November 15–22, 2001

cover story

"We Had Dreams", part 2

Homesick and in debt, Indian teachers hired to fill gaps in the Philadelphia public schools are learning hard lessons about education and business in America.

by Daniel Brook

Host with the most: TPG founder Michael Vanjani at the reception for Indian teachers. photo: Nelliegoat

part 1 | part 2

Interviewing the Indian teachers in the apartments where they live in groups of up to nine, it is clear how little they understood about their jobs when they came over. Every few weeks they learn new details about their situation. Recently, they have heard that the teachers in Cleveland and Chester are unionized and are getting better pay. One TPG teacher in Philadelphia said he has tried to persuade an Indian teacher in Cleveland to send him a copy of his pay stub, but so far has been unsuccessful. Many teachers are only beginning to realize that the district pays TPG more than TPG pays them. Since they clearly agreed to pay TPG the $7,000 placement fee, many believed this was TPG’s total cut.

In two separate interviews, a teacher took out a copy of the current union contract and turned to the salary scales pointing to what their pay should be based on their education and experience. According to the union salary scale, the most experienced and highly educated teachers should be receiving nearly 40 percent more than TPG pays them. In their first few weeks of teaching, the instructors were so in the dark about their employment situation that during an Oct. 11 meeting with district officials, some actually asked whether they were in the union.

That the teachers’ problems are unique to Philadelphia shows just how preventable they are. Teachers Placement Group has recruited teachers for Cleveland; Baltimore; Cecil County, Md.; Englewood and Newark in New Jersey; and Chester, Pa., as well as schools in South Carolina. In each of these districts, TPG is solely a placement agency; teachers pay the company the placement fee and make additional payments during the year, but they are employed directly by the school districts. This means they are members of the local teachers union and receive the same pay and benefits as other teachers in their school districts. What they will be paid and how much they owe TPG is clearly spelled out before they arrive in the U.S.

Indian teachers in Cleveland are paid the same wages and benefits as other Cleveland teachers, earning between $32,863 to $43,426, based on education and experience. Those making more than $35,000 owe TPG an extra yearly fee, up to $6,000 for the best-paid teachers. By contrast, TPG takes more than twice that from the salaries of its most qualified employees in Philadelphia.

The Cleveland district provides a clear example of how a school system can use TPG to provide much-needed teachers while ensuring they are treated equitably. Carol Hauser, human resources director for the Cleveland school system, says that TPG initially sought to be the direct employer of the 40 teachers it was providing the district. Hauser describes that initial offer as Vanjani’s "standard procedure." When the district refused, Vanjani agreed to allow the school board to hire the teachers. As part of the contract, the Cleveland schools agreed to pay TPG $180,000.

In late August, when the Cleveland Teachers Union raised questions about a clause in the Indian educators’ contracts, the district stopped payment on its six-figure check to TPG. The union said the teachers’ contracts bound them to pay TPG $15,000 if they wanted to return to India. Vanjani said that was a misreading of the contract, that teachers would owe TPG that fee only if they took a job in another U.S. school district. But with payment stopped, Vanjani quickly agreed to modify the contract to state clearly that no money would be owed by a teacher who decided to return to India and that TPG would be responsible for providing a return plane ticket. With the issue resolved, the district resumed payment, but on a quarterly basis, retaining the authority to monitor the contract.

In Philadelphia, the contracts have not been modified, though TPG did pay for the return ticket of the one teacher who returned to India and relieved her of her debts.

Richard DeColibus, president of the Cleveland Teachers Union, compared the employment situation in his district with the setup in Philadelphia: "[Our arrangement is] better for everyone — except maybe Mr. Vanjani," he says.

Despite the more equitable setup in Cleveland, some teacher-exchange advocates consider any recruitment situation that forces applicants to go into debt to be exploitive. Trudy Herman, executive director of Amity Institute, says the San Diego-based nonprofit that organizes teacher exchanges charges its teachers only $1,800 and does not collect any money up front, though teachers are responsible for purchasing their own round-trip plane tickets. Herman says that after she learned that TPG demands fees up front, Amity, which had helped the company obtain visas, canceled all contracts with it. Herman says an Amity lawyer who saw a TPG labor contract described its terms as "near servitude."

While vigilance on the part of the Philadelphia Federation of Teachers could have nipped problems in the bud, the groundwork for the Indian teachers’ predicament was laid long before the School District of Philadelphia had even heard of Teachers Placement Group. In the summer of 2000, Philadelphia teachers threatened to go on strike. At the last possible moment, the district and the union agreed on a new contract; the school year started on time. But over the next few months, little odds and ends of the contract were worked out between union officials and school district administrators through binding addenda to the contract called "side letters."

In one such side letter, dated Sept. 27, 2000, Marjorie Adler, the district’s executive director of human resources, wrote Philadelphia Federation of Teachers President Ted Kirsch, "In the event the School District has been unable to recruit and/or hire a sufficient number of certified teachers to fill existing vacancies in areas of critical need through the normal hiring, posting and transfer processes by June 1, the School District may enter into contracts with outside providers to provide services which would otherwise be filled by bargaining unit members." The district was asking for the right to subcontract, and the union, by tacking the letter onto the contract, indicated its agreement.

Subcontracting is usually fought tooth and nail by labor unions. The practice weakens the bargaining unit by creating a divisive two-tier wage structure in which employees with equal qualifications and experience get different wages and benefits for doing the same job. It also creates a group of employees who work in a unionized workplace without paying dues to the union. Because subcontracting hurts the union’s bottom line, union leaders tend to fight it hard.

But for some reason the teachers union rolled over. According to union spokeswoman Barbara Goodman, "We had 200 to 300 vacancies at the beginning of the school year. In a last-ditch effort to fill positions, that [subcontracting] language was agreed to." Goodman insisted, however, that there is an "ongoing effort" to get the teachers into the bargaining unit, though she would not discuss specifics.

School district recruitment and examination director Maryann Greenfield says, "We have not received any grievances [regarding the Indian teachers]."

Despite the stated intentions of the Philadelphia Federation of Teachers, other unions, from Newark, N.J., to South Carolina — not exactly union territory — were able to get their districts to hire their Indian teachers directly, making the workers eligible for union membership and equal pay and benefits. One district official was especially blunt. When Gregory King, spokesman for the Newark Public Schools, heard that in Philadelphia TPG is used as a subcontractor, he says, "We would really get reamed out royally [by the teachers union] for that." King said that Indian teachers in Newark are paid the same as other Newark teachers. The starting salary is roughly $41,000 for a bachelor’s degree with no experience. Because of their education and experience, all of the Indian teachers make more than that.

Two districts, Cecil County, Md., and Chester, Pa., that had used TPG as a subcontractor last year now directly employ their Indian teachers. According to Joann Emerson, the Chester Upland district human resources director, the initial contract set up with TPG was hastily created "in the interests of time." This year, because of "union considerations," the district has become the direct employer and the teachers are part of the collective-bargaining unit.

Henry Shaffer, who handles human resources for the Cecil County Public Schools, also says "union concerns" were a factor in the change in his district.

Even if the Philadelphia Federation of Teachers could not secure equal wages and benefits for the Indian teachers, the federal government should have. TPG brings over Indian teachers on H-1B visas a temporary working visa for non-immigrant professionals. Employers who obtain such visas for their workers are required by law to pay them the prevailing wages and benefits for the job they are performing in the area where they are performing it. The stipulation is designed to keep American employers from bringing in foreigners solely to save money, likewise protecting foreigners from inequitable situations. Clearly, the TPG teachers in Philadelphia are being paid less than other Philadelphia teachers and have worse benefits, but no one can say whether this is the result of a loophole in the visa law or a violation of that law.

To obtain H-1B visas, an employer must file a "labor condition agreement" with the federal Department of Labor. In that document, the potential employer must list the prevailing wage for the job. To discern the prevailing wage, employers may use any source they please or even their own calculations.

The information listed by the employer on the labor condition agreement is never verified unless a complaint arises. "If the union is not objecting, we’re going to accept it as legitimate," says Stephen Stefanko of the Department of Labor’s Philadelphia office. "The Wage and Hour Division does enforcement based on complaint only."

In discussing the union’s efforts on behalf of the Indian teachers, Philadelphia Federation of Teachers spokeswoman Barbara Goodman never mentioned having challenged TPG’s labor-condition agreement. When asked directly, Goodman would not reveal whether the union had done so. "We certainly have inquired about their salary and benefits," she said, "but it takes a much deeper legal knowledge to understand what exactly prevailing wage is, and I’m not sure that we’re entirely sure."

The school district has not asked the Department of Labor to verify TPG’s prevailing-wage information either. District official Peter Bent, who initially provided some prevailing-wage data requested by the Department of Labor, said, "I’ve never seen [TPG’s] labor-condition agreement."

Michael Vanjani says TPG’s attorneys handled all visa paperwork. He refused to provide the names of TPG’s attorneys or contact information for them.

The more the teachers learn about their situation, the more they feel that they are not solely responsible for their predicament. While they regret their naivete at taking jobs without knowing their precise salaries, benefits, tax rates or working conditions, they have come to believe that there is more than enough blame to go around. Some lies with Teachers Placement Group, for taking advantage of their desperation and naivete; some with the School District of Philadelphia, whose only interest was in staffing classrooms. Much blame lies with the Philadelphia Federation of Teachers, for failing to look out not only for the teachers’ interests, but even for its own narrow self-interests.

But sharing blame with faceless institutions offers little solace when teachers call home to tell their families that any plans for being reunited must be postponed indefinitely.

One science teacher has explained to his wife over the phone that the family cannot come to America because he cannot support them. When he talks to his teenage daughter, rather than break her heart, he lies. "How can I tell her?" he asks.

Another teacher does not go into specifics. He says simply, "We had dreams."

part 1 | part 2