Driver paid $97,500 from teachers union

[Philip_P]

vern humphrey:

Management answers to the pressure groups – like teacher’s unions. Which is why we can’t fire the shoddy labor and improve the schools.

By the way, IF management answers to us, why a union?

Um, didn’t we already go through this? The union is there to push for workers rights. It’s constituents are the workers, not management, not voters.

However, this does raise an important point. If management could be trusted to provide for the workers, there would be no need for a union. Since they don’t, there is.

 

[Richardols]

vern humphrey:

Management answers to the pressure groups – like teacher’s unions.

And parents and the public can also be one of those pressure groups as well.

By the way, IF management answers to us, why a union?

To protect teachers’ rights.

Pressure can be put on management even in districts with no unions.

 

[Karin]

Richardols:

And parents and the public can also be one of those pressure groups as well.

To protect teachers’ rights.

Pressure can be put on management even in districts with no unions.

OK Richard-
I am going to ask the stupist question ever…you say that unions are in place to protect teachers rights…what rights (outside of health benefits and money)?
Dont Unions also have the responsibilty to make sure that the people they support actually do what they should…in this case teach or are they only out for the $$$?

 

[vern_humphrey]

Richardols:

And parents and the public can also be one of those pressure groups as well.

But not as effective as the teachers unions, who make up the largest single block of delegates at every Democratic National Convention in recent memory.

To protect teachers’ rights.

Which is exactly the problem – it’s all about “teachers’ rights” at the expense of student rights.

Pressure can be put on management even in districts with no unions.

Indeed – the educrat lobby has more strings to its bow than just the one. That’s why public education is in such a sorry state.

 

[Richardols]

Karin:

OK Richard-
I am going to ask the stupist question ever…you say that unions are in place to protect teachers rights…what rights (outside of health benefits and money)?

How about to see to it that a teacher isn’t fired except for cause?

Dont Unions also have the responsibilty to make sure that the people they support actually do what they should

No. If my father or mother were slackers at work, for example, the railroad or the factory would have had the right to fire them, and certainly would have. Their unions made no guarantees to their employers that all union members would be working at expected levels. There’s no connection between one’s job duties and fulfilling them to one’s employer and belonging to a worker’s organization.

 

[Karin]

Richardols:
How about to see to it that a teacher isn’t fired except for cause?

Isnt sexual abuse and not sub standard teaching just cause??

 

[Richardols]

Karin:

Isnt sexual abuse and not sub standard teaching just cause??

I suppose it would be. However, I’m not at all familiar with teachers’ union contracts, so I can’t give any kind of a definitive answer. Maybe some other poster can.

 

[vern_humphrey]

Richardols:

I suppose it would be. However, I’m not at all familiar with teachers’ union contracts, so I can’t give any kind of a definitive answer. Maybe some other poster can.

The fact that we have to say that we “suppose” sex abuse and sub-standard teaching are grounds for firing illustrates the problem.

In the case of sub-standard teaching, there are so many layers of protection that it’s almost impossible to fire such a teacher.

 

[Richardols]

vern humphrey:

In the case of sub-standard teaching, there are so many layers of protection that it’s almost impossible to fire such a teacher.

I won’t deny what you say, but things are different about sexual matters. A teacher at my wife’s school was quickly dismissed after he was accused of patting a school secretary on her backside.

 

[Karin]

Richardols:

I won’t deny what you say, but things are different about sexual matters. A teacher at my wife’s school was quickly dismissed after he was accused of patting a school secretary on her backside.GOOD!!!

Sexual matters are no different than sub-standard teaching matters. Either you had sex , asked for it or insinuated about it …all should require dismissal! schools are not the place for acts of sex…yes some teachers abuse kids outside of school also and that should not be allowed either (teacher or not)

 

[bapcathluth]

Any teacher who has sex or commits any kind of lewd act with a child will be fired and prosecuted. Perhaps the union will provide a lawyer since everyone is innocent until proven guilty.

Schools are so paranoid about this issue now, that teacher’s can’t even hug their students anymore. Teachers are very careful about being alone in classrooms with students of the opposite sex–especially male teachers. I am glad I’m a woman, so I can still give my students a hug now and then.

That being said, we had a teacher in the high school where I used to teach who did take advantage of a boy. He was swiftly fired, and every other teacher in that school was fully behind the firing. Nobody who cares about kids wants a molester in their midst.

 

[vern_humphrey]

bapcathluth:

Any teacher who has sex or commits any kind of lewd act with a child will be fired and prosecuted. Perhaps the union will provide a lawyer since everyone is innocent until proven guilty.

Only true recently, and still not widespread.

And it still doesn’t address the problem of firing incompetent teachers.

As I have said, we actually have functionally illiterate teachers here in Arkansas – and can’t fire them.

 

[bapcathluth]

I can only speak for Wisconsin, where I have said repeatedly, it is very easy to fire an incompetent teacher. I know of teachers who were good who were fired only because the principal or superintendant didn’t like them. I find it hard to believe that in Arkansas you can’t fire an illiterate teacher. Obviously, their superiors don’t want to do their jobs.

 

[vern_humphrey]

bapcathluth:

I can only speak for Wisconsin, where I have said repeatedly, it is very easy to fire an incompetent teacher. I know of teachers who were good who were fired only because the principal or superintendant didn’t like them. I find it hard to believe that in Arkansas you can’t fire an illiterate teacher. Obviously, their superiors don’t want to do their jobs.

If you can fire incompetent teachers in Wisconsin, how come there’s such a disparity between the best and worst schools in that state?

We can’t fire teachers because teaching jobs are political plums in many districts.

 

[Richardols]

bapcathluth:

Schools are so paranoid about this issue now, that teacher’s can’t even hug their students anymore.

My wife said the same thing to me, and she’s a second and fourth grade teacher!

 

[Karin]

bapcathluth:

Schools are so paranoid about this issue now, that teacher’s can’t even hug their students anymore.

As a parent I would question why teachers want to hug my kids to begin with (unless they are family memebers). They are there to teach not hug my kids!

 

[bapcathluth]

Well, I have two children in elementary school, and I see many kids at that age who want to hug their teachers. I would be very upset if my child’s kindergarten teacher didn’t give hugs once in a while.

 

[Richardols]

Karin:

As a parent I would question why teachers want to hug my kids to begin with (unless they are family memebers). They are there to teach not hug my kids!

No, it’s the kids who want to be hugged by the teacher, not the other way around. A child falls on the playground and scrapes a knee, some kid calls another one a name, a child won’t play with another child. All occasions for the kid to be sad and cry, and what would help more than a sympathetic hug from your own teacher? Except that teacher is afraid to hug the child lest she or he get into trouble.