Teacher Hiring Surge: Prioritizing Union Interests Over Student Needs

This week’s curriculum focuses on significant numbers, class — we’re adding 3,700 new teachers!

But has anyone crunched the numbers?

In reality, this lesson isn’t centered around education, budgets, or outcomes — it’s primarily about union influence.

Furthermore, it implies bringing in more teachers who will deliver more subpar instruction to a larger number of students, perpetuating the cycle.

Mayor Adams announced on Wednesday that the New York City Department of Education — the largest single employer in the state, employing 76,000 teachers — will recruit an additional 3,700 teachers and 100 assistant principals.

This is only the beginning. This initial recruitment is just a fraction of a larger initiative to bring in a total of 17,700 teachers, at an estimated annual cost of $1.9 billion — a figure Adams has long stated would be excessive.

This lavish expansion is dictated by the contentious maximum class size law passed by state lawmakers and signed by Gov. Hochul, disregarding parental concerns and the DOE’s troubling performance — all in an effort to appease the teachers’ union.

What could possibly go awry with this reckless recruitment blitz?

This is especially troubling given the looming fiscal issues faced by the city and state, anticipated federal funding cuts, and a declining student population.

Additionally, there’s the ongoing national deficit of qualified teachers, prompting states to lower requirements to fill gaps — what could possibly be the downside of increasing NYC’s teaching workforce by an astounding 23%?

Securing new teachers should be straightforward, provided that quality is not a concern.

After all, the average salary for a New York City teacher exceeds $100,000, not including other benefits, holidays, pensions after four years, and absolutely no accountability if students fail to learn. (Assistant principals earn more, along with the Chancellor, the highest-paid public servant in the city.)

However, if Adams aims for high-quality educators, he faces a significant challenge in sourcing them.

Veteran teachers are exiting city schools, and skilled applicants are opting for positions elsewhere as rampant leftist indoctrination perpetuates an environment of fear in schools, curriculums infused with radical ideologies undermine real academic progress, and “equity-focused” disciplinary measures lead to chaotic classrooms.

Let’s evaluate some figures — a complex task in a city where public schools are failing to adequately educate the majority of students (an estimated two-thirds to three-quarters of our children struggle with reading and math at grade level).

Considering the 912,000 students, 144,000 total staff, and 76,000 current teachers (prior to the new hires), what are the ratios of students to staff (not factoring in anticipated enrollment declines)? Showing your work is optional.

Solution: ratios of roughly 12:1 for students to existing staff, 10:1 for students to projected total faculty, and 6:1 for students to all staff.

These ratios are already commendable: one faculty member for every 12 students, and one staff member for every six!

Proponents of the class-size law, especially teachers’ unions, advocate that smaller classrooms enhance learning. Yet, research does not substantiate this — and certainly fails to justify this extravagant expenditure.

Studies indicate that teacher quality significantly outweighs teacher quantity in terms of learning efficacy.

Moreover, many of our top-performing schools actually have larger, not smaller, class sizes — a logical outcome: as families depart underperforming schools, which causes those classes to shrink, they select superior schools, resulting in larger classes there.

Lower-income districts in the city have already experienced smaller class sizes, reaping scant benefits. Further reducing those sizes is unlikely to yield any significant improvement.

The city would be better off expanding charter schools that are in high demand.

Most charter schools do not employ unionized teachers and aren’t affected by the new class-size regulations. They outperform many district schools while spending nearly $20,000 less per student, excelling by focusing on core subjects, demanding accountability from students and teachers, and maintaining strict discipline — qualities often absent in New York City’s public schools.

The budget for the NYC school system is an astonishing $41 billion — translating to nearly $45,000 per student — for an unacceptably poor performance.

Instead of pouring money into a failing system, we should promote school choice and prioritize teacher excellence for genuine improvement.

This hiring surge needs reassessment. This lesson plan deserves an F.

Wai Wah Chin is the founding president of the Chinese American Citizens Alliance Greater New York and an adjunct fellow of the Manhattan Institute.