- Joined
- Oct 12, 2005
- Messages
- 281,619
- Reaction score
- 100,389
- Location
- Ohio
- Gender
- Male
- Political Leaning
- Libertarian - Right
When there are job openings admin. will try to get there friends/relatives hired. Without union protection, those on the hiring committee could be targeted if they don't pick the 'right' person.
I would argue indirectly they do. A teacher who is treated as a professional with a backbone and a voice is better than a cog in a wheel.
I find that contrary to what I have seen.
I find that to be dubious at best.
So, you prefer the cog in a wheel?
Really, you don't think that kind of nepotism exist?
I prefer my taxes not going to pay for the inflated costs that public sector unions impose upon us taxpayers
So, cog in a wheel works for you as long as it's cheap.
I find it hard to believe in public sector employment. I find disingenuous claims that this justifies public sector unions and the resulting costs to us taxpayers.
do you consider yourself a cog in a wheel?
So, basically you don't give a crap. Fair enough.
Not a all, but of course I am not afraid to speak up because I know they can't get rid of me for having a professional opinion that might not always jive with administration.
Fact is that I did not make that claim. I did speak about the reality that in 2014 the publication of the information in question, in a information age? Can and will be used by bad actors, this is why said is no longer acceptable. You don't like my comparison that responsible businesses in the real world realize that private info (like who and who is not a dues payer) can be used by bad actors for obvious purposes? No surprise there, as your "awareness" of what I have said in this thread is likely muted owing to that WiFi signal under the aforementioned bridge. Which also lead you to make the mistake of thinking that this is all about my "awareness" in the first place. That would seem to be an ad hom approach to the topic, I know what to do about that weak chaff.The fact that you claimed they printed people's addresses and phone #'s combined with the fact that they did not demonstrates that your awareness is less than you claim.
Dunning
I give a crap about what is best for the taxpayers and the public. and for the life of me, I cannot find a single good thing public sector unions do for the public or the taxpayers (which are sadly different groups)
so how are children in your school benefited by the existence of a union. are you held to higher teaching standards by the Union? do you provide more value to the taxpayers?
or do you support the union for merely gaining you more benefits?
Yes, because we are not afraid to be a part of the discussion and be a voice at the table. That is the only way to affect change. Also, we have fair and decent benefits. That makes the profession attractive to well qualified candidates rather than just a warm body to fill a spot.
Yes, because we are not afraid to be a part of the discussion and be a voice at the table. That is the only way to affect change. Also, we have fair and decent benefits. That makes the profession attractive to well qualified candidates rather than just a warm body to fill a spot.
That's a pretty thin argument. i went to a private school that was not unionized and the teachers actually made less than the big public school district. My brother is a director of another top private school and confirms the same thing. yet, the quality of teachers those two schools obtain were vastly superior to the big Cincinnati Public schools though the magnet school-Walnut Hills has some very good teachers. unlike public schools where most of the teachers have masters in "teaching" my HS teachers had masters in the actual subjects they taught. For example, my senior year the Advanced Bio teacher had a masters in biology from williams, the History teacher had a masters in american history from Harvard, the AP calculus teacher had a masters from U of Penn in math, and the English teacher had a doctorate in that subject from Columbia. The Spanish teacher didn't have a Masters in spanish-but his masters was in English (he taught English as an Anglican Missionary from Britain in South America for 20 years before coming to the states)
Unions protect unqualified teachers by using pro-union legal protections to prohibit former employers that terminated them to disclose why. This allows unqualified people to remain in the profession.
Want to understand the argument why and how this is so?
http://hanushek.stanford.edu/sites/default/files/publications/Hanushek 2014 NYT Room for Debate.pdf
Debate on school reform Our view: Unions protect bad teachers, harming kids' education - USATODAY.com
Firing bad teachers nearly impossible - Schools
Private employers can't do that either.
What do you mean "private employers can't do that?" Can't do what? Of course they can. For one thing, at-will employment, for anything thing, basic personnel policies can set their own progressive disciplinary policies as well as list grounds for immediate termination.
If employment law fully protected bad non-union employees the same as union employees, then what purpose would the unions serve?
The left wing is fundamentally nonsensical when it comes to unions. Most of the time the left wing bleats about the plight of the unemployed, how they just can't catch a break and struggle so mightily to get by, but then they support unions, which seek at every opportunity to make it impossible for these unemployed to compete with their workers. One moment the left wing wants to accommodate the unemployed and underemployed, and the next moment the left wing is a champion of the unions who do everything in their power to suppress the unemployed and underemployed.
Unions are simply labor cartels that buy politicians and legal protections that allow them to legally and artificially constrict the supply of labor in a certain firm or industry in order to drive up its price. Unions insulate their own members from any competition from those with whom they (the workers) would otherwise have to compete in terms of wage or job performance. Unions are anti-competition and this screws over the un- and under-employed.
Not to derail the discussion, but you seem to be claiming there is a law which prevents companies from disclosing why a former employee was dismissed. Legally, employers are allowed to say just about whatever they want to a prospective employer. However, I get the spirit of what you are saying. It is pretty close to the reason that companies also don't publish list of private information like addresses, phone numbers and who or who not donated to the causes the company favors either. Or in this case, why certain unions should not be publishing the names of non dues paying members. Because any mook or bad actor with a search engine, or paid subscription to any number of online data mining services can use said info for less than honorable purposes.Private companies can't disclose why a person was dismissed. Your last part about competing in terms of wages and/or job performance is nonsense. The motive is to fill a spot with the cheapest price available. Churning and burning teachers is detrimental to any school system. The motive should be to retain good teachers not chase them away.
Fact is that I did not make that claim. I did speak about the reality that in 2014 the publication of the information in question, in a information age? Can and will be used by bad actors, this is why said is no longer acceptable. You don't like my comparison that responsible businesses in the real world realize that private info (like who and who is not a dues payer) can be used by bad actors for obvious purposes? No surprise there, as your "awareness" of what I have said in this thread is likely muted owing to that WiFi signal under the aforementioned bridge. Which also lead you to make the mistake of thinking that this is all about my "awareness" in the first place. That would seem to be an ad hom approach to the topic, I know what to do about that weak chaff.
Private companies can't disclose why a person was dismissed.
Your last part about competing in terms of wages and/or job performance is nonsense. The motive is to fill a spot with the cheapest price available.
The motive should be to retain good teachers not chase them away.
In a word? No. And my other posts in this thread clarify my initial comments. But then again, when one habitually uses a WiFi hotspot (even with an airport booster) from under a bridge? The most simplistic and obvious of facts can elude them.IOW, your defense is that your post was dishonest, not ignorant. You know that the union didn't print any addresses or phones #'s but you talked about that even though you know it has nothing to do with what this union did.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?