Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
And I don't think that people are being forced to join a union.
If you can't get the job without paying dues you are effectively union member. What needs to happen is non union members do not automatically get the salary and benefits of union member and they have to negotiate the contract on their own. You can bet the union would vehemently oppose that too because the non union meber does not have the expense of union dues and could accept less and still effectively get the same salary and benefits.
Why should a union be able to interfere with a contract between a company and another employee?
Isn't it a free country when a union and an employer negotiate how they want employment contracts to be handled in their business?
So you want to get government out of everything, but you want to get the government to interfere in order to make business/union deals (private entities) illegal?
You people don't seem to understand the concept of "right-to-work" states. Lefties hate the idea that a person may be able to work somewhere without having to pay union dues.
And you are probably there because you want to teach and educate. I applaud you for that.
I know too many that are there just for the pay and benefits and not to mention tenure. Once they achieve it, you find out exactly why they're there and teaching has nothing to do with it.
right.
agree exactly.
people who want to be teachers are obviously in it for the MONEY!
that little smiley face can not roll it's eyes strongly enough to express my feelings on such a statement.
I don't know too many teachers like that. I would say that at my school there are probably 2 or 3 teachers like that. Other than that, I would feel fine allowing my child to be in their classrooms.
I support getting rid of tenure and reward teachers based on performance and not seniority. That being said, though teaching is one of the most demanding professions, not physically, but mentally and emotionally. There is pressure coming at you from all directions. The federal, state, county, and city governments expect a lot of teachers. Parents expect a lot from teachers. Teachers expect a lot of themselves. Being in charge of 25-30 students for most of the day is very mentally taxing.
Teacher unions need to get ahead of the curve and be partners is lower the cost of education and reforming what doesn't work.
Those 2 or 3 are the very ones who have caused my wife to resign from this school that she has taught in for 39 years. Of course, they aren't the only reason but all the paperwork involved in government meddling is a heavy contributor to it also.
I wonder what would happen if the 2 or 3 in our school were the ones who decided who was the best people to get the performance awards. I ask this because the 3 that my wife just can't stand any more constantly rail against the principal who all the rest appreciate and support. I always supported that kind of thing when I taught but knew that it would bring on too much butt kissing from many teachers.
I'm a teacher. I'm not in a union. I'm not being forced to be in a union.
It's just another Conservative lie.
Unions membership is probably at it's lowest point in over a century.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
