Gun violence is a public health crisis and currently the leading cause of death for children in America. Newtown Federation of Teachers member and Sandy Hook massacre survivor Abbey Clements (speaking in photo, above) co-founded a grassroots collective to empower fellow educators and school support personnel to raise their collective voices for change. In a recent blog post, she shares how engaging with Teachers Unify to End Gun Violence can help communities “move forward in healthy and productive ways:”

On June 25, 2024, the U.S. surgeon general declared gun violence in America a public health crisis. Along with his announcement, Dr. Vivek Murthy released a comprehensive advisory that provides information on the complex and multi-layered impact of gun violence on communities, children and families, including prevention strategies and resources.

Since 2020, guns have been the leading cause of death for children and adolescents. In his advisory, Dr. Murthy recognizes educators and school staff – along with community leaders, and health workers – as those promoting healing and connection and leading violence‑intervention initiatives.

Click here to watch Dr. Murthy’s announcement of the unprecedented health advisory.

This isn’t something we can ignore. So how do we talk about this with our students? How do we do this in our classrooms?

How do we promote healing and connection in spite of all the barriers in our way – curriculum restraints, social and emotional learning (SEL) under attack and the perception that conversations about gun violence are political and controversial?

Click here for the American Psychological Association’s recent analysis of escalating attempts aimed at censoring teaching.

Gun violence impacts schools and communities across the country in so many ways. And kids carry the weight of the news, their fears and their direct impact into their classrooms. What does this look like?

It looks like kids who:

Are unable to concentrate; Have difficulty focusing; Have trouble recalling and retaining new information; Aren’t getting enough sleep; Are unable to be alone; Are unable to go to school easily or get there at all; Are hyper alert; Look for exits; Are stuck in their traumas—unable to move them aside for learning; Are grieving; and Suffer from survivor guilt.

We know that adults process trauma in different ways and children do, too. Some become quiet, sad, angry, withdrawn. But here’s the thing: kids aren’t available for learning unless they have healthy ways to work through challenges.

Educators are not just teachers. We wear multiple hats and switch them out sometimes, moment to moment. Teachers can slip in and out of the role of counselor, nurse, administrator, while simultaneously teaching (what incredibly skilled multitaskers we are)!

Teachers Unify to End Gun Violence invited five school shooting survivors to talk about ways educators can promote healing and connection after students experience tragedy.

Click here for our previous report on the organization’s advocacy efforts.

Here are some of the ways that we suggest to do this:

Give students time and space to process their feelings through art and writing. Understand that talking is sometimes challenging but that most students want to talk about their experience but maybe don’t know how to do this.​ Sometimes you might feel like a broken record, but just keep asking how your colleagues and students are doing, how they are feeling. And it’s OK not to know what to say (you can say that). Just asking and listening mean so much. Use therapy dogs. ​ Balance space and routine.​ Spread out the support over time. The aftermath is long and hard, and resources need to last.​ Administrators and teachers need to work with students to plan for triggering events – other shootings, anniversaries, etc. Listening and inclusion are very important to those who feel powerless.​ Give space for students to interact with one another frequently.​ Pay attention to the news cycle. It can affect students greatly, especially those who’ve experienced trauma.​ A lot of students don’t really know how to ask for help, so create spaces of openness; students need to feel they can reach out to educators.​ Make the effort to connect with students on a personal level.​ Try to build a strong sense of safety, such as a quiet time to process; calming music; a variety of different ways to reach out to you when needed (Need to Talk Jar, email, notes, etc.); time for kids to talk with one another in unstructured conversations; maybe extra time outside for fresh air. After a tragedy or difficult drill, allow time for all to process together.​ Show your vulnerable side.​ Be there to listen, even cry with your students.​ Advocate for mental health professionals, beyond counselors, who are trained in trauma. This is tough because educators and school staff often don’t have the power to invite therapists in, but you can advocate for more help whenever you can, perhaps even reaching out to administrators, parents, and school board allies for help. Make sure kids know there are many people available for them to talk to.​ Keep saying it. Acknowledge how they are feeling, repeat it back. Give them specific times they can come to class early or late or during a free period to chat with you (but boundaries are important for educators, too). Students want a space where they feel safe enough to discuss their concerns without feeling awkward or weird. ​ Do not push down the feeling and keep it some big “secret,” like it doesn’t exist or didn’t happen.​ Don’t be afraid to have hard conversations; it helps people feel comfortable to talk to one another.​ Allow kids to share healing tactics that have worked for them. ​ Support students in any positive way they want to heal.​ Speak up for what the students need because a lot of the time they don’t know how.​

Click here for a recent professional learning webinar Clements and fellow union members presented for Share My Lesson.

We are a nation of survivors: no one is free from the threat or impact of gun violence.

The weight of this public health crisis is dense and difficult to carry, but we must not do it alone. We need one another to process the pain and fear and to discover how to move forward in healthy and productive ways.

Click here for press reporting on Clements’ gun violence speech to the Democratic National Convention last week.

Teachers are rockstars and can model this. And there can be pockets of joy in the effort!

As Dr. Murthy says in his advisory, “the safety and well‑being of our children and future generations are at stake.”

Click here for Clements’ original post at the Share My Lesson blog.

The post Promoting Healing and Connection After Tragedy first appeared on AFT Connecticut.

Arguably, the primary lesson of the Connecticut General Assembly’s 2024 session is the need for legislative reform of structural fiscal impediments undermining vital public services. National AAUP Vice President Rotua Lumbantobing, (right, in photo above) and Brendan Cunningham (left), the treasurer of our affiliated CSU-AAUP, proposed a proven approach in a recently published opinion editorial. Together they urged state lawmakers to “move beyond survival mode” and take action to drive long-term economic growth and stability through progressive taxation:

In Connecticut, you hear a lot about “fiscal responsibility,” “fiscal guardrails” and “living within our means.” When Governor Ned Lamont uses these terms, what he really means is fiscal irresponsibility, with 12 multibillionaires paying the lowest tax rates while 3.6 million of us confront a huge tax burden in exchange for fewer and fewer public goods and services.

Meanwhile, the state remains saddled with outdated promises to Wall Street while we face dismal child poverty rates, and historic cuts to our poorest public school districts that only face more challenging months to come.

Click here for press reporting on Connecticut’s ranking in the Annie E. Casey Foundation’s 2023 “Kids Count” survey.

From all appearances, a small handful of operatives in the executive branch lack the political will to make the transformative fiscal shifts required to fix these wrongs.
What real fiscal responsibility looks like is when big corporations and people like Lamont pay their fair share in taxes while we use that revenue to invest in public goods that grow the state’s economy, promote social mobility, and benefit the people that the governor serves.

Our neighbors to the north have done exactly that: they found a solution to the seemingly unsolvable issue of sustainable funding for public education and transportation infrastructure by implementing a more just, progressive tax policy. Massachusetts’ “Millionaires Tax,” a 4% income surtax on earnings over $1 million, has far exceeded expectations, generating $1.8 billion in the first nine months of the fiscal year.

Click here for an analysis of the policy from the Center for State Policy Analysis at Tufts University.

This windfall is directed towards essential public services, with significant portions earmarked for education and transportation, two investment areas known for their strong return on investment. The success of this tax has also generated substantial revenue without driving away wealthy residents.

The outcome of this tax is immediate and beneficial. The revenue has already funded public college scholarships, universal free school meals and infrastructure upgrades. Critics who predicted a mass exodus of millionaires have been proven wrong, as the state continues to thrive economically while making critical investments in its future.

Click here for A Better Connecticut Institute (ABCI)’s report busting the “millionaire migration” myth.

Conversely, Connecticut’s fiscal policy is hamstrung by the so-called “fiscal guardrails” – including most notably the spending and volatility cap. These measures, initially intended to promote fiscal responsibility, have in fact stymied the state’s ability to utilize surplus revenue for meaningful investments in public services. Despite this year’s $1 billion surplus, Connecticut faces severe underfunding in higher education and other essential services. The spending cap, in particular, prevents the legislature from using existing surplus revenues to bolster programs that could benefit residents and reduce long-term service needs and, in turn, reducing future reliance on public services.

Governor Lamont’s stringent adherence to these fiscal policies has manufactured a crisis of public service disinvestment. The state’s inability to invest in higher education, for example, has led to a system that is deeply underfunded, affecting the quality and accessibility of education for many residents (Lumbantobing is associate professor of finance in Western Connecticut State University’s Ancell School of Business and Cunningham is professor of economics and finance at Eastern Connecticut State University).

This stands in stark contrast to Massachusetts, where surplus revenue is used to enhance educational opportunities and infrastructure, driving long-term economic growth and stability.

Click here for another CSU-AAUP leader’s recently published commentary on the impediments’ harms to students in higher education.

The volatility cap, which supposedly targets only fluctuating revenues, has diverted approximately $8.4 billion over six years from potential investments. This cap captures “excess” revenues, which have averaged $1.4 billion yearly, including over $530 million during the pandemic’s first year. These funds, if invested in Connecticut’s people and communities, could have spurred broad-based economic growth and increased future revenue.

Research consistently shows that investment in core services fosters more resilient economies and communities than austerity measures. Yet Connecticut’s fiscal caps, based on outdated formulas from 1991, fail to consider the current and future needs of its residents. They exacerbate economic and racial inequities, locking in patterns of injustice rather than addressing them.

Massachusetts’ approach illustrates the benefits of expecting the ultra-wealthy to pay their fair share in order to fund critical public services, creating a more equitable and thriving state. Connecticut, a state with substantial wealth, can and should adopt similar strategies. But the fiscal guardrails, initially intended as a safeguard, have become a hindrance, preventing the state from leveraging its wealth to benefit all residents.

Click here for current reporting on the impediments’ unpopularity with voters.

It’s time for Connecticut to redefine success. The state must move beyond survival mode and embrace a model that prioritizes investment in public services, fostering economic growth and improving the quality of life for all its residents. Connecticut is one of the worst states in the nation for inequality. To move our state forward, we must reform our fiscal policies, thereby allowing for greater flexibility in utilizing surplus revenues. Only then will Connecticut create a more just and prosperous future.

The lesson from Massachusetts is clear: progressive taxation works. By taxing the ultra-wealthy and reinvesting in public services, states can generate significant revenue and drive long-term growth.

Connecticut has the wealth and the potential to follow this path. It’s time to dismantle the fiscal guardrails and build a Connecticut for all.

Click here for Lumbantobing and Cunningham’s original published op-ed at CT Viewpoints.

The post Calling for Real Solutions to Manufactured Shortfalls first appeared on AFT Connecticut.

Members of AFT Connecticut-affiliated healthcare unions did not rest on their laurels after improving working conditions in 2023. They have since focused on both enforcing a strengthened hospital staffing law while also advocating for additional protections against incidents of violence. In a recently published commentary, state federation Vice President John Brady, RN (second row, third from left, in photo, above), shared how nurses and health professionals have turned their collective action into an “incredible internal organizing tool:”

Connecticut’s staffing legislation went into effect last October, and we’ve been making great progress on our Code Red campaign goals. We have established stronger staffing committees in all eight acute care hospitals that we represent. We’re training committee members on how to participate in meetings and what the committees and staffing plans should look like under the new law.

Click here for Brady’s previous commentary on passage of the strengthened staffing law.

We’re also educating our members more broadly about the legislation. We created a Safe Patient Limits “toolkit” with webinars and additional resources, and we’re working with our national union on a webinar series on staffing committees, including how to use the committees for internal organizing.

Click here for this website’s toolkit section.

We’ve also been working to ensure that hospitals abide by the legislation. The first staffing plans under the new law were submitted to the state on January 1. At five of our hospitals, the administration submitted the plans that our committees developed, voted on, and approved.

At the other three hospitals, the administration refused to submit the committee-approved plans to the state. Instead, perhaps thinking they could get away with subverting the law, they submitted separate plans that had not been approved by the committees. In one of these, William Backus Hospital in Norwich, the meeting minutes that are available to everyone clearly show that the plan passed by the committee is not what the hospital submitted.

Hospitals that violate the law by not meeting their approved staffing numbers 80 percent of the time will face penalties beginning this October, but they must adhere to the other parts of the law – like posting the committee-approved staffing plan- now.

Click here for recent press reporting on hospital administrators refusing to follow the staffing law.

So, we filed complaints against these three hospitals with the Connecticut Department of Public Health (DPH), the agency enforcing the legislation. Our staffing committee labor co-chair submitted the committee-approved plans to DPH, and regulators are investigating.

We know that DPH will want us to work this out with management at each hospital.

However, these managers are trying to manipulate their way into the ratios that they mistakenly believe are good for their bottom lines. In meetings, they say things like, “this will cause backups in the emergency waiting room; how would you feel if that was your family?”

This is not a capacity issue. Proper staffing ratios improve safety, patient outcomes, and nurse recruitment and retention – and research shows they are good for the bottom line.

Click here for a recent study on the impact of legislation mandating hospitals’ caregiver-to-patient ratios.

Unless we force health chain administrators to staff at levels at which nurses feel safe and able to give patients the care they deserve, nurses will continue to be pushed out of the profession. Our members have pushed back, and we have the majority vote, so we hope DPH will back us up. If they don’t, we have enough friends in the legislature and in the governor’s office to address that.

This year, we are also working on workplace violence, another issue that ties into recruitment and retention. There was a horrible incident last fall when a visiting nurse was murdered during a home visit. There have been other situations where the home care assignment was in a dangerous neighborhood.

We’re lobbying for greater safety measures for our members that include and go beyond adequate staffing.

Click here for press coverage of our healthcare workplace violence advocacy earlier this year.

We need a way to assess potential risks and flag those in patient charts. We also want wider access to the hands-on de-escalation training that tends to be only available for staff in the emergency or psychiatric departments. It should be required for anyone who interacts with patients, whether in clinical or support capacities.

We’re working with a coalition that includes the Connecticut Nurses Association (CNA), other unions in the state and interested legislators to strengthen Connecticut’s existing staff safety legislation.

Editor’s note: the bill received final General Assembly approval eight days after initial publication of Brady’s commentary and was signed by the governor in late May.

Click here for reporting on lawmakers’ passage of the proposal to shield healthcare professionals from violence.

Additionally, Joe Courtney, one of our congressmen, has been working on an Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) standard for workplace violence for years. We are cautiously optimistic that we may get that standard this year.

This Code Red campaign has been an incredible internal organizing tool. Our staffing committees have really owned our new legislation, and we’re going to keep communication channels open so that we know what’s going on at the different hospitals and can learn from each other.

Many Connecticut hospitals are still not unionized. My hope is that through this campaign they see what can happen when people are empowered to use their collective voice – and that they’ll join us so they can make a difference in their hospitals, too.

Click here for Brady’s original commentary published in AFT Health Care.

The post Putting Vital Safety Regulations to Work first appeared on AFT Connecticut.