Free to Teach: The 1973 Evergreen Teacher Strike

Evergreen Teacher John Zavodsky criticizes Evergreen School Board for arresting teachers for asserting their basic rights, May 1973

For a more interactive and citation friendly version of this blog post click here for my StoryMaps project!

In the spring of 1973, something remarkable happened in Vancouver, Washington. Hundreds of teachers in the Evergreen School District walked off the job, defied a court order, and marched themselves into jail. Their crime? Demanding a voice in their working conditions and refusing to back down when they were told they had no right to be heard

The Evergreen strike was more than a local labor dispute. It was a pivotal moment for public education in Washington. A moment when teachers stood up not just for themselves, but for the idea that better working conditions lead to better learning conditions. Their courage helped reshape the way schools were run, spurred legislation solidifying teachers’ rights to negotiate fair contracts, and set in motion court cases that required the state to better fund public education. The legacy of Evergreen lives on, not only in the stronger, more equitable classrooms it helped create, but in the rights that teachers continue to use today to advocate for their students and push for a better future for public education in Washington.

Before the Strike

Up until the mid-1960s, teachers in Washington spent years working under a system in which they had little real say in their working conditions. Teachers were supposed to act like professionals, but were not treated like professionals. Teachers had almost no job security and very little autonomy. They were typically hired on one-year contracts, usually on just a single sheet of paper. Those contracts laid out basic assignments and pay, but they didn’t include anything about teacher rights, working conditions, or expectations for how administrators should treat them.

Seldom were the rules written down in policy. The rules were what the principal or superintendent said they were.

Steve Kink, Class Wars

School administrators held all the power, much of which was unwritten. Teachers could be fired without cause or warning, and a complaint from the right person was often all it took. Some administrators forbid teachers from going to local bars or from being seen buying alcohol in town. Others enforced strict grooming codes or required teachers to get permission before leaving the town for the weekend. One teacher in Blaine, WA, was fired because her administrators decided she was too old.  Without any real security built into their contracts, teachers had no safety net or way of pushing back.

A Cultural Revolution

Bob Dylan-The Times They Are A-Changin’ (Official Audio)

But Bob Dylan was right in 1964 when he said the times were a-changing. The cultural revolution of the 1960s transformed how ordinary people thought about power and their rights. Social movements for civil rights, women’s liberation, and labor justice were sweeping across the country, inspiring people to take a more direct, confrontational approach to improving their lives, in and out of work. By the 1970s, collective action had become a tool of choice for workers from a range of industries. Postal workers, truckers, telephone operators, auto workers, and even NBA and NFL players use strikes as a way of achieving bargaining goals.

And teachers were a part of that cultural shift. Education historian Marjorie Murphy wrote that teacher militancy appeared suddenly in the late 1960s and drew much of its strength from a new, younger workforce that was very much dedicated to the social issues of the day. Labor historian Marshall O. Donley Jr. suggested that “economic injustice” as well as an “unrealistic demand that educators should be solving all the growing problems of a complex society” were at the heart of this growing militancy. In his book Teacher Strikes and the Courts, David L. Colton argued that the 1970s were a time when teachers all across the country increasingly saw unionism and bargaining as a “viable mechanism” to restore dignity to teaching.

But teachers had a major problem. As public employees, teachers are not protected by the National Labor Relations Act. That meant no legally protected right to organize, no guarantee of collective bargaining, and no legal right to strike. So when teachers started speaking up about their workloads, their pay, or how decisions were being made in their schools, administrators didn’t have to listen–and most of the time they didn’t.

Even among teachers, though, there wasn’t always agreement about whether striking was the right move. The more radical American Federation of Teachers (AFT) had always leaned more into traditional union tactics. They believed strikes were necessary to get results. But the National Education Association (NEA), representing the majority of the nation’s teachers took a different approach. They saw teachers as professionals, not laborers, and for a long time, discouraged striking altogether. But by the late 1960s and early ’70s, that mindset was starting to shift.

The Professional Negotiations Act

In 1965, the Washington Legislature passed the Professional Negotiations Act, or the PNA, which was supposed to give teachers a way to engage with administrators and raise concerns about pay, work assignments, and classroom conditions. The PNA granted teachers the right to “meet, confer, and negotiate” with administrators, but there was a problem. It did not require school boards to bargain in good faith, implement any agreements, or even take the meetings seriously.

The provisions of the Professional Negotiations Act…permit but do not require the board of directors of a school district to meet, confer, and negotiate with the representatives of a duly designated employee organization.

Slade Gordon, WA Attorney Genera, 1973

Unlike traditional collective bargaining laws, which required a contract as the end result, the PNA treated school policy, which was controlled by the board, as the final product. A formal contract was not guaranteed. As a result, school boards often engaged in “surface bargaining,” or the appearance of bargaining without a good-faith attempt to reach an agreement. As teachers across the state tried negotiating under the PNA, they regularly met resistance from school boards who didn’t take them seriously. Teachers knew that in order to have their voices heard, they were going to have to look to their own power rather than a legal process that was stacked against them.

Washington Teachers Get Radical

By 1970, teachers were done playing nice. Tensions between teachers and administrators were building, and the polite approach clearly wasn’t working. Teachers began recognizing that they needed real leverage if they were going to be taken seriously at the bargaining table.

So, the Washington Education Association launched the UniServ program, a new effort to train teachers in the skills of collective bargaining. This wasn’t a polite seminar on how to write strongly worded emails. UniServ brought in tough, experienced negotiators from across the country who meant business. They trained teachers on identifying workplace issues, crafting contract language, and, most importantly, negotiation tactics.

Their training was rooted in the strategies of  Saul Alinsky  a radical activist who believed in direct action and strategic confrontation. Alinsky had a simple rule: If people have the power to act, they will. The primary purpose of UniServ was to give teachers that power.

And the timing couldn’t have been more critical. The economy was in bad shape, state education budgets were shrinking, and levies were failing. That meant bigger class sizes, stagnant wages, layoffs, and fewer resources for already overstretched teachers. Tense conflicts at the bargaining table, combined with the muscle of UniServ, created the perfect storm for Washington’s first teacher strikes.

First Strike: Aberdeen

The first big test for this new, more aggressive approach came in May 1972, when teachers in Aberdeen walked off the job. They weren’t just fighting low pay and overcrowded classrooms; they were standing up against a superintendent who refused to take them seriously. When he threatened to replace them with unclassified staff, that was the final straw. With help from UniServ, Aberdeen launched the first teacher strike in Washington State History.

But the district quickly struck back. Not only did they refuse all of the teacher’s proposals, but they also got a court order demanding that the teachers return to work. The teachers had two choices: Go back to work without a contract, or defy the court order and go to jail. Without legal protections, the teachers returned to work without a contract.

But the strike was far from a failure. Governor Dan Evans appointed a committee to investigate the conflict. The committee publicly sided with the teachers, calling out the district’s bad-faith tactics. While the ruling wasn’t legally binding, it did create enough political pressure that the district had little choice but to implement many of the teachers’ demands. In the end, the strike was a success in that it finally forced the district to deal with the issues raised by the teachers.

Evergreen School District No. 114

By 1973, conditions in the Evergreen School District were rough, even by the standards of the day. Superintendent Ray Patrick ran the district with a heavy hand, and teachers were excluded from key decisions and regularly mistreated. The Evergreen Education Association (EEA) had been trying to negotiate with its board for five months. Their proposals were similar to many of the concerns in Aberdeen, and for teachers all across Washington, for that matter. Evergreen teachers sought smaller class sizes, more prep time, fair salaries and benefits, and most importantly, job protections against arbitrary firings. But the board refused to negotiate and take the teachers’ concerns seriously.

Then, in January, Evergreen failed to pass a special levy. Rather than working with teachers on a solution, the board prepared to cut positions unilaterally. After months of stalled negotiations, the dispute was referred to an impasse committee made up of primarily board-aligned officials, offering little hope of resolution. That was the breaking point. EEA president Fred Ensman wrote a letter to UniServ, expressing frustration with the board’s unwillingness to negotiate in good faith, and asked for their support. He also made it clear that the EEA members were prepared to strike if necessary.

The Evergreen School Board has not take negotiations seriously…we are prepared for whatever action is necessary to succeed in true collective bargaining.

Fred Ensman to UniServ, May 9, 1973

Four days later, Evergreen teachers gathered at Clark College to hold a secret ballot. On Mother’s Day, 1973, the Evergreen teachers–with the support of UniServ–voted overwhelmingly in favor of striking, setting off the second teacher strike in Washington state history.

EEA President Fred Ensman outlines commitment to establishing “true and viable” collective bargaining rights for teachers

The next day, Ensman and strike leader Dick Johnson held a press conference to announce the strike. In doing so, they placed themselves directly in the crosshairs of Clark County Superior Court Judge Guthrie J. Langsdorf. The consequences would come quickly.

Free to Teach

Evergreen teachers picket at Covington Jr. High School despite court order

Just like in Aberdeen, Evergreen’s superintendent went to the courts and got an injunction ordering teachers back to work. But this time, the teachers refused. President Ensman issued a statement to teachers, encouraging them to “respectfully ignore” the court order, and to “remain on the picket lines until negotiations have been completed.”

Having just seen them on television, Langsdorf summoned Ensman and Dick Johnson to his courtroom. He gave them the same choice that Aberdeen teachers faced. End the strike now, or go to jail. They both refused to comply and were sentenced to 90 days for contempt of court. For context, in Washington, contempt of court charges typically result in a warning, fine, or at most, a few days in jail. The average stay is about 7 days, according to WEA official Steve Kink. Ninety days was an extraordinary sentence, clearly intended to make an example of the striking teachers and to discourage others from following in their footsteps. The following day, middle school math teacher John Zavodsky was appointed interim EEA president. He was quickly called into court and ordered to direct the teachers back to work. Like Johnson and Ensman, he refused, and was also arrested and sentenced to 90 days in jail.

John Zavodsky at an EEA meeting the night before he, too, is sentenced to jail

Judge Langsdorf made sure the experience would be as uncomfortable as possible for the three teachers. They weren’t allowed newspapers and were limited to just ten minutes of visitation per week. To make the most of it, the men’s wives coordinated their visits, showing up together to offer support in the little time they had. Unlike other inmates, the teachers weren’t permitted to leave their cells for activities. Each was placed in a cell with no view of the outside, just blank walls and sixty feet of concrete in any direction.  Zavodsky later said that he only knew what the weather was like because they were given Kool-Aid when it was warm outside.

He asked me if I was one of those teachers. He was surprised. They put you in here with us killers?

Fred Ensman, Class Wars

Despite the isolation, teachers weren’t forgotten. They received dozens of letters from people all across the state. WEA members, students, and community members sent them cards, jokes, and letters showing their support. Zavodsky joked that the jailers had  “quite the job”  reading all the mail before it could be passed to them. Teachers across the district even got together to paint Ensman’s home while he was behind bars.

Johnson and Ensman would each serve forty-five days behind bars, while Zavodsky served forty-three, remaining in jail long after the strike was settled. All three could have ended their sentences weeks earlier had they complied with the judge’s repeated demands for them to call off the strike.

A Divided Public

Gov. Dan Evans was asked if he plans to intervene in the Evergreen strike and discusses the differences between public and private employee strikes, May 22, 1973

But as the strike heated up, so did public reaction. Teacher strikes were illegal then, and are still technically illegal in Washington today.  Debates on whether or not teachers should be allowed to strike raged far beyond the school board or the picket lines, but were also being fought out in Olympia, in newspaper columns, and even living rooms all across the state. Many believed that, as public employees, teachers had a duty to remain in the classroom and not disrupt children’s education. To them, striking teachers were not just breaking the law, but were betraying a sacred privilege that had been bestowed upon them.

The Columbian‘s “Letters from our Readers” section captured just how divided the community had become.

Some readers called the teachers’ actions “unacceptable,” accused them of disrespecting authority, and compared them to “mercenaries” driven only by money. Others defended the teachers and blamed the district for failing to negotiate sooner, adding that the teachers’ demands were “not out of line” and had been “public knowledge for some months.” One letter called the school board’s treatment of teachers “deplorable,” adding that they felt “compelled to speak out on behalf of our teachers.”

Speaking from their home in Vancouver’s Five Corners neighborhood, the Sheldon family share their thoughts on the ongoing teacher strike as their children remain out of school, May 23, 1973

Local man condemns the Evergreen teachers for disregarding the rule of law

In a show of solidarity, the Camas Education Association wrote a public letter of support for the striking Evergreen teachers, recognizing the inconvenience of the strike but also acknowledging its necessity:

While the withholding of professional services is seen by all to be drastic and does present inconvenience and harm to the children, parents, and teachers of any school district, we do wish to go on record as supporting what we believe to be the long-term goals of ultimate improvement in the educational system and improved educational climate for the children of the Clark County area.

Letter from CEA to EEA, Published in the Columbian, May 21, 1973

The letter also reassured parents that their sacrifices were necessary to improve education, not just for Evergreen students but for all students in the state, foreshadowing that the resolution of the Evergreen conflict would have state-wide implications. As working conditions worsened and school boards refused to negotiate in good faith, more teachers began to see themselves as workers who deserved the same rights to push back as other workers.

Betty Colwell

The school board likely thought the arrests of Ensman, Johnson, and Zavodsky would break the EEA’s momentum, and it nearly did– if not for Betty Colwell. With three of their leaders in jail, the EEA made a bold move. They appointed Betty Colwell, a 45-year-old middle school science teacher, as the new EEA president. Just as expected, she was served a court summons the very next day. She knew she was likely headed to jail next. But instead of backing down, she took the fight right to the school board. The night before her court appearance, Colwell stood up to speak at a packed school board meeting. When the board tried to cut her off, parents in the crowd pushed back, chanting “let her speak.”

Colwell delivered a speech that reframed the strike, not simply as a fight over wages, but as a stand for dignity, unity, and the right to be heard. Her speech was captured in the Evergreen School Board Meeting Minutes.

“Today, another EEA leader was jailed, and I am ordered to appear at 9:30 am tomorrow for the same charges as my colleagues… When is the Board going to take its elected responsibility and negotiate in good faith to a settlement and end this strike? Why does the Board jail their teachers rather than put them back into their classrooms with the dignity they deserve? [Tomorrow], I will go to jail, and the School Board is responsible…Teachers don’t like jail…teachers don’t like strikes either, but we do like dignity, and we still stay united. I feel that every parent here tonight and in this community should demand that the Board be responsible. Please help us get your children back into their classrooms. We want to teach, and we want to be free to teach.”

After her speech, she turned to the board and stated, “I’ve never broken the law or had so much as a traffic ticket, but tomorrow, I’m going to jail all because of you!” Then, she turned and walked out. The room erupted. Parents applauded. Some shouted in anger, blaming the board for jailing their children’s teachers. At least one school board member was reportedly moved to tears.

Later that night, the EEA held an emergency strategy meeting. Tensions were running high. Principals had been spotted photographing picketing teachers, and there were reports that a principal at Mill Plain Elementary had struck two teachers with his car.

With the three strike leaders in jail, and no real bargaining going on, the threat of the judge arresting more teachers was very real. EEA leaders were determined to come up with a strategy that would stop the judge and get serious talks going. That’s when UniServ representative John Chase floated a bold idea to the teachers: What if every teacher showed up and surrendered themselves? Organizers braced themselves for push back from the teachers. Fears, questions, hesitations. But after a brief silence, one teacher raised her hand and asked: “What can we bring with us to jail?”

The next morning, Colwell arrived at the courthouse, joined by nearly 300 Evergreen teachers, walking one by one, ready to surrender themselves alongside her. As they packed into the courthouse, they sent a clear message to the judge: If you’re going to arrest teachers for striking, you’ll have to arrest us all.

300 Evergreen Teachers surrender themselves to Clark County Courthouse

Victory

Judge Langsdorf hadn’t expected nearly 300 teachers to appear in his courtroom that morning, and for a moment, it looked like mass arrests were about to begin. He even ordered his bailiff to begin making arrangements. But the story had become front-page news, and the media was documenting every moment. Public opinion was shifting fast in favor of the teachers, and the prospect of jailing hundreds more of them posed a serious public relations risk. So Langsdorf changed course. Instead of arresting more teachers, he turned the pressure onto the district. He called in school officials and gave them a new ultimatum: Begin negotiations now, or you’ll be the ones going to jail. The district relented. A federal mediator was brought in, and for the first time, meaningful negotiations began. The outcome was historic. Evergreen teachers secured the first teaching contract in Washington state ever won through a strike.

Not long after the strike ended, Judge Langsdorf was stripped of his ability to select cases. The Clark County Court made the decision due to concerns about his conduct and lack of restraint during his handling of the strike. And on the same day as the teachers’ march on the courthouse, Superintendent Ray Patrick submitted his letter of resignation, citing the “volatile conditions” in the district.

Evergreen teachers had done what few believed was possible. They didn’t just secure a contract, they fundamentally shifted the balance of power between teachers and administrators. For years, teachers had been told that they were professionals, but not workers. That they should negotiate politely but never strike. That they could speak up, but shouldn’t expect to be heard. But Evergreen changed that.

By standing firm in the face of legal threats and jail time, they showed that collective action could succeed, even without formal legal protections. They showed that public employees didn’t have to wait for permission to demand fairness. And they proved that real, lasting change often begins when teachers decide to stop accepting the limits placed on them.

Legacy

In the months that followed, school districts across Washington took notice. Some, like the Vancouver School District, moved quickly to offer better contracts, hoping to avoid the kind of conflict Evergreen had just endured. Elsewhere, where administrators still refused to negotiate, teachers followed Evergreen’s example and went on strike. In both cases, the outcome was clear: Teachers expected to have a real say in the decisions that shaped their working conditions, and they were ready to take action to get it.

In 1976, lawmakers passed the  Educational Employment Relations Act , finally granting teachers formal collective bargaining rights in Washington. The law required school districts to bargain in good faith and to produce a contract as the final result of those negotiations. It also created the  Public Employment Relations Commission (PERC),  which is responsible for enforcing collective bargaining laws, handling unfair labor practice complaints, and resolving labor-management disputes in public employment.

In 1978, the Washington State Supreme Court ruled that the state, not local levies, was responsible for fully funding basic education. The decision was part of a broader shift sparked by Evergreen and the wave of teacher strikes that followed.

None of that would have been possible without the courageous teachers of Aberdeen and Evergreen.

Today, the legacy of the Evergreen strike lives on through  scholarships in honor of the teachers who led the strike . The John R. Zavodsky Student Activism Scholarship is awarded to a senior who demonstrates a commitment to activism and has shown a willingness to “speak truth to power,” while the Fred Ensman/Virginia Oliver Dependent Scholarships assist the children of EEA members in pursuing higher education.

The Evergreen strike may have happened over fifty years ago, but the core issues–respect, fair pay, and a voice in decision-making– are still driving teacher’s today . Across Washington and around the country, educators are still standing up for better conditions, not just for themselves, but for their students and their schools.

Evergreen didn’t make teacher strikes legal, but it did change how those laws are enforced, and how authorities respond when teachers walk out. It made punishing teacher strikes politically risky, and practically unenforceable.

Despite the many teacher strikes since, no teacher in Washington has been jailed for striking since.

Thanks for reading!

-Frank