In the early 1990s, many of the same political forces orchestrated the passage and implementation of two of the most destructive anti-education laws in Wisconsin history: school district revenue caps and the Qualified Economic Offer (QEO) law.

The governor’s 1993–94 state budget called for the state to deliver local property tax relief by assuming the responsibility for funding two-thirds of the costs of local schools. An extremely popular political move that was backed by legislators in both parties, the funding shift provided a sudden and dramatic burst of tax relief to homeowners and farmers throughout the state. It also allowed the governor and the Legislature to claim they were delivering tax relief and increasing school funding at the same time. It is not possible to increase spending and cut taxes at the same time, of course, but that did not stop the politicians from claiming to have done just that during re-election time. The two-thirds funding commitment came with strings attached. The state imposed unreasonably rigid revenue caps on school districts, barring them from raising needed revenues.

The revenue caps meant strict limits on the ability of school districts to fund proven initiatives that improve classroom education. The caps made it more difficult to reduce class size and improve discipline in elementary classrooms. They restricted the ability of schools to offer technical education classes and vocational training for non-college-track students. They forced districts to cut back on ongoing teacher training and professional development opportunities. And they impeded efforts to update classrooms with modern computers and new technology that teachers needed to prepare their students for the new millennium.

Under the state government’s revenue controls, approximately half the school districts in Wisconsin have delayed the purchase of computers and other technology, a third have increased class sizes, and nearly all have made at least one cut to essential programs offered for students. Results from surveys conducted by WEAC and the Wisconsin Association of School District Administrators since the imposition of revenue caps in 1993, show that 80 percent of teachers and 62 percent of superintendents believe revenue controls had a negative effect on the quality of education for children in their school districts.

Despite the well-documented and undesirable consequences of the revenue caps for children and schools, political demagoguery over the property tax issue made the caps an almost untouchable political issue. Attempts by friends of education to eliminate—or even loosen—the revenue caps were met with threats of property tax increases, and all but the most incremental attempts to chip away at the caps died quietly in the Legislature.

At the same time that the new revenue caps were beginning to choke off funding for schools, a companion law—known as the QEO—allowed school boards to unilaterally impose substandard pay and benefit packages on teachers, provided certain minimal criteria were met. For 15 years, Wisconsin’s collective bargaining law had provided a non-confrontational arbitration process to resolve contract disputes between teachers and school boards, a process that forged an era of labor peace in Wisconsin schools. In 1993, the QEO law changed all that, decisively shifting the balance of bargaining power to the school boards.

"Labor Peace Come to an End" News and Views, November 1998 Twenty years of labor peace in Wisconsin schools has come to an end. Two state laws—the QEO bargaining law and school district revenue controls— are generating a rising tide of frustration that is spilling over into a new era of labor unrest. “There isn’t a teacher in Wisconsin who wants this to happen,” said WEAC President Terry Craney. “Revenue caps are tearing apart our schools, and the QEO is tearing down the teaching profession. These laws are seriously affecting the lives of children and the lives of teachers—and teachers refuse to stand idly by and watch it happen.” The QEO law, Craney said, provides “no non-confrontational option” for resolving contract disputes. “By throwing out arbitration as a legitimate option, the state has effectively forced teachers into labor actions.” In early September, Madison teachers captured the spotlight when they staged a one-day job action that closed nearly all the district’s schools. It was, in effect, the first teachers strike in the state since 1977. But Madison is not alone. Teachers in New Berlin, Racine, Nicolet, Germantown and other districts have resorted to demonstrations and/or job actions. Many others are considering similar measures. At this stage, Madison is the only district that has effectively conducted a strike. The most common job action so far has been the “work-to-rule” or “work-to-contract” action in which teachers only perform duties specifically required in their contract. That means they come to school just in time for their first class and leave immediately after their last class—a major change in schedule for most teachers. It also means teachers sometimes won’t perform the myriad volunteer duties that are taken for granted. These can include lunch supervision, hall supervision, after-school clubs, science fairs, meetings, parent-teacher conferences, and many more activities.

Next>>