Parents paying too much for too little education

By Kipkirui K’Telwa

American human rights activist Rev Jesse Jackson questions teachers’ "rights to strike for more money when the employer — tax paying parent —holds tax receipts in one hand and test results in the other that proves he is paying more and more for less and less."

This is the exact position obtaining in Kenya where thousands of public schools posted poor results in the just-released KCPE examinations. And there is no respite yet for the many parents who took their children to public schools. As they stare at bad examination results and wondering where such KCPE result slips will take them, rival teachers’ unions have issued next term teachers’ striking guidelines as they fight to control salary negotiations with an otherwise unwilling government.

The Kenya Union of Post Primary Education Teachers (Kuppet) and the Kenya National Union of Teachers (Knut) have both informed the teachers affiliated to them not to report to work from January 15 and 19 respectively. This is part of the unions’ fight for supremacy on who, between the two, should address the contentious pay rise issue before the government.

But as the rival unions fought, the government pulled a fast one on them by going for harmonisation of teachers pay with that of other civil servants and mooting plans to hire teachers on internship. These irked the unionists, and moreso, Knut officials, who said the move would erode the gains made in teaching fraternity over the last four decades. They did not say the move would make them, Knut officials, irrelevant and even jobless.

Whereas Knut bosses do not want the teachers’ employer, the Teachers Service Commission (TSC) to be scrapped, they insist on being paid like other civil servants. One does not understand why unionised teachers fear being absorbed into the civil service where they claim personnel get better remuneration.

Could it be that Knut bosses fear once TSC is phased out, they would find it difficult issue threats?

Writing in Freeman: Ideas on Liberty, James Bovard questions the relevance of teachers’ unions in the management of education.

"Government schools are increasingly run by the unions and for the unions," writes Bovard in his article titled, Teachers Unions: are schools run for them?

Unionists, it appears, are least disturbed by the poor results of their graduates who can hardly read beyond the letters of alphabet.

In fact, by resorting to employ interns to teach in public schools, the government will be putting both Kuppet and Knut affiliated teachers on notice: Teach or quit.

An intern is likely to work hard to please the employer and hence earn a permanent and pensionable job. And unionised teachers are likely to stop issuing threats not to report to work either during exam periods or when schools are about to open days.

Further, only individuals keen on being teachers will seek permanent employment and further training in the field. The notion that a teacher provides vital service is a fallacy and fraud aimed at arm-twisting the taxpayer to pay more for less.

Teachers do not appreciate the long leave days that come with their jobs. Conservative estimates give teachers 90 leaves days per year. They are on leave as long as the schools are on recess. So I dare ask, is teaching not a well paying job given that one is free most of the time?