3)
• working conditions to get worse
• CTERA found itself unable to coordinate its demands to the national level, stuck in a fragmented opposition
• some governments started paying teachers under the table, meaning they did not contribute to obras sociales (4)
• CTERA had trouble of articulating provincial demands at the national level
• for example: SUTEBA would strike, but SADOP and FEB didn't help
• Provincial crises
• at first the provincialization of education caused a drop in militancy and strikes, but eventually problems at the province level made the edcuation adn fiscal crisis worse (5)
• fiscal crisis occurred in many provinces because the national government was an important source of money for the provinces (5)
• not only were education budgets low, but they were set up irrationally (6)
• this strong problem a the provincial level led to deepening and expanding labor protest at the provincial level
• soon the teachers in some provinces were striking more against general issues facing society as a whole, not just for specific issues in regard to their own salaries or working conditions (7)
• this general protest, combined with the fact that it was happenign in many different provinces and the fact that there was some violence result in the re-nationalization of the conflict in 1997 (7)
• when other unions didn't join SUTEBA protests, they found allies outside the union sector, and eventually with UCR and FREPASO (8)
• The nationalization and politicization of the conflict
• the first is a recentralization of the deabte, the second is a move away from technical questions to social/citizenship ones (8)
• the CTERA wanted to do a national strike in 1996, but was having trouble convincing its uniosn to follow, and to get the government to talk to them...the government eventually agreed to talk about these things... (10)
• but hte union in Nequen decided to go on strike anyway, it was a broad colaition against lowering salaries across public sector workers, and the closing of YPF...
• violence to clear roadblock, bystander killed by police (10)...
• in response to this violence, CTERA called  anational strike (80% adhesion) and quit negotiating with teh government (11)
• BIG strike with lots of help, carpa blanca, and after this the idea of nationalizing education demands became a reality (11)
• this also helped the politicization of the cause, as non-union groups joined the fight after this (11-12)
• national ministry wanted to focus the talks on techinical aspects of teaching, while CTERA changed the topic to political and social-economic role of teaching (12)
• CTERA starts doing a lot of social actions, whole eudcation question became way bigger than just a union issue (13)
• 
  

Chiappe 2012

Chiappe, María Mercedes. La conflictividad laboral entre los docentes públicos provinciales: 2006-2010. Diss. 2012.
this isn't the right cite. find the correct one.

• paper about docente labor conflict 2006-2009
• understand the growth and important of national strike in 2008, as well as the development of provincial strikes (295)
• how do salary demands affect other education budget demands
• political alignment between CTERA and the national government
• history
• conflict itn eh 1990s was mostly against reforms adn fiscal adjustments (296)
• in teh late 1990s CTERA moderated demands because they were a part of the government, but then the workers autoorganized their own protests (297)
• teachers demands were not linked to greater politicization post-2003, had already been doing stuff, by post 2003 were demanding work related things
• national state after 2003 began to retake its role as the head of education, even if the provinces were technically still in control of everything (298)
• theory: 298-300
• data
• most conflicts between 2006 and 2009 were strikes, second most common thing were mobilizations (300-1)
• teachers had lots of strikes, not the most of any public sector group, but had way more teachers involved than any other group (and even more after that if you include indiviudal days not worked around the strike among workers who technically weren't out on strike (301-2)
• salary demands are most common (303, 305)
• generic salary demands are also more common than specific demands (305)
• work conditions the most important non-wage demand
• state-level conflicts are more likely than in other industries, which makes sense (306)
• seems like private sector teacher demands are also at state level, which is a bit unusual int eh private sector in general
• see more conflicts with between government/ERs and a coalition of trade unions (307), because education workers are often in different unions (308)
• 5 unions
• CEA:no national confed
• UDA, AMET, SADOP (private): CGT
• CTERA: CTA
• the complex array of unions creates very different union/government relations in different provinces (311)
• CTERA doesn't have the top-down control that other national confederations have (312)
• 2010: big drop in strikes compared to 2009 (312-3)
• DIFFERENCES IN CONFLICT LEVEL by province see 314
•  doesn't seem to be any relation between improvements, level of salary and conlifct levels (216-317)
• CTERA found some common ground with Nestor adn Cristina, so the focus came to be extending federal law implementation at the provincial level (321)
• CTERA stopped doing so much striking, became actions done more by base unions at the provincial level
• when education went down to the provincial level, that meant that provincial governments had the power to determine pay, etc, but also the legality of strikes among the teachers (322)
• differeing levels of institutionalization of rules about these things, though its too early to tell if they are affecting conflict levels (323-326)
• after creation of the paritaria nacional seems like conflict is lessening, though  we can't say for sure quite yet (328), and no other factors seem to have an effect (328)
• this law says that the federal governmetn will pay teachers if the province can't afford the national minimum set
• CTERA might be moderating its provincial level conflicts to focus on this national tool
• thsi national law seems to be a strong tool for province level unions (329)
• Conclusion
• CTERA and government seem to been in alliance, thats to Partiaria Nacional, and that this probably has had the effect of limiting conflict (330)
• 
  

Perazza 2011a

Perazza, Roxana. 2011a. Relaciones de consenso y cooperación. El caso argentino. Desafíos desde la política pública. El Cotidiano, Julio-Agosto, 121-126.

• since 2003 government-teacher union relations have been really important in decisions around education (121)
• Governments in Latin America need to improve and expand education systems (122)
•  state is retaking its role as important garantor of education rights of its citizens (122)
• the state has had many responses to teachers unions, sometimes it ignores them, somtimes it works with them
• one big reason why unions have been included in negotiations over education policy is because teachers unions have gotten into politics
• but education reforms also produce tensions in teh relationship between government adn unions
• teacher careers, training, and promotion has been a place where governments have attempted to confront teachers unions
• but despite this, it is important to note that some of the things that need reofrming would actually be good for teachers, like (123)
• less ridigity in what is taught
• new demands are being made of teachers, especially given the massive influx of students
• reforms could be made that respect labor rights and actually allow teachers to have access to professional improvement
• ANALYSIS: reforms aren't bad in themselves, but seem to be resisted by teachers unions because they can be double-edged
• the post dictatorship period in argentina until 2003 was all about cuts for teachers (123)
• marcha blanca in 1988 and and carpa blanca in 1997, fought Menem (123-124)
• in 2003 everthign changed, and the president made laws that made the teachers happy (124)
• now national and provincial governments get together and talk with teachers when there are problems
• BUT teacher protest and strikes continued in a few places, some provinces had to borrow money from teh central government to pay teacher salaries (124)
• but though Argentina has started to rely on consensus with teachers, many of the old problems of education still exist (124-125)
• yet strikes still occur... (125)
• and unions in governmetn face an intersting tadeoff that can rsult in radicalization of the base
•  also inequality complicates everything, and improved education policy isn't the answer, needs to be coupled with better economic and social policy (126
• governments should try to bild consensus with teacehrs unions and give restitution if some of their historical demands are not met (26)
• 
  

Gindin 2011

Gindin, Julián. 2011. "La Tradición Sindical y la Explicación de las Prácticas Sindicales: Conclusiones de una Comparición Internacional Sobre los Docentes delSecotr Publico." Revista Latinoamericano do Trbalho, año 16 no. 26, 119-143.

• Introduction
• comparing Brazil, Argentina, and Mexico throughout the length of the 20th century
• this article proses the idea of "teacher unionism of the base", which is defined by a gravitation of the unions to the union base (in teachers unions), labor demands as the axis of activity, and open collective conflict with the government (120)
• this article presents how the union tradition can explain how a union works
• seven elements go into structural elements of the union (121)
• political relation with the state
• expansion and development of education system
• local work realities
• ideas of decent employment
• recruitment of teachers
• gender
• social image of the public school and teacher
• history of the union is also a key part of how/what a union does, as it often informs values and norms of the union
• its a little bit working class culture, a little bit union history
• two parts to the idea of "sindicalismo docente de base (122)
• union base includes leaders whose power is not taken by upper level leaders
• willingness to have open and strong conflict with, opposition to the government
• uses critical junctures to compare time periods that aren't actually the same across countries (123)
• notices three junctures:
• one, the existence of some sort of group that says it will represent workers (124)
• two, that group must become the representative of a large base of teachers
• three, consolidation of sindicalismo docente de la base, where the union is able to free or reorganize itself as independent from the state
• Critical junctures in teacher union history
• first, unions in Mex, Arg, Brz form as part of popular mobilization for democracy against the oligarchy (125)
• for Argentina this was the first radical government, Revolution in Mexico, and jsut before Estada Novo in Brazil (125-126)
• groups become solid as opposed to small, marginal
• these weren't necessarily unions, just teachers groups
• second, these groups became real unions, attached to a base
• either through state of mobilization of the teachers themselves (127-8)
• in Mexico it seemed like teachers were mobilizing themselves, but int he end the state was able to impose  union (128)
• in Argentina Peron started to organize through state, but coup meant that teachers ended up mobilizing themselves
• Brazil teachers mobilized themselves weakly and failed to consolidate in the face of government repression (128, 130)
• third, unions serve the base, can count on leaders in the base, are autonomous from government
• Mex: 1974-83, with CNTE emerging and the SNTE, for the first time, using its power within the SEP to not implement government changes (131-132)
• for Argentina and Brazil this happened in the 1980s with the return of democracy, both places unions willing to mobilize against the government (132)
• THE KEY IS A NETWORK OF LEADERS AMONG THE BASE
• Brazil uniosn join PT, but it becomes unclear if uniosn serve party or vice versa (133)
• SNTE plays politics, but its clear that union does so as a pragmatic way to gain power, since it doesn't succumb to too many political demands (133)
• national strikes are rare in Argentina, but happen at the state level depending on union history and political situation (133-4)
• conclusions
• union tradition is a mediating factor between teachers demands and union actions (134)
• union tradition is a legacy of critical junctures, and as such is also... (135)
• a mechanism of that explains path dependence (135)

Murillo 1999

Murillo, M. V. (1999). Recovering political dynamics: Teachers' unions and the decentralization of education in argentina and mexico. Journal of Interamerican Studies and World Affairs, 41(1), 31-57. 

• this draws out some of the same ideas in her 2001 book, but looks at differences in education reform in Mexico and Argentina, noting the reforms occurred differently due to variation across partisan identities (of the unions), organizational fragmentation (in the unions) and leadership competition (both for union and government officials) (31)
• education reform became an important issues because education was seen as
• important to developing human capital, increasing social equity, and consolidating young democracies (33) see footnote 6 for some citations
• the public felt the edcuation systems were becoming inadequate to mee the countries' needs
• The suggestion made by many groups is that decentralized education is more responsive to local needs, and thus more efficient than hihgly centralized education systems (33-34)
• BUT unions can play an important role in enhancing or sabotaging reforms (34)
• Public sector unions:
• public sector militancy is often more visible to the general public, which would suffer from loss of delivery of public goods thanks to strikes (35)
• "Indeed, strikes often serve the dual purpose of demanding higher wages from the government and mobilizing public opinion to call for greater budget allocations for public services." (35)
• teaching is labor intensive, teachers are distributed across the country, and they can have a great affect on public opinion (36)
• a large proportion of education budgets is directed to salaries (36)
• decentralization reforms in Mexico and Argentina
• The SNTE suppressed it's opposition to decentralization and the government met some of its demands (38)
• CTERA kept unsuccessfully resisitng decentralization and was ignored by Menem (38)
• Stats:
• Law 1,420 of 1881 established free public edcuation and compulsory primary education for all Argentina (39)
• initially the federal government centralized education, by 1952 feds controlled 42.7% of primary, 64.8% of secondary, and 82.5% of vocational schools (Paglianetti 1991)
• military started to decentralize
• By 1987 the national jurisdiction had only 1.9 % of primary schools, 44.7% of secondary schools, and 37.8% vocational schools (40)
• 1991 law enacted in 1992, Law 24,049, transfered all the rest of the schools to provincial jurisdiction (40)
• history of teachers unions (42-43)
• CTERA was with CGT and PJ int eh 1980s, but broke with Menem in 1991 and formed CTA (42)
• CTERA has been strong at province level, but never really centralized enough to be strong national presence (43)
• reform
• most teachers unions rejected Menem's reform (44)
• feared financing would be hurt
• also concerned with declining real wages and wage dispersion once bargaining became decentralized
• teachers struck and demonstrated against reform
• government officials ignored militancy and demands (45)
•  decentralization DID enhance CTERA's position over other competing union confederations (45)
• CTERA joined UCR to form coalition, but meant they found few allies among the mostly PJ provincial governors who didn't want to ally with enemy party (46)
• also competition over teachers weakened all unions, meaning government had no desire to offer concessions (46)
• explaining the difference between SNTE and CTERA
• SNTE was PRI, and not fragmented, CTERA was opposition and fragmented (47-48)
• why not get allies where you can? not really a full explanation here
• conclusion:
• party loyalty can speeed reforms but hinder their effectiveness (see Murillo 2001) (49)
• when there is leadership competition, as there was for SNTE, government will make concessions to keep their leader in power
• CTERA had neither leadership competition (it seems) AND teachers unions were fragmented -- seems a bit weak here

Gindin 2008

Gindin, J. 2008, "Sindicalismo docente en México, Brasil y Argentina: una hipótesis explicativa de su estructuración diferenciada", Revista mexicana de investigación educativa, Abril-junio 2008 volume 13 number 37, p 351-375.

• Argument: the fundamental variable that explains the difference between the cases in Brazil/Argentina and Mexico is the relationship with the sate established at the period of consolidation of labor relations systems (353)
• Argentina
• CTERA created in 1973 (367)
• generally CTERA has been pretty fragmented and weak
• in 1987 there was a split in the CTERA, half were under a UCR leader and half under a PJ leader
• but the PJ half essentially dissolved after it started and lost a big national strike in 1988 (367-8)
• CTERA helped create CTA (368) and bolstered its own power by allowing for leadership at every level to be elected directly, making them the most centralized of the teachers unions (369)
• White tent in 1997 against Menem (369)
• stayed up unti lthe UCR-led coalition won in decemeber 1999
• CTERA got close to NK after his election, but this closeness allowed the teachers to be a sort of internal opposition and still be militant (370)
• the differenc ein that the SNTE was a mediator between teh government and teachers, while in ARgentina and Brazil the government(s) didn't incorporate teachers into the coproate system, and simply ruled them directly when it wanted to. (370-371)
• the mobilization of the 1980s restructured Argentina and Brazil docente unions, while it didn't have this effect on teh SNTE (372)
• said another way, SNTE in Mexico was part of corporatism, and not in Arg and Brazil
• author suggest this starting point helps us understand current teachers' unions