The Mucca Posted January 23, 2010 Share Posted January 23, 2010 A look at what the recession has done to Unions LINK Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Savage Beatings Posted January 23, 2010 Share Posted January 23, 2010 At least they're working. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tosberg34 Posted January 23, 2010 Share Posted January 23, 2010 Great. Unions sucked dry the corporations and now they are bleeding the government as well. That means more $$ from the taxpayers. Yay! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ursa Majoris Posted January 24, 2010 Share Posted January 24, 2010 Great. Unions sucked dry the corporations Really? You mean all corporations are completely dessicated? They're broke? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tosberg34 Posted January 24, 2010 Share Posted January 24, 2010 Really? You mean all corporations are completely dessicated? They're broke? Yeah, what am I talking about. There all livin' large like GM. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ursa Majoris Posted January 24, 2010 Share Posted January 24, 2010 Yeah, what am I talking about. There all livin' large like GM. Good. They won't be able to afford to buy all the politicians then. Maybe there'll be a couple left over to represent us. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bushwacked Posted January 24, 2010 Share Posted January 24, 2010 Really? You mean all corporations are completely dessicated? They're broke? That's what Rush told him. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tosberg34 Posted January 24, 2010 Share Posted January 24, 2010 That's what Rush told him. I wouldn't know that as I don't listen to Rush. But apparently you do. Congrats. You're on the road to recovery. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Mucca Posted January 24, 2010 Author Share Posted January 24, 2010 Good. They won't be able to afford to buy all the politicians then. Maybe there'll be a couple left over to represent us. It wouldn't matter, if they couldn't afford to buy them, then the next group with the most cash would. Either way the politicians are gonna be bought, it's just a matter of by who. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bushwacked Posted January 24, 2010 Share Posted January 24, 2010 I wouldn't know that as I don't listen to Rush. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WaterMan Posted January 24, 2010 Share Posted January 24, 2010 That's what Rush told him. \Have to agree here Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bpwallace49 Posted January 25, 2010 Share Posted January 25, 2010 Ridiculous. I still have heard NO compelling reason from anyone in a govermental union that can justify WHY they have/need a union. It is one thing if we are talking about tradesmen/plumbers, etc that have had unions to keep the govt and unions honest through fair working conditions and helping create OSHA. But now? What is the VALUE to the world for govt based unions like teachers unions? What hazardous conditions exist? PLEASE can someone weigh in that can illuminate WHY govt based unions, like the post office, are necessary? Is it simply to get more money and benefits from the govt/taxpayers? Why would they NEED to collectively bargain with the govt? I would love any insight.answers . . but I severely doubt I will get any . . Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Perchoutofwater Posted January 25, 2010 Share Posted January 25, 2010 Ridiculous. I still have heard NO compelling reason from anyone in a govermental union that can justify WHY they have/need a union. It is one thing if we are talking about tradesmen/plumbers, etc that have had unions to keep the govt and unions honest through fair working conditions and helping create OSHA. But now? What is the VALUE to the world for govt based unions like teachers unions? What hazardous conditions exist? PLEASE can someone weigh in that can illuminate WHY govt based unions, like the post office, are necessary? Is it simply to get more money and benefits from the govt/taxpayers? Why would they NEED to collectively bargain with the govt? I would love any insight.answers . . but I severely doubt I will get any . . This is really going to hurt, but with the litigation you see in education, I can actually see the need for teacher's unions to some extent. Still it could also be taken care of with a very cheap insurance policy that would probably cost much less than the union dues, similar to the policy I used to have when I coached pee-wee football and little league. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bpwallace49 Posted January 25, 2010 Share Posted January 25, 2010 This is really going to hurt, but with the litigation you see in education, I can actually see the need for teacher's unions to some extent. Still it could also be taken care of with a very cheap insurance policy that would probably cost much less than the union dues, similar to the policy I used to have when I coached pee-wee football and little league. What litigation would necessitate a union response that isnt covered by the school districts insurance policy already? Specific individual lawsuits regarding misconduct allegations? Arent those arbitrated anyways? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Perchoutofwater Posted January 25, 2010 Share Posted January 25, 2010 What litigation would necessitate a union response that isnt covered by the school districts insurance policy already? Specific individual lawsuits regarding misconduct allegations? Arent those arbitrated anyways? I think the district's policy only helps if the district stands behind the teacher, and unfortunately the districts often find it easier to step aside than to defend the educator. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bpwallace49 Posted January 25, 2010 Share Posted January 25, 2010 I think the district's policy only helps if the district stands behind the teacher, and unfortunately the districts often find it easier to step aside than to defend the educator. But if they dont stand behind the teachers, then the school isnt a defendant? Whether or not they agree, wouldnt it still be included under the umbrella policy for protection? Dont schools have codes of conduct that teachers must abide by, and if they DONT then they arent covered in the instance of misconduct as pertains to litigation? I still dont understand why you would need a teachers union to protect teachers that have VIOLATED a code of conduct or broke the law in a severe enough action that they would not be covered under the district umbrealla policy, or the school would refuse to stand by them . . . . but I really dont enough about school districts and lawsuits to say for sure . . . Perch, do you have an example that would need a UNION to defend them? Your wife is a teacher, right? To me this sounds like the crap we get in Chicago when a dirty cop is found guilty of misconduct, but then still gets paid while on suspension . . even when they are on trial for felonies. That is protectionist crap . . and seems to just protect the guilty Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ursa Majoris Posted January 25, 2010 Share Posted January 25, 2010 But if they dont stand behind the teachers, then the school isnt a defendant? Whether or not they agree, wouldnt it still be included under the umbrella policy for protection? Dont schools have codes of conduct that teachers must abide by, and if they DONT then they arent covered in the instance of misconduct as pertains to litigation? I still dont understand why you would need a teachers union to protect teachers that have VIOLATED a code of conduct or broke the law in a severe enough action that they would not be covered under the district umbrealla policy, or the school would refuse to stand by them . . . . but I really dont enough about school districts and lawsuits to say for sure . . . Perch, do you have an example that would need a UNION to defend them? Your wife is a teacher, right? To me this sounds like the crap we get in Chicago when a dirty cop is found guilty of misconduct, but then still gets paid while on suspension . . even when they are on trial for felonies. That is protectionist crap . . and seems to just protect the guilty The bottom line is that the District will often have no qualms about throwing a teacher under the bus to save themselves. that's why the union is needed, or at least one reason. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WaterMan Posted January 25, 2010 Share Posted January 25, 2010 Great. Unions sucked dry the corporations and now they are bleeding the government as well. That means more $$ from the taxpayers. Yay! Funny how corporate america is paying for their former crimes on workers by being run out of business by unions. It's like Dr. Doom being blindsided by Magneto. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bpwallace49 Posted January 25, 2010 Share Posted January 25, 2010 The bottom line is that the District will often have no qualms about throwing a teacher under the bus to save themselves. that's why the union is needed, or at least one reason. Ok . . that makes sense. But that is determined by federal law, isnt it? I have a guy that is very sick in my health plan at work, I cant fire him because he is sick to make my group's health look better. That is mandated by federal discrimination laws. Are you saying that school districts can arbitrarily fire teachers every time they have something go wrong, even it would not be aviolation of their code of conduct? Wouldnt that also fall under federal discrimination laws? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Perchoutofwater Posted January 25, 2010 Share Posted January 25, 2010 But if they dont stand behind the teachers, then the school isnt a defendant? Whether or not they agree, wouldnt it still be included under the umbrella policy for protection? Dont schools have codes of conduct that teachers must abide by, and if they DONT then they arent covered in the instance of misconduct as pertains to litigation? I still dont understand why you would need a teachers union to protect teachers that have VIOLATED a code of conduct or broke the law in a severe enough action that they would not be covered under the district umbrealla policy, or the school would refuse to stand by them . . . . but I really dont enough about school districts and lawsuits to say for sure . . . Perch, do you have an example that would need a UNION to defend them? Your wife is a teacher, right? To me this sounds like the crap we get in Chicago when a dirty cop is found guilty of misconduct, but then still gets paid while on suspension . . even when they are on trial for felonies. That is protectionist crap . . and seems to just protect the guilty My wife has never had an issue. My wife also has an insurance policy separate from anything the school or the union offers. The unions do protect some teachers, but not all equally. It is much easier to protect a minority teacher or a teacher with some type of issue than it is to protect a non-minority. The bottom line is that the District will often have no qualms about throwing a teacher under the bus to save themselves. that's why the union is needed, or at least one reason. I agree with this and have seen it happen to one very nice gentlemen. It all depends on which is easier. The districts rarely throw minorities under the bus for fear of minority groups, but they will throw a white guy under the bus in a heart beat, particularly if the so-called aggrieved party is a minority. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Perchoutofwater Posted January 25, 2010 Share Posted January 25, 2010 Ok . . that makes sense. But that is determined by federal law, isnt it? I have a guy that is very sick in my health plan at work, I cant fire him because he is sick to make my group's health look better. That is mandated by federal discrimination laws. Are you saying that school districts can arbitrarily fire teachers every time they have something go wrong, even it would not be aviolation of their code of conduct? Wouldnt that also fall under federal discrimination laws? A lot of times they won't necessarily fire them. There was a guy that my wife worked with that got reassigned to a different school and position that the district knew he wouldn't take. So he basically quit because it is easier than fighting the district even though he was in the right. On the other hand some people can get away with darned near anything and the district is terrified to even give them an official reprimand. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bpwallace49 Posted January 25, 2010 Share Posted January 25, 2010 A lot of times they won't necessarily fire them. There was a guy that my wife worked with that got reassigned to a different school and position that the district knew he wouldn't take. So he basically quit because it is easier than fighting the district even though he was in the right. On the other hand some people can get away with darned near anything and the district is terrified to even give them an official reprimand. Soo you are saying that your school districts discriminate based on race when it disciplines/assigns teachers? That suuure sounds illegal to me. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Perchoutofwater Posted January 25, 2010 Share Posted January 25, 2010 (edited) Soo you are saying that your school districts discriminate based on race when it disciplines/assigns teachers? That suuure sounds illegal to me. Dude, I know of an english teacher that keeps a pint in her desk drawer and couldn't put a grammatically correct paragraph together if her life depended on it, and everyone knows it but is afraid to touch her because they are afraid she will pull the race card and because she is related in some way to someone high up in the NAACP nobody will do a thing about it. (ETA: I'm well aware of the irony of the preceding paragraph, but I'm not an english teacher, and I pay someone good money to clean up my writing before it goes out.) On the other hand, if you are a white male and you send the wrong kid to the principle too many times, they are going to look for a way to to get rid of you. They may not outright fire you but they will try their damnedest to force you to quit. Edited January 25, 2010 by Perchoutofwater Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Skippy Posted January 26, 2010 Share Posted January 26, 2010 It is not often that Perch and I see even close to eye to eye on these sorts of subjects but his examples of what can happen to teachers based on race are sadly true. However, it is not just teachers. Being a minority has added a trump card to many that would play it. And I know first hand that the card will be played even if the minority was not headed that way. Groups watch out for discrimnination and all to often punishment gets that lable. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rocknrobn26 Posted January 26, 2010 Share Posted January 26, 2010 It is not often that Perch and I see even close to eye to eye on these sorts of subjects but his examples of what can happen to teachers based on race are sadly true. However, it is not just teachers. Being a minority has added a trump card to many that would play it. And I know first hand that the card will be played even if the minority was not headed that way. Groups watch out for discrimnination and all to often punishment gets that lable. I agree. Love ya Bro, but your comment made me dive back into this fray. I'll try to keep our honor. Facts: Schools have insurance to protect themselves and the faculty. They do not necessarily HAVE to support a teacher of a wrong doing. Unions provide insurance to protect the teacher regarless. (I was sued twice and had school, Union, and personal insurance.) School boards are trying to Cover Their Ass First. That is their priority, and perhaps it should be. Faculty are disposable. It's the $$$$, nothing more. BP, Your lack of knowledge when it comes to school code, the BoE's ability to do want they want, Unions in general, and teachers rights in general make you look foolish. You have no facts and your bias is so apparent that a qualified statement would go over your head. Don't get into a gun fight with a club. Opinions are fine. Like 'a' holes we all have them, but get some facts first. Peace. rr26 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.