question about teachers union and public schools

Absolutely. They donate dollars and labor. The closest thing to direct representation we have.

 

Again I ask, What wouuld be the gain if teachers were forced to leave a union and the union existed no more?

 

Well lots of things....Less money, less benefits, no retirement, but having family members as teachers they would just leave the field entirely...which by the way happens a lot in teaching in less than 10 years..

And then charter schools would be the norm so they can make money off teaching your children, and best part of charters schools you dont even need a teaching degree!

 

I assume there must be one or a few charter schools somewhere that hire people without teaching degrees. Such a thing, I am sure is possible.

With that being said, it is about as disingenuous as it gets to pretend like this is somehow the norm with charter schools. By in large, people are not going to send their kids to schools with teachers without degrees. To call this scare mongering is an understatement.

One can support charter schools without supporting those charter schools that hire teachers without degrees.

 

Here in Arizona you do not need a degree to teach at a charter!.........I have nothing but problems that a school was made, and designed to make a profit off children's education...It dosent get lower than that.

And on top of, that by law they dont even have to test the children to national standards...
So lets make money off our future? Kids are the future and the less we care, and the less we put into it makes the outlook bleak!

But I do belive that is the plan, keep people stupid and you can do anything right in front of once face...................and never be questioned

 

I don't advocate at all that teachers be forced to leave the union. It is their right to be members. Nor do I advocate that the teachers union not exist if it wants to.

My suggestion is simply that the public sector become, in effect, a non-union shop. The gains, I believe, would be that it would take politics out of the public school system, it would give parents more control over their children's education, as employees teachers would be beholden to their employer (us) rather than to a union, teachers would go back to work when the community requires it or face losing their job, and the local community would make the rules instead of a union based in DC or wherever. It would be a win for children and parents, which is what teaching is supposed to be about.

School choice would probably serve the same purpose. The private schools could hire whoever they want to, because they doubtless depend on the parent's agreement, as parents can pull their kids out whenever they want to and place them elsewhere. Parents of public school children generally have no choice.

 

Public unions negotiate their pay and benefits with the politicians to whom they give lots of money.

No conflict of interest there, lol.

 

Look at how the self-serving radical teacher's unions damaged themselves in the COVID lockdowns.

​

16% boost in support for School choice, up to 74%. Every group has supermajority support for School Choice. Every group increased support for School Choice led by K-12 parents, who now support School Choice by 80%!

The Radical Teacher's union now only enjoy monopoly support because of their massive political contributions to elected Democrats who are positioned will outside the American mainstream.

 

In my state those politicians required me in order to teach to have a masters degree, to return to school for a minimum of 2 courses every 5 years, to sign a loyalty oath, to undergo random drug tests and a background check. After all of that and more than 30 years of experience and superior recommendations I was given 56 % of my health care costs and paid 48 K a year. Oh, I would do it all again because it is an awsome job when politics leave you alone to do it.

 

Well, it's certainly clear that there are many many teachers like you that actually like their job and are fulfilled by having a positive impact on children. Kudos to you. Sincerely.

 

That is appreciated.

 

Rumblings: Radical Teachers union head, Fed chair hint that schools might not reopen on schedule

We need a Courageous Red State Gov To Order These Overpaid Radicals To Report To The Classroom and Then Fire Them if They Don't, Replacing Them With Teachers Willing To TEACH.​

There is no "try". There is DO and REFUSE TO DO

A few weeks away from the school year starting and they won't commit:

Who knew that will children scheduled to return to school in two weeks, that the radical teachers union was still uncommitted to returning? Give them a choice, report to work or you lose your job.

Even Jay Powell?

This clown is also imagining no harmful inflation.

Lying Fauci on the CDC's mask flip-flop: "The CDC hasn’t really flip-flopped at all."

We are ruled by fools, idiots and pretenders, completely out of their depth.

 

You actually have something to back this up?

 

Who doesn't like to sit home and still get paid?

 

If they can find a job that will do that, good for them. Our children need in class instruction. The desires of the Radical Teachers Unions aside, OUR CHILDREN COME FIRST.

 

It wouldn't take years to get rid of bad teachers.

 

Except we keep increasing funding while getting less and less educated children... which means more and more money is going to something other than educating children.

 

It shouldn't take that now. Tenure is pretty much gone in most states and has been replaced by a process where theacher is told what must be improved and given reasonable time to improve or lose the job. For the First two years in most states teachers can be non renewed and no reason need be given.

If people are concerned about the quality of teachers in their local school they need to find away to attract better candidates and/or take the time to better screen those hired in the first two years.
Remember that teachers and unions do not hire teachers; they don't evaluate teachers; and they don't write the curriculum and they don't decide who is fired. There is nothing in a teacher contract that hasn't been agreed upon by teachers and the local school board unless it is required by law.

 

Yes a lot of it goes toward required testing and reporting as well as time and money spent preparing students to take the test, not teaching what needs to be learned. The last year I taught I had to take 11 school days doing exercises, practice tests (4 in each year), test coaching, and giving the test itself. Those were 10 days out of the school year that students only learned about taking the state test and 2 days taking the test.
Laws have increased the services that a school is required to provide to handicapped students. Some get one on one teaching all day. I have a friend whose daughter "graduated" two years ago but continues to get school training until she is 22. State law not Union policy. I do not live in a blue state.
The money of which you speak has never been used to reward teachers or upgrade staffs it is used to fulfill the needs of politicians and to please taxpayers.

Compare the per student cost of public schools to tuition of non subsidized private schools. You are getting a bargain.

 

700 NYC teachers paid to do nothing

Hundreds of New York City public school teachers accused of offenses ranging from insubordination to sexual misconduct are being paid their full salaries to sit around all day playing Scrabble, surfing the Internet or just staring at the wall, if that's what they want to do.

Because their union contract makes it extremely difficult to fire them, the teachers have been banished by the school system to its "rubber rooms" — off-campus office space where they wait months, even years, for their disciplinary hearings.

The 700 or so teachers can practice yoga, work on their novels, paint portraits of their colleagues — pretty much anything but school work. They have summer vacation just like their classroom colleagues and enjoy weekends and holidays through the school year.


https://www.nbcnews.com/id/wbna31494936

 

Absolutely baseless nonsense!

 

Three points
1. Date on youe article: June 22, 2009, 6:05 PM EDT / Source: The Associated Press - articles about similar problems in NYC since then: 0
2. June 22 is probably at the end of that school year. If that is a fact they had already done the work to earn that money.
3. That is less than 1 % of the teachers in New York City
4. These teachers were awaiting a hearing. The contract didn't state they would be paid to do nothing. It did say they were to be paid until there was a hearing to decide course of action the school would take.

 

See post #97

 

I was a teacher for 12 years and never joined the union despite being asked to.