Vida Newspaper, Volume 4, Issue 2 - October 1976

DEPLORBLE STATE OF BILINGUAL BICULTURAL EDUCATION Por Norma Quiroga Limon The California Advisory Com¬ mittee has charged that the Sta¬ te Department of Education has failed to meet the needs of 233,000 non*and limited-english- speaking students in California. Most of us, to a certain extent were aware of the ineffec- tifenness of the bilingual educa¬ tion. However, not until June of 1976 when the advisory Commit¬ tee to the U. S. Commission on civil rights published their re¬ port entitled, "State Administra¬ tion of bilingual education — si о no? — ” We became completely aware on how badly the State Department of Education has fai¬ led to comply with the federal and state was regulating bilin¬ gual education. The lOOpage report states that the State Department had iden¬ tified 1 1 federal programs with approximately $36, 320, 000 in funds for possible use in as¬ sisting I a n g u age-minority stu¬ dents But in spite of this, only 21,693 students less than 10 percent of 225,000 nor-or-limi- ted-english-speaking students we¬ re participating in the bilingual programs in school year 1974-1975 "Of crucial importance is, the report said, "When the de¬ partment becomes aware of lo¬ cal district noncompliance with State or Federal laws or regula¬ tions, it made little effort to en¬ force compliance”. The report goes on to say that 80% of the teachers in the bilingual programs are monolingual-english. Despite of this, the department took no action against those dis¬ tricts which they knew did not have bilingual teachers. The report is the result of a six-month study by the Cali- fonia Advisory Committee to tho U. S. Commission on Civil Rights The study included interviews with more than 60' persons in¬ cluding parents, students, commu¬ nity leaders, members of state assembly, members of the de¬ partments of education and other concerned individuals throught out the State. It also included an in¬ formal public hearing in Sacra¬ mento' in June 1975. The report also noted that the (Continued on Page 8) LOYOLA MARYMOUNT UNIVERSITY M.E.Ch. A. DEPARTMENT OF CHICANO STUDIES OCTOBER 1976 VOL^ IV NO. 2 Vote Yes on November 2nd. PROPOSITION 14 Por LI IN DA MANNEY U,F.W. Organizzer On November 2, the voters of California will assume an im¬ portant role in determining the welfare of the farmworkers of this state by voting on Propo¬ sition 14. Proposition 14 asserts the farmworkers' right to vote in secret ballot elections for the Union of their choice, a right which should encompass; all working people, yet has been spe¬ cifically denied to farmworkers. Farmworkers were previously pro¬ tected under the Agricultural La¬ bor Relations Act; the Growers, however, successfully nullified the law s^x months after Gov. Brown signed it into law by opposing the funding, and in Febuary of 1976 secret ballot! elections for farm¬ workers stopped. Farmworkers presently do not have the opportunity to elect a union to represent them, and as a result unfair labor practices and unsafe w о г к ing conditions prevail, child labor laws are bla- lantly violated, and farmworkers continue to live in poverty and misery. Proposition 14 provides for farmworkers by outlining in de¬ tail the particular points of their right to elect a union. It provides for a new Agricultural Labor Re¬ lations Board with new terms of office, it allows union organizxers access to the fields one hour be¬ fore work, one hour afetr work, and one hour during the lunch break, it requires the board to make lists of employees availa¬ ble to persons petitioning for an election, it allows the board to order payments of treble dama¬ ges as penalty for unfair labor practices, and it requires that pe¬ titions to remove a previously elec¬ ted union must carry 50 per cent (Continued on Page 3) Join ns new full tifflie for 60 days off bard work* Organiser®, of flee worker®, mechanic®, and anybody willing «- are needed to win the Farm Worker Initiative - Proposition 14 - to guarantee free election® In the field®. Y&u can т&кФ the difference! U.F.W. Photo/Cathy Murphy o join, contact Farm Worker Proposition 14 Offices : 434 W. Olympic Blvd. S.F. : 415/567-6673 os Angelas, 90015 Oak.: 415/533-3477 13/381-1136 S. Jose: 408/292-4651 plbHshed^UnjtedFarnT^rkers of America. AFL-CIO, “Yes onT* Com m ittee. c THERE ARE LESS THAN 30 DAYS LEFT HAVE DONE YOUR SHARE?