-Horatio_Alger_Jr- t1_j8jdkil wrote
Public employees shouldn't be able to unionize. Public unions should not exist.
Edit - I am not going to respond to every ridiculous comment on my post.
If it is a safety issue, call OSHA. There is no need for a union.
If it is about compensation, put forth legislation to fund a pay raise. There is no need for a union.
A public employee using the government boot to step on the necks of the taxpayers until they get better individual compensation is a selfish tactic.
3720-To-One t1_j8jike9 wrote
Police unions can certainly get bent.
mattgm1995 t1_j8juaou wrote
Yeah teachers should just get fucked even more.
niknight_ml t1_j8kr86r wrote
>If it is a safety issue, call OSHA. There is no need for a union.
Fun fact, public schools are not subject to OSHA regulation unless they're vocational schools. (I learned about this one during my laboratory safety training)
​
>If it is about compensation, put forth legislation to fund a pay raise. There is no need for a union.
The contracts are between the unions and the municipality, since they are municipal employees. The state just can't pass legislation saying "hey Boston, you need to give your teachers a 4% raise this year.
​
>A public employee using the government boot to step on the necks of the taxpayers until they get better individual compensation is a selfish tactic.
And the school committees and select boards refusing to negotiate in good faith (or at all, recently) because the employees can't strike is perfectly ok in your eyes, though?
pillbinge t1_j8lcjj8 wrote
>If it is about compensation, put forth legislation to fund a pay raise. There is no need for a union.
What happens if you don't get that legislation through but they do put forth legislation to increase teachers' workloads?
ArchaicArchetype t1_j8jkuwj wrote
The common reasoning against striking is that workers can just quit.
However, a teacher for example, is given their summer pay as a lump sum at the end of the year instead of being distributed through their working hours. In practice this means that teachers who leave before the school year's end lose 25% of their yearly pay. This would be similar to if you quit your job, 25% of your pay was held as a punishment. No private employer would get away with this.
This traps teachers financially and forces them to work through the school year. When they do quit, new teachers are unwittingly put into the same unreformed system. The new teachers are not tenured and won't be able to voice any disagreement without fear of repercussion furthering the lack of change.
To the public, no loss of service is immediately noticable. But the system is rotting.
Striking is a tool to break through the necrosis caused by stagnant administration and local government.
niknight_ml t1_j8kssor wrote
>However, a teacher for example, is given their summer pay as a lump sum at the end of the year instead of being distributed through their working hours. In practice this means that teachers who leave before the school year's end lose 25% of their yearly pay. This would be similar to if you quit your job, 25% of your pay was held as a punishment. No private employer would get away with this.
​
Umm... not even close. The pay you get is for 185 work days. If you leave during the year, you will be paid for the number of days you worked. If the amount you were paid doesn't cover all of the days you worked, the difference will be added to your last check.
The "summer pay" you speak of is the district paying out the balance owed on your contract if you decided (or the district required) your pay to be split into 26 checks instead of 21. The only reason why it's doled out in a balloon payment is because the year-to-year contracts expire on June 30 (before the start of the next fiscal year on July 1), so they can't have any remaining obligations on their books.
pillbinge t1_j8lcs3s wrote
Teachers only get paid in lump sums at the end if that's how they distribute their paychecks. They still get paid for the days they work, fair and square. You don't lose out on that pay if you quit - that's the same as any other job. It's just chunked up a bit differently.
ShawshankExemption t1_j8km852 wrote
While I’m sure other districts pay teachers like this, not every single one does and many give individual teachers options (out of a set) on how they want to be paid.
Many other jobs/employers also have claw back provisions on compensation so teachers wouldn’t be unique in this regard.
Bada__Ping t1_j8jfqcy wrote
You mean using public safety and children as bargaining chips shouldn't be allowed?!
bastard_swine t1_j8k7eku wrote
It's actually the opposite, teachers' passion for education and care for their students is typically held against them to discourage them from striking and demanding better conditions, hence why teaching is one of the most underpaid professions requiring a graduate degree and there is a dire shortage across the country. As someone going into education, I think more teachers need to realize their empathy is being taken advantage of and realize we can only care for students as much as their taxpayer parents do, which as it stands is very little.
AnyRound5042 t1_j8jpz4m wrote
What about using made up public safety and made up children as bargaining chips in online arguments?
ShawshankExemption t1_j8ku2h3 wrote
These are literally teachers, the children aren’t made up. They are the students.
AnyRound5042 t1_j8mfujk wrote
Are the children in the room with us right now?
ShawshankExemption t1_j8mmnjf wrote
Actually no, the kids are at home because their teachers walked out and the district screwed them.
AnyRound5042 t1_j8mw8y1 wrote
So, just to be clear, you want worse conditions for both the kids AND the people tasked with keeping them safe or is it only the teachers who should have bad conditions? I just want to make sure I understand your position
ShawshankExemption t1_j8mx5wh wrote
I’m saying I want the legislature to give teachers unions alternative tools, and coerce districts in alternative ways, to get to an agreement, without forcing kids out of the class room.
Bada__Ping t1_j8jqfbv wrote
Ah yes, the old "There is 0 need for any police & there are no children in the schools that the teachers on strike are employed at" strategy. Bold.
AnyRound5042 t1_j8jqrc6 wrote
Thanks for proving the point
Viewing a single comment thread. View all comments