RE: Friedrichs v. California Teachers Association

RE: Friedrichs v. California Teachers Association (Full Version)

All Forums >> [Community Discussions] >> Dungeon of Political and Religious Discussion

Message

vincentML -> RE: Friedrichs v. California Teachers Association (1/18/2016 12:40:50 PM)
quote: the national right to work website has tons of those stories: Florida is a right to work state. However, the Constitution gives persons the right of lawful assembly to redress grievances. Public employees enjoy guarantees of the Bill of Rights. You don't like it, change the Constitution.

vincentML -> RE: Friedrichs v. California Teachers Association (1/18/2016 12:47:33 PM)
quote: Charter school growth is 15% per year. I provided quotes that show charter school kids are beating public school kids on every standardized test in the state of florida. And if charter schools can rent space in depressed school malls and save money - why can't public schools. In dade county just about 50% of the school budget is spent on, yanno, actually instructing kids.. The operating budget for public schools in Miami is separate from the construction budget. There are over 230 charter schools in Miami. some are affiliated with the Public School District. You keep pulling numbers out of your ass just like you tried to make the 1968 school riots recent vintage. You have shown no data for the superiority of charter schools whereas I provided a link to research on the subject. Through with feeding the troll.

Phydeaux -> RE: Friedrichs v. California Teachers Association (1/18/2016 7:45:29 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: vincentML quote: I don't think its wise for the tax payer to pay the union to make the taxpayer pay more - do you? Tax payers pay the union? Outright bullshit. The court case cited in the OP is about teacher dues paid to the union. Read the citation carefully. The federal government has more than 5000 employees who do nothing other than union related work. The employees spend more than 3 million hours and $150+ mil dollars to do union work. So yes, indeed, the taxpayers and paying the unions to rip themselves off.

Phydeaux -> RE: Friedrichs v. California Teachers Association (1/18/2016 8:31:48 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: vincentML quote: Charter school growth is 15% per year. I provided quotes that show charter school kids are beating public school kids on every standardized test in the state of florida. And if charter schools can rent space in depressed school malls and save money - why can't public schools. In dade county just about 50% of the school budget is spent on, yanno, actually instructing kids.. The operating budget for public schools in Miami is separate from the construction budget. Wrong again. Here's a link to the current budget. Please do note that both instruction and construction are featured in it. http://financialaffairs.dadeschools.net/pdfs15/2015-16_State_Budget_Forms.pdf However, even if that weren't true - so what? Do you think that having 3,124 separate budgets somehow means the money in the end, doesn't come from the same pocket? Ie., the tax payer? quote: There are over 230 charter schools in Miami. some are affiliated with the Public School District. And? And there will be more every year until some asshole democrat gets in charge and cozies up to the teachers union. May hay while the sun shines. quote: You keep pulling numbers out of your ass just like you tried to make the 1968 school riots recent vintage. . The fact that you can't find a cite for race riots in Miami since 1968 says a great deal about the paucity of your google skills. You have apparently missed a large number of riots -etc. For example the liberty city riots which made front page news around the country. When you go back for remedial education may I suggest you not enroll in a public school? quote: You have shown no data for the superiority of charter schools whereas I provided a link to research on the subject. Through with feeding the troll. I am quite a bit puzzled; I had previously provided cites for 86% of parents in florida are highly satisfied wth public schools; scores across the boards are higher on standardized achievement tests graduation and reading compression rates of 53% and 35%. But I don't see those cites now. I research before I write - I don't have those same sources to hand at the moment. But here are some cites. 1. Well run charter schools consistently deliver better public educaton than public schools: http://www.washingtonpolicy.org/publications/detail/guide-to-major-charter-school-studies 2. 92% of parents of disabled children were satisfied or very satisfied with their charter schools (compared to less than 16% of public shool parents). http://excelined.org/floridaschoolchoice/ The same source notes that schools. (NAEP 2013) 45% of students in charter schools scored proficient or better in 4th grade reading compared to 31% in traditional schools. 39% of students in charter schools scored proficient or better in 8th grade reading compared to 26% in traditional schools. It is also worth noting that charter schools are complying with class size requirements where by and large public schools are not. http://www.fldoe.org/schools/school-choice/charter-schools/charter-school-faqs.stml https://www.floridaschoolchoice.org/district/files/School_Choice_Options.pdf A bit dated but shows the steady growth of charter schools in fl. It also shows that 64% of the opportunity scholarships were african american, and 30% hispanice. So much for the claim that florida charter schools are predominantly cherry picking students. Florida also allows corporations to fund scholarships - 42% of those are black, with 22% hispanic and 23% white. Here's a rand study. http://www.rand.org/pubs/research_briefs/RB9433/index1.html Notably it says: Charter schools are not skimming the highest-achieving students from traditional public schools, nor are they creating racial stratification. Students who attended charter high schools were more likely to graduate and go on to college. Researchers found that attending a charter high school appeared to boost a student's probability of graduating by 7 to 15 percentage points. Similarly, students who attended a charter high school appeared to benefit from an 8 to 10 percentage point increase in the likelihood that they would enroll in college For example, a study of a group of charter schools in Texas found statistically significant positive changes in achievement for their students (Booker et. al., 2004). Grongberg and Jansen (2005) found similar results when they studied high school charter schools. And in the case of CMOs—charter management organizations that manage several charter schools—Furgeson et. al. (2011) found that some were very successful in improving student achievement. Four experimental studies are particularly noteworthy. The first was a 2005 study by Hoxby and Rockoff of three charter schools in Chicago. In the words of the researchers, We use the "lotteried- out" students as a control group for the "lotteried-in" students because randomization makes the groups similar on unobservable characteristics, such as motivation, as well as on observable traits, such as race and prior achievement. We estimate both the effect of attending charter schools (the treatment-on-the-treated effect) and the effect of being offered the chance to attend a charter school (the intent-to-treat effect). We show that, compared to their lotteried-out fellow applicants, students who apply to and attend charter schools starting in the elementary grades score about six national percentile rank points higher in both math and reading. These effects are for students who have spent an average of two years in charter school (p.1). Thus, the researchers found that students enrolled in the Chicago charter schools in the study performed 5‐6 percentile points better in reading and mathematics than their non‐admitted cohorts. A second study by Hoxby and his colleagues (Hoxby, Muraka, & King; 2009) of a larger number of urban schools in New York City found that upper elementary grade students (grades 4‐8) in public charter schools outperformed similar grade students who were not admitted to the charter school. And a third study of oversubscribed charter schools in Boston found that students admitted to the charter schools performed better than students not admitted to the schools by approximately one‐quarter standard deviation. After examining student achievement data for students in grades 4‐8 and grade 10 in oversubscribed charter schools, 6 the researchers concluded, On balance, our lottery-based findings provide strong evidence that the charter model has generated substantial test score gains in high-demand Charter Schools with complete records. On the other hand, these results should not be interpreted as showing that Boston Charters always produce test score gains (p.39). Now, looking at florida charter schools specifically: https://www.floridaschoolchoice.org/pdf/Charter_Student_Achievement_2011.pdf 1. The schools are DISPROPORTIONATELY minority. 2. The schools had FEWER native english speakers. 3. The schools had FEWER gifted students. The same report, shows charter schools outperforming traditional schools on EVERY standardized test, at every grade level tested. 55.8% of african americans passed middle school reading, for example, vs 45% in traditional schools If you care about children at all - it is clear that democrat unionization of our public schools are dooming our children to second rank status. Rich people can afford private schools - its POOR people that benefit from charter schools. And as the figurs show, charter schools do this at 80% of the cost.

bounty44 -> RE: Friedrichs v. California Teachers Association (1/19/2016 5:48:28 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: vincentML quote: the national right to work website has tons of those stories: Florida is a right to work state. However, the Constitution gives persons the right of lawful assembly to redress grievances. Public employees enjoy guarantees of the Bill of Rights. You don't like it, change the Constitution. which says absolutely nothing about union abuses. but to your point: quote: Federal law gives private sector, but not public sector, employees the right to join unions, have them negotiate with employers for wages and working conditions and take group action concerning their employment, including the right to strike...Many states have granted public employees the right to join unions and collectively negotiate for certain benefits. http://smallbusiness.chron.com/private-sector-vs-public-sector-employee-rights-47957.html ...and even then there are still limits to union power when the employees, acting collectively, do not act in concert with the public trust for which they are hired. what? no...surely unions never do that! and again to your point---when public unions "redress grievances", the taxpayer often does not have a seat at the table. its an inherently incestuous and all too often, parasitical relationship.

vincentML -> RE: Friedrichs v. California Teachers Association (1/19/2016 9:53:05 AM)
Hey D.S. Toledo's problem is not much different than other major inner cities in the northern United States. quote: Another part of the problem is the non-instructional spending. Sure, there will always be administrative spending (Toledo Public is second only to Ottawa Hills in the area), and maintenance spending, but there is also the support spending on "social welfare" programs, like school lunches (and breakfasts, etc.) that Toledo Public has to deal with to a much greater extent than any other district in the area. Many of those programs are/were required by Federal law, but adequate funding wasn't granted. Poverty plays a significant and detrimental role in public school student performance. In addition to the impact of shabby neighborhoods, research (which I have read but cannot cite at the moment) poverty has an impact on the learning abilities of kids. Poor kids are slower. Maybe it is due to poor nutrition. I don't know. Toledo is 27.2% black; Ohio is 12.2 % The median value of owner occupied homes at the last census was $83,600 in Toledo while $130,800 in Ohio. In Toledo 27.2% of people registered below the poverty level. For the state of Ohio it was 15.8% I wonder if the balancing distribution of education funds can make up for such disparities. I wonder if Toledo has effective pre-school and primary school tutorials to compensate the poor development of impoverished infants. quote: For all those people who don't have kids in school (or pay extra for them to attend a prep school), your local school district still impacts your property values. The better the schools, the more attractive the area is, leading to a higher value on your property. So, you still have some profit from good schools, even if your kids aren't attending. DS, I believe there is an inverse relationship between good schools and property values. The wealth, education, and race of homeowners in the burbs make for good schools. Look at the history of what happened in northern cities. During the war in the 1940s defense industrials boomed. There was a large migration of blacks from the south. After the war the defense industry cut back severely and many jobs were lost. The black population remained in the north. In the 1950s the great interstate highway system was built and the suburbs were created. By the late 1960s industries and middle class families migrated out of the northern cities to the burbs. I was teaching then in rural New Jersey when we quite suddenly had to build a new high school to accommodate all the white migrant families from Long Island. We had a housing boom in the burbs and the rise of industrial parks. It was amazing. Those black families who had transportation and sought to move to the burbs were red lined by the banks and could not get mortgages. So, in summary, the 1960s and 1970s were a time of the great flight of white wealth and industries out of the cities. Blacks were left behind with scant opportunity for decent paying jobs. Wealthy families make good schools. Poverty makes for disadvantaged, educationally crippled kids. Regards, vincentML

vincentML -> RE: Friedrichs v. California Teachers Association (1/19/2016 10:34:56 AM)
quote: and again to your point---when public unions "redress grievances", the taxpayer often does not have a seat at the table. its an inherently incestuous and all too often, parasitical relationship. You seem to have a biased understanding of the actions of teacher unions. The Florida Legislature enacted a detailed "Collective Bargaining Law." The tax-payer had a seat at that table. It is called collective bargaining because there are two adversarial opposite sides at the table. You expressed the misconception that it is the employees acting "collectively" without opposition representing the public. You are wrong. The collective bargaining is between employees and employers, the school superintendent and the school board, elected by the tax-payers. So, tax-payers do have a seat at the table through their representatives. You are totally ignorant of the relationships involved, and blinded by your irrational ire at unions. If you look back at the labor movement between the 1870s and the 1940s you will see it was the growth of unions that accelerated the development of the middle class in this country. We certainly can't credit Carnegie, Pullman, or J.P Morgan. What has been happening since the Reagan Administration is the destruction of unions by right to work laws and by corporations exporting jobs to China and India. In the meanwhile the wages of the middle class have remained stagnant and wealth has moved to Wealth. We will rue this trend. Finally, your attack on unions is a distraction and is irrelevant to the OP. If you wish to attack unions, start your own thread. Adios, ciao, goodbye.

vincentML -> RE: Friedrichs v. California Teachers Association (1/19/2016 10:53:22 AM)
quote: The fact that you can't find a cite for race riots in Miami since 1968 says a great deal about the paucity of your google skills. You have apparently missed a large number of riots -etc. For example the liberty city riots which made front page news around the country. When you go back for remedial education may I suggest you not enroll in a public school? If you are referring to the Liberty City riots of 1980, they were in response to the killing of a black man named McDuffie by police and had nothing to do with unrest in the public schools. To suggest you are dissembling and misrepresenting the truth is a kindness on my part. All your prattle about charter schools has nothing to do with the topic in the OP. Why don't you start a separate tread devoted to your obsession and give other people a chance to respond. Otherwise, you are boring as dried shit, and I am done here. G'bye, farewell, adios, ciao.

DesideriScuri -> RE: Friedrichs v. California Teachers Association (1/19/2016 2:42:02 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: vincentML quote: the national right to work website has tons of those stories: Florida is a right to work state. However, the Constitution gives persons the right of lawful assembly to redress grievances. Public employees enjoy guarantees of the Bill of Rights. You don't like it, change the Constitution. The Constitution prevents the Federal Government from removing The People's right to peaceably assemble and petition government for redress of grievances. Union negotiations aren't exactly "peaceable assemblies" to "petition for redress of grievances." Negotiating higher wages, classroom sizes, medical co-pays, etc. isn't exactly asking government to correct a wrong. http://www.firstamendmentcenter.org/petition-overview

Phydeaux -> RE: Friedrichs v. California Teachers Association (1/19/2016 3:12:53 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: vincentML quote: and again to your point---when public unions "redress grievances", the taxpayer often does not have a seat at the table. its an inherently incestuous and all too often, parasitical relationship. You seem to have a biased understanding of the actions of teacher unions. By which he means - damn, you've caught on. quote: The Florida Legislature enacted a detailed "Collective Bargaining Law." So what ? The florida legislature has passed a lot of laws. quote: It is called collective bargaining because there are two adversarial opposite sides at the table. You might wish to call it collective bargaining. You might also wish to call it Fred. Its more likely to be fred than collective bargaining. You represent they are adversarial - any evidence .. of course not. Has the NEA ever supported a candidate who wanted to reduce teacher salaries? Of course not. They only support democrats who want to increase teacher pay, security, benefits. You can't really call that adversarial now can you.... quote: growth of unions that accelerated the development of the middle class in this country. We certainly can't credit Carnegie, Pullman, or J.P Morgan. What has been happening since the Reagan Administration is the destruction of unions by right to work laws and by corporations exporting jobs to China and India. Actually, the federal reserve published a fascinating pieces that union activity causes small but meaning declines in the middle class. Which is just what you would expect from any kind of corrupt activity. As for starting my own thread - the whole point of Friedrich's is that a bunch of teachers got fed up with the thuggish union and the supreme court is (hopefully) going to end this whole protection racket. You libs accuse conservatives of being nazi's - but its y'all that want to insist that people pay dues and muzzle their discontent. No doubt the supreme court will not go far enough - but unions ought to be banned from representation in public endeavors. Here's hoping.

DesideriScuri -> RE: Friedrichs v. California Teachers Association (1/19/2016 3:16:10 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: vincentML Hey D.S. Toledo's problem is not much different than other major inner cities in the northern United States. quote: Another part of the problem is the non-instructional spending. Sure, there will always be administrative spending (Toledo Public is second only to Ottawa Hills in the area), and maintenance spending, but there is also the support spending on "social welfare" programs, like school lunches (and breakfasts, etc.) that Toledo Public has to deal with to a much greater extent than any other district in the area. Many of those programs are/were required by Federal law, but adequate funding wasn't granted. Poverty plays a significant and detrimental role in public school student performance. In addition to the impact of shabby neighborhoods, research (which I have read but cannot cite at the moment) poverty has an impact on the learning abilities of kids. Poor kids are slower. Maybe it is due to poor nutrition. I don't know. Toledo is 27.2% black; Ohio is 12.2 % The median value of owner occupied homes at the last census was $83,600 in Toledo while $130,800 in Ohio. In Toledo 27.2% of people registered below the poverty level. For the state of Ohio it was 15.8% I wonder if the balancing distribution of education funds can make up for such disparities. I wonder if Toledo has effective pre-school and primary school tutorials to compensate the poor development of impoverished infants. I posted quite a bit of information, specifically in per pupil spending. While the $$ spent for actual education isn't massively different, I don't know that it's "being poor" that's the actual problem. If an impoverished family won the megabajillions lottery, and was no longer impoverished, would academic success improve? It might, but not to that great of an extent, imo. I truly believe socioeconomic status is more tightly related to other behaviors that, in turn, directly impact academic outcomes. Specifically, having a home environment conducive to school success, and a parent or parents directly involved in supporting academic success are, generally, directly related to socioeconomic status. I think it was put out in Freakonomics that Rod Blagojevich used a study of the differences in academically high achieving and low achieving households. One big difference was the presence of more books, especially reference books. To help low-achieving households, he used taxpayer monies to provide a set of encyclopedias to each low achieving household. The result? No change. As it turned out, the presence of lack of presence wasn't what was "causing" the difference, but the presence or lack of presence was due to other behaviors, that had a more causal relationship with academic achievement. Lots of money was spent to update classrooms from overhead projectors to "smart screens" (which are really cool, to be honest). While I applaud the use of better tech, the idea that the reason for poor performance was due to not having the latest and greatest tech is absolute horseshit. Only in cases where nothing exists already, does adding newer tech help. If there are no overheads, adding a smart screen should have a great impact, as it's a great teaching tool. My Dad was an educator. We lived in the suburbs, and he worked for the City school, so we didn't attend in the district where he worked. My school district was a better performing district than his. I highly doubt my family's academic performance was better than it would have been had we instead attended his school district. Students who moved from his district to mine usually didn't have much change in academic success. There may have been some teachers that were better in my district (I can't even give any testament to that since I never attended to be taught by them), but I doubt the difference was truly that different to explain the difference in achievement. quote: quote: For all those people who don't have kids in school (or pay extra for them to attend a prep school), your local school district still impacts your property values. The better the schools, the more attractive the area is, leading to a higher value on your property. So, you still have some profit from good schools, even if your kids aren't attending. DS, I believe there is an inverse relationship between good schools and property values. The wealth, education, and race of homeowners in the burbs make for good schools. Look at the history of what happened in northern cities. I think you mean there's a direct relationship. Suburbs tend to have higher property values, and the schools tend to perform better, though I would have to add that I don't believe the relationship is causal by any stretch. quote: During the war in the 1940s defense industrials boomed. There was a large migration of blacks from the south. After the war the defense industry cut back severely and many jobs were lost. The black population remained in the north. In the 1950s the great interstate highway system was built and the suburbs were created. By the late 1960s industries and middle class families migrated out of the northern cities to the burbs. I was teaching then in rural New Jersey when we quite suddenly had to build a new high school to accommodate all the white migrant families from Long Island. We had a housing boom in the burbs and the rise of industrial parks. It was amazing. Those black families who had transportation and sought to move to the burbs were red lined by the banks and could not get mortgages. So, in summary, the 1960s and 1970s were a time of the great flight of white wealth and industries out of the cities. Blacks were left behind with scant opportunity for decent paying jobs. Wealthy families make good schools. Poverty makes for disadvantaged, educationally crippled kids. Regards, vincentML I don't think it's socioeconomic status that's the cause of the academic performance, though. I used to (assistant) coach baseball for my oldest son's team. One of the other assistant coaches is (now) a principal in a poor-performing elementary school in the TPS District. Some of the horror stories (horrible because of the utter lack of parental involvement) he's told me made me cringe. His school offered every student (regardless of financial status) a free breakfast. There were many times some of the students were dropped off before school to get a breakfast, was provided lunch, and then were part of the after-school program the school held, not getting picked up until 7pm. There were times when these kids weren't even fed again until they came in for free breakfast. In this group of students, there were blacks, whites, hispanics, and mixed race students. It wasn't limited to race. I honestly believe I was blessed by being in a two-parent household where my mother didn't have to work outside the home. And, both of my parents were supportive of academic pursuits.

Phydeaux -> RE: Friedrichs v. California Teachers Association (1/19/2016 3:20:07 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: vincentML Blacks were left behind with scant opportunity for decent paying jobs. Wealthy families make good schools. Poverty makes for disadvantaged, educationally crippled kids. Regards, vincentML Nope. Florida charter schools are a great example. Its not poverty that makes for educationally crippled kids. Its the union's strangulation of public schools. Think about it. In the 1840's you had one room school houses with chalk boards. And yet people were able to learn. Right now, public schools cram thousands of kids into huge educational complexes, taught by well paid, tenured liberal professors - and the results are abysmal. While on the other hand florida charter schools spend less money per student; have huge parent satisfaction; are predominantly minority; and achieve higher scores. What we need is a more rapid revolution to completely get rid of corrupt, inefficient bastions of democrat cronyism.

vincentML -> RE: Friedrichs v. California Teachers Association (1/20/2016 7:05:23 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: DesideriScuri quote: ORIGINAL: vincentML quote: the national right to work website has tons of those stories: Florida is a right to work state. However, the Constitution gives persons the right of lawful assembly to redress grievances. Public employees enjoy guarantees of the Bill of Rights. You don't like it, change the Constitution. The Constitution prevents the Federal Government from removing The People's right to peaceably assemble and petition government for redress of grievances. Union negotiations aren't exactly "peaceable assemblies" to "petition for redress of grievances." Negotiating higher wages, classroom sizes, medical co-pays, etc. isn't exactly asking government to correct a wrong. http://www.firstamendmentcenter.org/petition-overview It is your judgment that Union negotiations are not peaceable assemblies that bargaining does not address grievances. You have a lot of moxie when you have never attended a lawful bargaining secession in Miami. You are seriously mistaken. In fact the U.S. Bill of Rights was incorporated into the contract by mutual ascent. The Florida Legislature established a law for bargaining between public employees and their government employers in around 1972. As far as I know there has never been a strike that effected the students, although I do recall maybe one or two after school picket lines around the downtown administrative building to express grievances pertaining to working conditions. The school board is an agency of government Bargaining in Florida is mediated by the rules of PERC ~ Public Employee Relations Commission. The following is a litany of employee rights from the Commission handbook: Rights of Public Employees Public employees have the right to choose to participate in employee organizations for the purposes of collective bargaining or other activities which mutually benefit two or more employees. The following rights are some of those enjoyed by public employees: To form, join, and participate in employee organizations. To negotiate collectively about wages, hours, and terms and conditions of employment. To be represented in grievances. To act together to help or protect each other by legal means other than a strike. To refuse to take any action in support of an employee organization Following are some examples of protected activities. Employees may draft a petition complaining about their safety or working conditions and ask other employees to sign it. Employees may not be discharged for trying to organize a new employee organization. They may also file grievances under a collective bargaining agreement without being treated adversely for doing so. An employee may request union representation in an interview with the employer if he reasonably believes disciplinary action may result. Employees may speak freely in trying to convince fellow employees to stop supporting one employee organization and to support another instead. The following is from the link you provided and I believe it supports my position. Perhaps the right of petition has escaped their attention precisely because it continues to work so well. The petition clause is the tacit assumption in constitutional analysis, the primordial right from which other expressive freedoms arise. Why speak, why publish, why assemble against the government at all if such complaints will only be silenced? As Justice John Paul Stevens stressed in his dissent in Minnesota Board for Community Colleges, “The First Amendment was intended to secure something more than an exercise in futility.” The petition clause ensures that our leaders hear, even if they don’t listen to, the electorate. Though public officials may be indifferent, contrary, or silent participants in democratic discourse, at least the First Amendment commands their audience. What is it about teachers and other public employees that in your mind make us subservient citizens with second class rights?

Phydeaux -> RE: Friedrichs v. California Teachers Association (1/20/2016 7:41:17 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: vincentML You have a lot of moxie when you have never attended a lawful bargaining secession in Miami. By this logic, you must have a lot of moxie to comment on crime unless you've killed someone. Right.... quote: . As far as I know there has never been a strike that effected the students... Because teachers strikes are illegal in florida. Not because of any special virtue of teachers unions. quote: To refuse to take any action in support of an employee organization So union members give up their right of free association. They are not allowed to join another employment agency. That is a violation of second ammendment rights. So much for not being second class citizens.... So since you're ok with all these mandory dues - how about we just make it a condition that all teachers must join the republican party and pay dues to them. You still ok with that? As for the larger question: Why should taxpayers give in to a bunch of thugs who demand higher pay for inferior results?

vincentML -> RE: Friedrichs v. California Teachers Association (1/20/2016 8:01:44 PM)
quote: So union members give up their right of free association. They are not allowed to join another employment agency. That is a violation of second ammendment rights. So much for not being second class citizens.... WTF are you trying to say so inarticulately? quote: So since you're ok with all these mandory dues - how about we just make it a condition that all teachers must join the republican party and pay dues to them. You still ok with that? If you go back and read my initial essay you will see that I confirmed that Florida was a rtw state and that worked out fine. Nowhere did I champion mandatory union dues. You pulled another false comment out of your ignorant ass. Please read with some comprehension. Give it a try. quote: Why should taxpayers give in to a bunch of thugs Obviously, the biased language of a troll who has no clue about what he is saying. How pathetic and childish.

vincentML -> RE: Friedrichs v. California Teachers Association (1/20/2016 8:33:07 PM)
quote: I think you mean there's a direct relationship. Suburbs tend to have higher property values, and the schools tend to perform better, though I would have to add that I don't believe the relationship is causal by any stretch. Thank you. I meant to affirm that affluent homes account for good schools and impoverished homes generate failing students. I think the history of events that lead to the impoverishment of inner cities was correct inasmuch as I experienced it. Wiki has a pretty good article on the development of impoverished inner cities in the Northeast and Midwest. quote: If an impoverished family won the megabajillions lottery, and was no longer impoverished, would academic success improve? Unlikely that it would because an impoverished environment has effects on the brains of toddlers and preschool children that likely cannot be reversed, much like the lead in the waters of Flint, MI and its debilitating effects on the cognitive development of children under six years. quote: I highly doubt my family's academic performance was better than it would have been had we instead attended his school district. Students who moved from his district to mine usually didn't have much change in academic success. Exactly correct because you would have carried your comfortable middle class childhood development with while the students who moved from the ghetto to the burbs were already irreparably damaged. There is so much literature available about the effect of poverty on cognitive function and on academic achievement. I will link only one here. The literature is overwhelming. Living in poverty can be a difficult task to undertake. A family in poverty will often have to go without more than other families who have more resources. Therefore, those people that grow up in poverty do not have the means to obtain certain resources, such as education(preschool, pre-k, K-12, etc.) as those who come from a family that has the resources to obtain an education among other things. Young children’s cognitive development is negatively affected by poverty; in order to solve this problem, one has to tackle the conditions that children live in by helping their entire family with education and better economic and financial resources so that children can have higher cognitive development and have the potential for better life outcomes.

Phydeaux -> RE: Friedrichs v. California Teachers Association (1/20/2016 9:55:52 PM)
No school work and all school pay? September 16, 2013 by Trevor Colestock in Share . 1 In July, the Miami Herald identified 42 positions in various Miami-Dade County divisions that collected $2.65 million-plus in salaries from taxpayers as of July 2013 — but they don’t have to do their county jobs. The 42 employees are excused from reporting to their assigned work sites to perform their duties so they can serve as union representatives, and they cannot be fired for not doing county work under Miami-Dade’s agreements with the 10 unions representing workers. On paper, the exempt union workers hold a variety of positions, from six-figure police and firefighters to lesser-paid public-transit workers. The pressure to end this wasteful practice has intensified as a county commissioner is seeking to end this practice and forcing the county mayor to address this practice in negotiations. L-R UTD President Fedrick Ingram, UTD First Vice President Tom Gammon, UTD Secretary/Treasure Karla Hernandez-Mats. For a larger view click on the photo. Apparently, the Herald missed this practice at the United Teachers of Dade (UTD), as there are 11 (3 officers, 8 staffers) Miami-Dade School Board employees that are fully released to work and operate the union- termed “teachers on special assignment (TSAs).” Considering salary, retirement contributions, and fringe benefits the total cost of these TSAs is between $700,000- $1 million for taxpayers. On paper, these TSAs are assigned to various school-based assignments. In reality, they are UTD officers and staffers that visit schools to campaign, build membership, and represent employees at grievance hearings – on the public dime. It seems noble in theory, but considering ongoing questionable union spending and problems, in particular the ongoing legal saga of Geno Perez and his election lawsuit, why should taxpayers foot the bill? Karen Aronowitz In March 2010, Geno Perez lost the UTD presidential election to Karen Aronowitz amid questionable electoral practices and irregularities. To seek the truth and to end electoral practices that many union members deem as fraudulent, Perez filed suit to obtain the online voting records. If UTD and Karen Aronowitz committed no wrongs, why has UTD spent well over $250,000 of the hard working dues-paying members’ money in keeping Geno Perez from the electoral records?

Phydeaux -> RE: Friedrichs v. California Teachers Association (1/20/2016 10:01:49 PM)
quote: Why should taxpayers give in to a bunch of thugs Obviously, the biased language of a troll who has no clue about what he is saying. How pathetic and childish. Snicker. So your contention is that the union isn't a bunch of thugs. Ok. So exactly why should the tax payers pay for teachers that can't be fired, who deliver inferior results at inflated costs. Why exactly do you think that happens? You don't think its because in the negotiations the thugs don't say "if you don't give us what we want we will make life hell for you?" Of course its probably a little bit of carrot and stick - vote for this higher raise because if you do - we'll donate money to your reelection fund; we'll turn out to vote for us. And if you don't..... So excuse me. I guess I should have said.. "well connected union thugs". Anytime one uses the threat of collective action to charge more than a good or service is worth - its thuggery.

vincentML -> RE: Friedrichs v. California Teachers Association (1/21/2016 9:38:46 AM)
quote: Apparently, the Herald missed this practice at the United Teachers of Dade (UTD), as there are 11 (3 officers, 8 staffers) Miami-Dade School Board employees that are fully released to work and operate the union- termed “teachers on special assignment (TSAs).” As a classroom teacher working my butt off day after day I would be more irate then you are. Shame on the Superintendent's bargaining committee for negotiating this. But this stupidity does not reflect on the rights of public employees to bargain collectively with their government employer. When I was teaching there were 18,000 teachers in Miami-Dade. It would have been impossible to work under unilaterally dictated conditions that permitted arbitrary treatment of teachers by administrators. So, good for you finding one unacceptable item in one contract negotiated by the taxpayers' representatives. Your anger should be directed to the elected school board who approved the contract. Bargaining is a two sided venture. No one held a gun to the heads of the Board's bargaining team. And how does this reflect on the fact that Florida teachers are not, never have been mandated to pay union dues? Obviously, it doesn't. You are off point from the case in the OP.

vincentML -> RE: Friedrichs v. California Teachers Association (1/21/2016 9:45:47 AM)
quote: Ok. So exactly why should the tax payers pay for teachers that can't be fired, who deliver inferior results at inflated costs. The collective bargaining agreement provides a process for the evaluation and dismissal of even tenured teachers who are not teaching effectively. quote: Why exactly do you think that happens? You don't think its because in the negotiations the thugs don't say "if you don't give us what we want we will make life hell for you?" Again you display your ignorance of the bargaining process.

Page: << < prev 2 3 [4] 5 6 next > >>

Collarchat.com © 2025

Terms of Service

0.046875