Regrettably, an abundance of misinformation appears to be circulating about the state Ethics Commission’s position on state Department of Education teacher travel.
Contrary to what many may believe, the commission is not saying that teachers cannot accompany students on school- related trips, nor is the commission questioning the educational value of the trips or the amount of work and responsibility teachers assume as chaperones on the trips. Most important, the commission is not saying that the trips cannot happen.
What the commission is saying is that, because of the way the trips are currently organized and arranged, the state ethics code prohibits teachers from accepting free travel offered to them by the tour companies through which the teachers organize the trips. As currently structured, teachers engage in the following activities when planning school-related trips:
>> They select the tour company, in many instances without obtaining quotations from or considering other companies.
>> They design and organize the itinerary with the selected tour company.
>> They decide which teachers will travel with the students.
>> They promote the trip to the students and their parents using promotional material prepared by the selected company.
For example, a teacher designs and organizes a trip’s itinerary with the tour company the teacher has selected. The teacher then generates interest in and promotes the trip to students and their parents through the use of a slide show bearing the tour company’s business logo, and/or through a solicitation letter to the students’ parents on the company’s letterhead bearing the teacher’s name as the signer of the letter.
Typically, the tour company offers teachers one free travel package for every six or 10 students who pay for the trip. The tour company may also offer some teachers an all-expense paid weekend trip to New York City or a similar mainland destination for a group leader orientation hosted by the tour company.
Simply put, by engaging in the above-described actions, teachers generate substantial revenue for the tour company and are, essentially, rewarded for their efforts in the form of free travel and other benefits from the tour company they selected and promoted.
The dual role as teacher and tour company representative places a teacher in a conflict of interest under the state ethics code. In addition to raising concerns under the conflicts of interests provision, the free travel that the tour company offers the teachers raises concerns under other provisions of the state ethics code.
In sum, because of the way the trips are currently organized and arranged, where the teachers who accept the free travel from the tour company are involved in selecting the tour company and promoting the trip, concerns arise under the state ethics code.
The commission’s complete discussion regarding the application of the various provisions of the state ethics code to teacher travel is available on the commission’s website at http://files.hawaii.gov/ethics/advice/AO2015-1.pdf.
To ensure that its teachers do not engage in conduct that may be contrary to the state ethics code, the DOE must find a way to restructure how school-related trips are organized and arranged.
The commission is currently working with the DOE by reviewing DOE policies and procedures developed to address some of the concerns associated with the teachers’ acceptance of free travel, while ensuring compliance with the state ethics code.
