goemaw.com

General Discussion => The New Joe Montgomery Birther Pit => Topic started by: Jeffy on February 14, 2010, 11:35:08 PM

Title: Forced Unionization
Post by: Jeffy on February 14, 2010, 11:35:08 PM
http://www.doczero.org/2010/02/a-less-perfect-union/

Quote
Michelle Berry runs a day-care business out of her home in Flint, MI. She thought that she owned her own business, but Berry’s been told she is now a government employee and union member. It’s not voluntary. Suddenly, Berry and 40,000 other Michigan private day-care providers have learned that union dues are being taken out of the child-care subsidies the state sends them. The “union” is a creation of AFSCME, the government workers union, and the United Auto Workers.

Title: Re: Forced Unionization
Post by: Dirty Sanchez on February 15, 2010, 12:39:13 AM
And what good will this union do for her?  Like most others, nothing.  Fatten up the coffers of the bosses and push political agendas that the rank and file by and large disagree with.

But whatever, if the government wants to do it, we shouldn't stop them.  The benevolent bureaucrats know what's best.

Sieg heil!
Title: Re: Forced Unionization
Post by: pike on February 15, 2010, 04:50:37 PM
Just wait for EFCA to pass. Then it will be even easier to unionize than this
Title: Re: Forced Unionization
Post by: Jeffy on February 15, 2010, 10:23:53 PM
Speaking of unions....

A school superintendent in Rhode Island is trying to fix an abysmally bad school system.

Her plan calls for teachers at a local high school to work 25 minutes longer per day, each lunch with students once in a while, and help with tutoring.  The teachers' union has refused to accept these apparently onerous demands.

The teachers at the high school make $70,000-$78,000, as compared to a median income in the town of $22,000.  This exemplifies a nationwide trend in which public sector workers make far more than their private-sector counterparts  (with better benefits).

The school superintendent has responded to the union's stubbornness by firing every teacher and administrator at the school.

http://www.businessinsider.com/henry-blodget-unionized-rhode-island-teachers-refuse-to-work-25-minutes-more-per-day-so-town-fires-all-of-them-2010-2

LOL
Title: Re: Forced Unionization
Post by: CatsFan_58 on February 15, 2010, 11:04:40 PM
http://www.doczero.org/2010/02/a-less-perfect-union/

Quote
Michelle Berry runs a day-care business out of her home in Flint, MI. She thought that she owned her own business, but Berry’s been told she is now a government employee and union member. It’s not voluntary. Suddenly, Berry and 40,000 other Michigan private day-care providers have learned that union dues are being taken out of the child-care subsidies the state sends them. The “union” is a creation of AFSCME, the government workers union, and the United Auto Workers.


So many are blind to the goings on of today.  :facepalm: its sickening.
Title: Re: Forced Unionization
Post by: Kat Kid on February 15, 2010, 11:08:54 PM
Speaking of unions....

A school superintendent in Rhode Island is trying to fix an abysmally bad school system.

Her plan calls for teachers at a local high school to work 25 minutes longer per day, each lunch with students once in a while, and help with tutoring.  The teachers' union has refused to accept these apparently onerous demands.

The teachers at the high school make $70,000-$78,000, as compared to a median income in the town of $22,000.  This exemplifies a nationwide trend in which public sector workers make far more than their private-sector counterparts  (with better benefits).

The school superintendent has responded to the union's stubbornness by firing every teacher and administrator at the school.

http://www.businessinsider.com/henry-blodget-unionized-rhode-island-teachers-refuse-to-work-25-minutes-more-per-day-so-town-fires-all-of-them-2010-2

LOL

There's the district pay scale, would mean the entire building is maxing out + supplementals to get to that $70-78,000 "average"

http://www.ntlongcber.com/cber/docs/_CF.htm (http://www.ntlongcber.com/cber/docs/_CF.htm)

Also, you butchered the crap out of the administration demands, here they are in full:

 KEY POINTS

Six conditions Central Falls High School teachers must accept by Friday to keep their jobs:

Increase length of school day by 25 minutes to provide more instructional time for students.

Formalize tutoring schedule so struggling students have extra help for one hour before and after school.

Agree to eat lunch with students one day a week to build stronger relationships.

Attend two weeks of professional development in the summer at a rate of $30 an hour.

Stay after school for 90 minutes one day each week to work with fellow teachers analyzing student work and test data and discussing ways to improve teaching at a rate of $30 an hour if Gallo can find grant financing.

Accept more rigorous evaluations by a third-party starting March 1.


All that said, this was a failing school for 4 years to get to that point and NCLB is pretty clear about the outcomes, if I were a teacher there I'd have been in a panic for the past two years.  Would be interesting to see the actual numbers, but from what is floating around, it was a horribly failing school.  I don't know all the details, but that building principal/superintendent should've been making reforms years ago and not being able to negotiate with the union is not a valid excuse.
Title: Re: Forced Unionization
Post by: ben ji on February 15, 2010, 11:51:21 PM
Dood, unions have run their course and need to die. If anyone truly believes in their ability to do a job better than someone else there is no reason they would join a union and demand that everyone else in their occupation who has half the ability/skill/work ethic should be compensated as much as them.
Title: Re: Forced Unionization
Post by: Kat Kid on February 16, 2010, 07:16:15 AM
The logic behind unions is an attempt to combat the asymmetry of contract negotiations and the rights of employees.  And fyi, unions are already pretty much dead.

Like, would I ideally want to be able to bargain for a raise on my own?  Sure, but I doubt I'd be able to put together a conttract as strong as the one that collective bargaining has put together over years of negotiated agreements with my district, and my district's union membership is not that big.

Btw, pretty sure Kansas is a right to work state so don't crap your pants about being called a scab any time soon.
Title: Re: Forced Unionization
Post by: Cire on February 16, 2010, 10:05:00 AM
love when Kansans complain about "the unions"
Title: Re: Forced Unionization
Post by: The Whale on February 16, 2010, 11:32:34 AM
From the original article:

Quote
...
For the first time, Gallo knows she can get it done because state Education Commissioner Deborah A. Gist has mandated the overhaul, giving Gallo federal and state authority to transform the school.

“We have a graduation rate of 48 percent. I have 19-year-olds in classes with 14-year-olds. It’s the middle of the school year and 50 percent of the students at the high school are failing all of their classes,” Gallo said.

Gallo said she offered to pay teachers $30 an hour for two additional weeks of training in the summer. Gallo also said she would try to find grant money to pay teachers for 90 minutes a week of after-school planning time, also at $30 an hour.

But she says she has no extra money to pay for other changes she is pushing for, including lengthening the instructional day by 25 minutes, so teachers work 8 a.m. to 3 p.m. instead of 7:50 a.m. to 2:25 p.m. She wants teachers to formalize a rotating tutoring schedule, so a teacher is available to help students for an hour before or after school, and she wants teachers to have lunch with students one day a week.

The average teacher’s salary at the high school ranges between $72,000 and $78,000 a year, because most are at the district’s top step, Gallo said.

Union officials have been pushing for $90 per hour and want the district to pay for more of the additional responsibilities.
Title: Re: Forced Unionization
Post by: Kat Kid on February 16, 2010, 11:53:58 AM
I saw that.  I offer the following two points:

1)  go look at the district payscale I linked.  For the entire school to "average" 72-78,000 would be tough, but possible, given that payscale.
2)  I have not read through the entire negotiated agreement, if the district had previously negotiated number of service days and their extra duty/hourly rates and they couldn't afford it, then they screwed up not the union that is trying to keep the terms of the contract for its members.

No idea what the full facts of the case are though.

From the original article:

Quote
...
For the first time, Gallo knows she can get it done because state Education Commissioner Deborah A. Gist has mandated the overhaul, giving Gallo federal and state authority to transform the school.

“We have a graduation rate of 48 percent. I have 19-year-olds in classes with 14-year-olds. It’s the middle of the school year and 50 percent of the students at the high school are failing all of their classes,” Gallo said.

Gallo said she offered to pay teachers $30 an hour for two additional weeks of training in the summer. Gallo also said she would try to find grant money to pay teachers for 90 minutes a week of after-school planning time, also at $30 an hour.

But she says she has no extra money to pay for other changes she is pushing for, including lengthening the instructional day by 25 minutes, so teachers work 8 a.m. to 3 p.m. instead of 7:50 a.m. to 2:25 p.m. She wants teachers to formalize a rotating tutoring schedule, so a teacher is available to help students for an hour before or after school, and she wants teachers to have lunch with students one day a week.

The average teacher’s salary at the high school ranges between $72,000 and $78,000 a year, because most are at the district’s top step, Gallo said.

Union officials have been pushing for $90 per hour and want the district to pay for more of the additional responsibilities.

Title: Re: Forced Unionization
Post by: sys on February 16, 2010, 03:02:08 PM
the teachers are wrong to reject most of the admin demands, but not the lunch one.  they're right to draw the line there.
Title: Re: Forced Unionization
Post by: Dirty Sanchez on February 16, 2010, 04:31:51 PM
the teachers are wrong to reject most of the admin demands, but not the lunch one.  they're right to draw the line there.

Only inmates should be forced to eat that garbage, although I hear that its better now than when I was in school.  Kids get all sorts of choices now.  Heck, in K-4 we got milk--2% only.  When I moved across town in 5th grade we got 2%, whole, or chocolate--that was a no-brainer.
Title: Re: Forced Unionization
Post by: Jeffy on February 16, 2010, 04:47:59 PM
love when Kansans complain about "the unions"
What about when the unions complain about Kansans?


Schlitterbahn Sucks.
Title: Re: Forced Unionization
Post by: Dirty Sanchez on February 16, 2010, 07:58:18 PM
love when Kansans complain about "the unions"
What about when the unions complain about Kansans?


Schlitterbahn Sucks.

They were actually complaining about texans.  They were stupid, though.  We do it for free on goEMAW.com.  They buy billboards.
Title: Re: Forced Unionization
Post by: Fake Sugar Dick (WARNING, NOT THE REAL SUGAR DICK!) on October 25, 2017, 09:33:24 PM
AMAZE  :love:

https://twitter.com/WSJ/status/923373622798045186
Title: Re: Forced Unionization
Post by: K-S-U-Wildcats! on October 25, 2017, 09:43:35 PM
There's a reason we're seeing frantic laws like this being proposed in blue states: If the libs thought Citizens United was bad, just wait until the Supreme Court's ruling in Janus, challenging unions' "fair share" fees by which unions can compel workers to pay dues even if they don't belong to the union. The most powerful unions in the country, who also tend to be the Dems' biggest donors, openly acknowledge this ruling could be a death warrant for them.

https://www.google.com/amp/amp.sacbee.com/news/politics-government/the-state-worker/article180426706.html (https://www.google.com/amp/amp.sacbee.com/news/politics-government/the-state-worker/article180426706.html)
Title: Re: Forced Unionization
Post by: Fake Sugar Dick (WARNING, NOT THE REAL SUGAR DICK!) on October 25, 2017, 10:25:49 PM
Dems: eff due process, you're going to jail if you don't sign up
Title: Re: Forced Unionization
Post by: renocat on January 29, 2018, 12:24:28 AM
https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/us/supreme-court-may-deal-major-blow-to-labor-unions/ar-BBIljyI
Be old belly laugh.  SCOTUS is expected to rule against unions making workers have to pay a fair share of union dues.  This expected ruling will allow workers to refuse  any dues.  I admit a one time unions were important aND did good.  Now all they care about is making their leaders wealthy by vote whoring to Democrats.  Gorsuch is the swing vote.