Is the left really against schools hiring students or is the issue Gingrich said it?

[kaz]

Arguments used against me by the left on this include:

- It's "forcing" students to work to pay them to do jobs around the school
- If students are to do jobs, we should force all students to do them, not pay some of them to do them
- It's depriving janitors of their livelihood.
- 10 year old will be forced to clean bathrooms
- Newt saying our child labor laws are stupid can only mean he wants to repeal all labor laws.

I have a hard time seeing in real life that if schools offered students work for chores around the school that the liberals would say or even think any of these things. I think they'd be OK with it. But you tell me, is that really the issue? Or is it a partisan attack against Gingrich?

I'd like you liberals to think about this and just be honest. Would you seriously make these arguments if your local school just did it? They offered kids money to perform chores around the school?

 

[Amelia]

Good questions!

 

[Sunshine]

Aw geeze not this shit again!

The child labor laws will not be repealed. You see, there REALLY IS a Santa!

 

[Amelia]

I could see an inner city educational activist suggesting some sort of on-campus job corps for high school students. And I could see the left embracing it.

 

[Jackson]

Good point, Kaz. Don't forget they'll probably die of hepatitus or in the coal mines.

 

[Sunshine]

I could see an inner city educational activist suggesting some sort of on-campus job corps for high school students. And I could see the left embracing it.

High school students already worked in schools when I was in high school. They took up the lunch money in the cafeteria and some washed dishes. They did this so they could pay for their lunches. I'm pretty sure this hasn't changed here.

 

[occupied]

Taken as a part of the overall attack on labor by the right it is a not something I would ever approve of.

 

[JoeB131]

Taken as a part of the overall attack on labor by the right it is a not something I would ever approve of.

You mean, union thugs, not labor.

Only about 11% of the workforce is unionized, and that drops to about 7% if you take out the government 'workers'. (Not that I've ever seen any of these people actually do 'work'.)

I think the idea he was trying to get across was making work part of education, and making pride in a school part of the experience. Wow. What a concept.


Nope, better to leave things like they are, where thanks to the union teachers (who make less than the janitors) 20% of them can't read their diplomas.

Meanwhile, all being good Sidwell Liberals, the Democrats send their kids to private schools.

 

[Baruch Menachem]

Kids are used as cash machines by the school already. They are sent out as salesmen several times during the year at my kids' school. It was even worse when they were in Portland.

 

[kaz]

I could see an inner city educational activist suggesting some sort of on-campus job corps for high school students. And I could see the left embracing it.

High school students already worked in schools when I was in high school. They took up the lunch money in the cafeteria and some washed dishes. They did this so they could pay for their lunches. I'm pretty sure this hasn't changed here.

Good point. So out of curiosity are you aware of any liberals having a cow over it?

 

[occupied]

Taken as a part of the overall attack on labor by the right it is a not something I would ever approve of.

You mean, union thugs, not labor.

Only about 11% of the workforce is unionized, and that drops to about 7% if you take out the government 'workers'. (Not that I've ever seen any of these people actually do 'work'.)

I think the idea he was trying to get across was making work part of education, and making pride in a school part of the experience. Wow. What a concept.


Nope, better to leave things like they are, where thanks to the union teachers (who make less than the janitors) 20% of them can't read their diplomas.

Meanwhile, all being good Sidwell Liberals, the Democrats send their kids to private schools.

See what I mean, this suggestion was not out of any concern for students but an attack on labor and as such is to be resisted.

 

[kaz]

Taken as a part of the overall attack on labor by the right it is a not something I would ever approve of.

You mean, union thugs, not labor.

Only about 11% of the workforce is unionized, and that drops to about 7% if you take out the government 'workers'. (Not that I've ever seen any of these people actually do 'work'.)

I think the idea he was trying to get across was making work part of education, and making pride in a school part of the experience. Wow. What a concept.


Nope, better to leave things like they are, where thanks to the union teachers (who make less than the janitors) 20% of them can't read their diplomas.

Meanwhile, all being good Sidwell Liberals, the Democrats send their kids to private schools.

See what I mean, this suggestion was not out of any concern for students but an attack on labor and as such is to be resisted.

How exactly are schools hiring students to do chores an "attack on labor?"

 

[occupied]

You mean, union thugs, not labor.

Only about 11% of the workforce is unionized, and that drops to about 7% if you take out the government 'workers'. (Not that I've ever seen any of these people actually do 'work'.)

I think the idea he was trying to get across was making work part of education, and making pride in a school part of the experience. Wow. What a concept.


Nope, better to leave things like they are, where thanks to the union teachers (who make less than the janitors) 20% of them can't read their diplomas.

Meanwhile, all being good Sidwell Liberals, the Democrats send their kids to private schools.

See what I mean, this suggestion was not out of any concern for students but an attack on labor and as such is to be resisted.

How exactly are schools hiring students to do chores an "attack on labor?"

Did you read your own comment? Even you see this as a way to get rid of unionized janitorial staff.

 

[JoeB131]

Kids are used as cash machines by the school already. They are sent out as salesmen several times during the year at my kids' school. It was even worse when they were in Portland.

Good point. I owe you some rep...

Frankly, I've always been bothered by this. With the level of taxes we pay, kids should not be going door to door (which really, can be a LOT more dangerous than mopping a floor) selling candy to God Knows Who is on the other side of the door.

Incidently, most parents I know sell the kid's candy for them at work.

 

[The T]

The latter. Painfully obvious seeing thier track record.

 

[JoeB131]

Taken as a part of the overall attack on labor by the right it is a not something I would ever approve of.

You mean, union thugs, not labor.

Only about 11% of the workforce is unionized, and that drops to about 7% if you take out the government 'workers'. (Not that I've ever seen any of these people actually do 'work'.)

I think the idea he was trying to get across was making work part of education, and making pride in a school part of the experience. Wow. What a concept.


Nope, better to leave things like they are, where thanks to the union teachers (who make less than the janitors) 20% of them can't read their diplomas.

Meanwhile, all being good Sidwell Liberals, the Democrats send their kids to private schools.

See what I mean, this suggestion was not out of any concern for students but an attack on labor and as such is to be resisted.

The unions can go screw themselves. They are more of a hinderance than a help at this point, and we'd be better off without them.

The fact that kids will get valuable learning experience, is just a bonus.

 

[kaz]

See what I mean, this suggestion was not out of any concern for students but an attack on labor and as such is to be resisted.

How exactly are schools hiring students to do chores an "attack on labor?"

Did you read your own comment? Even you see this as a way to get rid of unionized janitorial staff.

Read it more carefully. I said that was an argument used against me in this discussion, it was not an argument I was making, it was an argument I was disagreeing with.

So my question stands, how exactly are schools hiring students to do chores an "attack on labor?"

 

[Sunshine]

Kids are used as cash machines by the school already. They are sent out as salesmen several times during the year at my kids' school. It was even worse when they were in Portland.

That was the case when my kids were in school also. I would never let them go door to door as I didn't think it was safe. I would just buy and pay for whatever junk they had to sell. Before we moved to Nashville, though, the 'room mothers' got together and decided not to allow our children to go out soliciting. Those of us who could just chipped in 50 or 100 dollars each. Anyone who couldn't pay didn't have to. Those of us who could took care of it all.

 

[occupied]

How exactly are schools hiring students to do chores an "attack on labor?"

Did you read your own comment? Even you see this as a way to get rid of unionized janitorial staff.

Read it more carefully. I said that was an argument used against me in this discussion, it was not an argument I was making, it was an argument I was disagreeing with.

So my question stands, how exactly are schools hiring students to do chores an "attack on labor?"

Already told you.

 

[The T]

How exactly are schools hiring students to do chores an "attack on labor?"

Did you read your own comment? Even you see this as a way to get rid of unionized janitorial staff.

Read it more carefully. I said that was an argument used against me in this discussion, it was not an argument I was making, it was an argument I was disagreeing with.

So my question stands, how exactly are schools hiring students to do chores an "attack on labor?"

Because ALL labour belongs to the Unions...and therefore government since the Democrats are owned by the Unions? These kids can't be in the union...yet.