Just Go Away Teacher Unions!...

[Samson]

yes they are...and they are still the lowest paid professionals (requiring minimum of 5 years of college and certification) out there.

You make this sound like news?

Who expected to be highly paid for a teaching certificate?

Sorry, but if teachers wanted higher pay, then THEY SHOULDn"T HAVE BEEN TEACHERS.

Maybe it's me, but I find an average salary in the mid-high 40's pretty good. In more generous, populated states quite a bit higher. My local districts have an average in the high 50's for unit districts, secondary districts are in the mid-60's. Both of these are before extra curricular pay.

You are correct. Teachers, right out of school, are some of the highest paid Government Employees...

Anyone know what a 2nd Lt serving in A-stan is making?

 

[Annie]

As a public school teacher, I would be absolutely fine with doing away with the unions. My question to those of you who support that, however, is:

What are you going to do when that doesn't miraculously "fix" this broken system and, in fact, spawns a whole new set of problems?

It seems like many here are hanging their hats on the "the evil teachers unions are the reason public education is failing in this country," and while I would have no problem with doing away with collective bargaining, etc. (in fact, I'm pretty sure I would benefit greatly from such a decision), I find it laughable that so many seem to think that this will solve the problem of why our schools are failing.

Doing away with the unions will force teachers to hold themselves to a higher standard. They won't have the security blanket of a union fighting for them despite their abject incompetence.

Get the power out of the hands of the unions and put it fully in the hands of the school districts. If the school districts could have the power over their teachers and their competence without the inevitable threat of union intervention in personnel matters, things would no doubt change.

Basically, just cut out the middle man and get directly down to business. Enough is enough.

To a degree I agree with Gem. Truth of the matter is that Unions have protected the worst of teachers, doing away with that is good. However, the real issue for failure doesn't lie with teachers, but with parenting and the expectations that somehow 'schools' or 'teachers' can fix what's broken.

 

[Jroc]

Teachers earn far less on average than non-teachers with the same level of education required for the job.

That may be true but they receive other great benefits no other occupations have. All Weekends off,several weeks of paid Holiday Time off,and entire Summers off? That seems pretty nice to most outside observers. Look around America and see how many other Americans enjoy those kinds of benefits. The Teacher Unions are only trouble at this point. They've outlived their usefulness. They only stand for greed and political activism at this point. It's time for them to get the boot once and for all. Our kids deserve better.

1. Teachers work over the weekends sometimes. Maybe not at work-but they grade papers, make lesson plans, etc.

2. Most teachers work during the summers-you didn't address this.

I think we need to pay teachers more. Because most people who're qualified more than current teachers don't want the job. Why not? Because the pay isn't there. Put the money into teacher salaries (not unions, not districts, not to build a new football field).

Any college graduate who makes less than $45K a year-is NOT in it for the money. Try again.

Yeah.. how about the good teachers we pay more the not so good we pay less or get rid of them. It shouldn't be about how long you been in the stupid union

 

[N4mddissent]

Then they have to listen to lots of other people jump on the "blame the teacher" bandwagon just because it is more convenient to blame teachers or it fits better with their political ideology or just utter bombastic nonsense about issues of which they have no real knowledge.

It is convenient to "blame the teachers."

However, every other "professional" is measured by their accomplishments...why should teachers be any different? They are, after all PUBLIC School teachers. They are supposed to teach the PUBLIC, not just kids that come from perfect households, and who have high values of self motivation.

Because most other professions rely more upon the actions of the professional than upon the actions of others...especially minors to which you have limited access and control. If doctors were not judged by how much they helped patients heal, but how healthy they were. Imagine if we judged doctors as shit because too many of their patients are getting fat and it's making them sick. Or perhaps their patient is smoking and getting cancer. That is what we're doing with teachers. They can't control whether little johnny goes home and studies or whether he simply picks up his xbox and plays all night. They can't control that little suzie is too busy texting her friends all night and her parents can't be bothered to attend a teacher conference. But yet they are judged "poor teachers" when little johnny and suzy fail their tests.

 

[Gem]

Samson Wrote:

What "whole new set of problems" do you mean?

Like, what would be the top 3?

Off the top of my head...

I worked for a district that worked closely with its union for several years on developing a merit based pay system that would reward "good" teachers and would encourage struggling teachers (or bad teachers) to improve or get out. The union and the district worked hand in hand, in good faith...and after years of trying...they abandoned the idea...the reason? The district discovered that it was highly likely that it would cost the district FAR FAR too much because so many of the teachers were highly educated, highly qualified, and working their assess off every day for their students.

Yes...without unions it would be easier to get rid of "bad" teachers...that would be wonderful. But are taxpayers REALLY willing to pay the good teachers what they are worth? The district I worked for decided that answer was "no."

On the other side of that coin...you have the problem of districts that would simply say...Here's what we are paying (not much...cause afterall, you get summers "off")...oh, and healthcare costs have got to go up....and your pension is gone....you're going to have a lot of teachers who love teaching...but who still need to eat, save some money for the future...and keep their families healthy...who are going to go elsewhere.

Good, you say. Good riddance to them! We'll get the teachers who REALLY want to be there then. I argue that no...you won't. You'll get young, inexperienced teachers who will quickly learn that without any of the benefits...what they have chosen is a REALLY, FRIGGIN' HARD JOB that has very few perks....and they'll leave (in even higher numbers than they already do.)

And then we'll be left with even worse teachers than the ones you are so desperate to get rid of the unions so you can fire...

There's two potential problems...I can speak at length about the problems that getting rid of collective bargaining bring (even though I support it...its a nightmare in a public education system).

Again...I'm not saying that getting rid of unions might not be a good step for public education. I'm just laughing a bit (politely and respectfully) at people outside the world of public education who genuinely believe that it is going to solve the problems we are facing and not end up causing new ones.

 

[Gem]

Yeah.. how about the good teachers we pay more the not so good we pay less or get rid of them. It shouldn't be about how long you been in the stupid union

I agree completely.

Are you as a taxpayer, willing to cough up A LOT more money when you discover that your district is made up of 95% good teachers and 5% mediocre ones?

 

[Jroc]

[ame="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yuri7p_9pm4"]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yuri7p_9pm4[/ame]

 

[bodecea]

yes they are...and they are still the lowest paid professionals (requiring minimum of 5 years of college and certification) out there.

You make this sound like news?

Who expected to be highly paid for a teaching certificate?

Sorry, but if teachers wanted higher pay, then THEY SHOULDn"T HAVE BEEN TEACHERS.

Maybe it's me, but I find an average salary in the mid-high 40's pretty good. In more generous, populated states quite a bit higher. My local districts have an average in the high 50's for unit districts, secondary districts are in the mid-60's. Both of these are before extra curricular pay.

And you understand this pay is usually after over 10 years of service.

 

[Wicked Jester]

As a public school teacher, I would be absolutely fine with doing away with the unions. My question to those of you who support that, however, is:

What are you going to do when that doesn't miraculously "fix" this broken system and, in fact, spawns a whole new set of problems?

It seems like many here are hanging their hats on the "the evil teachers unions are the reason public education is failing in this country," and while I would have no problem with doing away with collective bargaining, etc. (in fact, I'm pretty sure I would benefit greatly from such a decision), I find it laughable that so many seem to think that this will solve the problem of why our schools are failing.

Doing away with the unions will force teachers to hold themselves to a higher standard. They won't have the security blanket of a union fighting for them despite their abject incompetence.

Get the power out of the hands of the unions and put it fully in the hands of the school districts. If the school districts could have the power over their teachers and their competence without the inevitable threat of union intervention in personnel matters, things would no doubt change.

Basically, just cut out the middle man and get directly down to business. Enough is enough.

To a degree I agree with Gem. Truth of the matter is that Unions have protected the worst of teachers, doing away with that is good. However, the real issue for failure doesn't lie with teachers, but with parenting and the expectations that somehow 'schools' or 'teachers' can fix what's broken.

There's been bad parenting from day one. No doubt about it. It just seems that nowadays it's gotten worse. No doubt due to many factors, too include the nanny state culture that many kids are being raised under. Their parents make a living on welfare so, the kids say fuck it, why work hard in school when I can just milk it and get free shit later on in life, and supplement my tax payer given income by selling drugs or whatnot just like mommy and daddy do?

The teachers blame the parents, and vice versa. Fact is, they've both become a problem. Disban the unions who blatantly protect incompetence and start using existing LAWS and create new LAWS to go after dysfunctional parents. Despite what the ACLU might whine about.

 

[xotoxi]

More brave Politicians need to start standing up to the corrupt Teacher Unions. The Teacher Unions have brought our Public School System to its knees. It has become all about them. It's all about getting that cash for them.

HERE HERE!!!

Down with those money-grubbing teachers!!! They make enough money!!!

 

[bodecea]

You know...I've always been a proponent of School Choice. Public schools should be able to choose who they accept from their district and who they don't accept.

 

[Jroc]

Yeah.. how about the good teachers we pay more the not so good we pay less or get rid of them. It shouldn't be about how long you been in the stupid union

I agree completely.

Are you as a taxpayer, willing to cough up A LOT more money when you discover that your district is made up of 95% good teachers and 5% mediocre ones?

Yeah.. if that were only the case I think you give some teachers too much credit what suburbs do you teach in? I went to Detroit public schools they now have a 300 million dollar budget defect...unrea!!l most of it is legacy cost from pensions

 

[The T]

The following would make one think by Liberal Statist Standards that we were watching a "Rightwing Tea Party Rally"...

Think again...Projection by the left and rears it's head...

 

[Stephanie]

The teachers have shut down the schools protesting this..

But I guess it's for the GOOD OF THE CHILLLLLLLLDREN.

I say Fire them all who are protesting. Plenty of others out of work willing to work.

I hope he sticks with it.

And get ready folks for more of this shit this summer. The Unions are seeing with Obama a free pass and they mean to take advantage of it.

 

[The T]

The teachers have shut down the schools protesting this..

But I guess it's for the GOOD OF THE CHILLLLLLLLDREN.

I say Fire them all who are protesting. Plenty of others out of work willing to work.

I hope he sticks with it.

And get ready folks for more of this shit this summer. The Unions are seeing with Obama a free pass and they mean to take advantage of it.

 

[Samson]

Samson Wrote:

What "whole new set of problems" do you mean?

Like, what would be the top 3?

Off the top of my head...

I worked for a district that worked closely with its union for several years on developing a merit based pay system that would reward "good" teachers and would encourage struggling teachers (or bad teachers) to improve or get out. The union and the district worked hand in hand, in good faith...and after years of trying...they abandoned the idea...the reason? The district discovered that it was highly likely that it would cost the district FAR FAR too much because so many of the teachers were highly educated, highly qualified, and working their assess off every day for their students.

Yes...without unions it would be easier to get rid of "bad" teachers...that would be wonderful. But are taxpayers REALLY willing to pay the good teachers what they are worth? The district I worked for decided that answer was "no."

On the other side of that coin...you have the problem of districts that would simply say...Here's what we are paying (not much...cause afterall, you get summers "off")...oh, and healthcare costs have got to go up....and your pension is gone....you're going to have a lot of teachers who love teaching...but who still need to eat, save some money for the future...and keep their families healthy...who are going to go elsewhere.

Good, you say. Good riddance to them! We'll get the teachers who REALLY want to be there then. I argue that no...you won't. You'll get young, inexperienced teachers who will quickly learn that without any of the benefits...what they have chosen is a REALLY, FRIGGIN' HARD JOB that has very few perks....and they'll leave (in even higher numbers than they already do.)

And then we'll be left with even worse teachers than the ones you are so desperate to get rid of the unions so you can fire...

There's two potential problems...I can speak at length about the problems that getting rid of collective bargaining bring (even though I support it...its a nightmare in a public education system).

Again...I'm not saying that getting rid of unions might not be a good step for public education. I'm just laughing a bit (politely and respectfully) at people outside the world of public education who genuinely believe that it is going to solve the problems we are facing and not end up causing new ones.

So, in your opinion, states without collective bargaining have bad teachers (all others having left teaching because the pay is low)

Which State is that?

Not all states allow teacher unions to collectively bargain: E.g. Texas

But Texas has some of the most highly rated (Newsweek's 100 BEST HIGH SCHOOL's in the USA) public schools?

 

[Gem]

Yeah if that were only the case I think you give some teachers too much credit what suburbs do you teach in? I went to Detroit public schools they now have a 300 million dollar budget defect...unreal most are legacy cost from pensions

Nice try, but no dice. I teach in an inner-city district. High-poverty, majority minority. I have had parent-teacher conferences with pimps and crack dealers. I have students who keep deodorant, mouthwash, and wet-wipes in my bottom drawer because they have no heat or water at their house. And the majority of teachers I work with have master's degrees, multiple areas of certification, and work on average from 7AM (or earlier) to 5PM (or later).

Again, don't misunderstand - I have stated from the beginning that I think the unions are a problem for several reasons and I wouldn't cry to see them go. The pension plans promised are unrealistic in our economy and are bankrupting our states. Changes must be made.

What I AM saying, however...is that this notion that its the BAD teachers that are causing all the problems and that if we could just get rid of unions everything would be fine...is simply laughable. Are their bad teachers? Absolutely. Do they cause problems? Absolutely. Should there be easier ways to fire them? ABSO-FREAKIN-LUTELY! But certainly not in the amount that some here seem to think...in fact, most teachers are highly educated, highly qualified, deeply involved and caring employees who - if taken out of a collective bargaining system, would be in a position to ask for (and be worth) a hell of a lot more than 40,000. And I don't think all the people here who claim they want to pay good teachers what they are really worth would be singing the same tune when they saw what that bill looks like.

 

[Samson]

You know...I've always been a proponent of School Choice. Public schools should be able to choose who they accept from their district and who they don't accept.

They wouldn't really be "Public" schools if they didn't serve the "Public."

We'd need to rename them: "Schools-For-Only-That-Portion-Of-The-Public-That-Bodecea-Approves."

 

[shintao]

Doing away with the unions will force teachers to hold themselves to a higher standard. They won't have the security blanket of a union fighting for them despite their abject incompetence.

Get the power out of the hands of the unions and put it fully in the hands of the school districts. If the school districts could have the power over their teachers and their competence without the inevitable threat of union intervention in personnel matters, things would no doubt change.

Basically, just cut out the middle man and get directly down to business. Enough is enough.

To a degree I agree with Gem. Truth of the matter is that Unions have protected the worst of teachers, doing away with that is good. However, the real issue for failure doesn't lie with teachers, but with parenting and the expectations that somehow 'schools' or 'teachers' can fix what's broken.

There's been bad parenting from day one. No doubt about it. It just seems that nowadays it's gotten worse. No doubt due to many factors, too include the nanny state culture that many kids are being raised under. Their parents make a living on welfare so, the kids say fuck it, why work hard in school when I can just milk it and get free shit later on in life, and supplement my tax payer given income by selling drugs or whatnot just like mommy and daddy do?

The teachers blame the parents, and vice versa. Fact is, they've both become a problem. Disban the unions who blatantly protect incompetence and start using existing LAWS and create new LAWS to go after dysfunctional parents. Despite what the ACLU might whine about.

What an incompetent teacher, and who is protecting one?? Sounds like a mythical paradigm your erecting down in the basement. I got to ask you. When you went to school did you have any incompetent teachers?

Further, attempting to disban Unions is UnAmerican and anticapitalist to the core. What do you do for a living? Maybe we should cut your wages or just throw your sorry ass out the door and let an illegal do what you do for a plate of beans a day.

 

[Wicked Jester]

Yeah if that were only the case I think you give some teachers too much credit what suburbs do you teach in? I went to Detroit public schools they now have a 300 million dollar budget defect...unreal most are legacy cost from pensions

Nice try, but no dice. I teach in an inner-city district. High-poverty, majority minority. I have had parent-teacher conferences with pimps and crack dealers. I have students who keep deodorant, mouthwash, and wet-wipes in my bottom drawer because they have no heat or water at their house. And the majority of teachers I work with have master's degrees, multiple areas of certification, and work on average from 7AM (or earlier) to 5PM (or later).

Again, don't misunderstand - I have stated from the beginning that I think the unions are a problem for several reasons and I wouldn't cry to see them go. The pension plans promised are unrealistic in our economy and are bankrupting our states. Changes must be made.

What I AM saying, however...is that this notion that its the BAD teachers that are causing all the problems and that if we could just get rid of unions everything would be fine...is simply laughable. Are their bad teachers? Absolutely. Do they cause problems? Absolutely. Should there be easier ways to fire them? ABSO-FREAKIN-LUTELY! But certainly not in the amount that some here seem to think...in fact, most teachers are highly educated, highly qualified, deeply involved and caring employees who - if taken out of a collective bargaining system, would be in a position to ask for (and be worth) a hell of a lot more than 40,000. And I don't think all the people here who claim they want to pay good teachers what they are really worth would be singing the same tune when they saw what that bill looks like.

As opposed to the bill we are now paying for abjectly incompetent teachers who are being protected by abjectly corrupt unions?

I guarantee the bill will be much smaller in the end if this countries children are being educated instead of being warehoused for 6-7 hours a day.

I'll be glad to see my taxpaying dollars go to funding well paying salary's for competent teachers who aren't working under the shield of union corruption.