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.
I never said teachers don't do a good job. Many do. Many are bad apples like anywhere else. They get paid like everybody else. They knew what they would get paid when they signed up. You want to make more money go get another job. Pretty siimple stuff. Screaming about wanting a 30% pay raise while at the same time having class size reduced which in turn makes the job easier is ridiculous. Not that I'm against making the class size smaller either. Problem is they want smaller class size, 30% increase and on top of it to compensate for the smaller classes the public will have to pay even more teachers at that 30% higher rate. Or kill them.
I never said teachers don't do a good job. Many do. Many are bad apples like anywhere else. They get paid like everybody else. They knew what they would get paid when they signed up. You want to make more money go get another job. Pretty siimple stuff. Screaming about wanting a 30% pay raise while at the same time having class size reduced which in turn makes the job easier is ridiculous. Not that I'm against making the class size smaller either. Problem is they want smaller class size, 30% increase and on top of it to compensate for the smaller classes the public will have to pay even more teachers at that 30% higher rate. Or kill them.
And there in lies the problem with unions as I see it.
I go to work for a company. I excel at my job, I do awesome work. But they can't promote me, or they can't give me a significant raise, because its a union shop, and EVERYONE has to benefit, or someone has "seniority".
We should pay for performance, period. Unions don't allow for that.
I think unions have a place. If an employer, lets say Apple, has a huge profit margin, and they aren't passing that onto any employees, then unionize, demand higher wages for all, but don't restrict them with "seniority" and "everyone gets a pay increase" rules.
I have worked in a union shop. I saw a lot of idiots get raises and promotions that they did not deserve, simply because they had been there 5 years, or because everyone got a raise.
And there in lies the problem with unions as I see it.
I go to work for a company. I excel at my job, I do awesome work. But they can't promote me, or they can't give me a significant raise, because its a union shop, and EVERYONE has to benefit, or someone has "seniority".
We should pay for performance, period. Unions don't allow for that.
I think unions have a place. If an employer, lets say Apple, has a huge profit margin, and they aren't passing that onto any employees, then unionize, demand higher wages for all, but don't restrict them with "seniority" and "everyone gets a pay increase" rules.
I have worked in a union shop. I saw a lot of idiots get raises and promotions that they did not deserve, simply because they had been there 5 years, or because everyone got a raise.
Exactly right. I used to work in IT in a casino. We weren't union but everybody else was. They all got paid the same no matter if they did their jobs or not. Shared tips the whole shabang. Lot of animosity would grow too from those who worked harder come pay raise time because like you say they all got the same exact bump.
I've always been of the opinion that I'll negotiate for my own pay and benifits thank you. If I don't like something or feel somethign isn't fair or I'm not being compensated properly I take it up with my boss and if it comes to it I'll go find a job that I feel I get what I deserve.
And there in lies the problem with unions as I see it.
I go to work for a company. I excel at my job, I do awesome work. But they can't promote me, or they can't give me a significant raise, because its a union shop, and EVERYONE has to benefit, or someone has "seniority".
We should pay for performance, period. Unions don't allow for that.
I think unions have a place. If an employer, lets say Apple, has a huge profit margin, and they aren't passing that onto any employees, then unionize, demand higher wages for all, but don't restrict them with "seniority" and "everyone gets a pay increase" rules.
I have worked in a union shop. I saw a lot of idiots get raises and promotions that they did not deserve, simply because they had been there 5 years, or because everyone got a raise.
I'm union and I don't mind doing extra and picking up someone else's slack. I consider myself a part of a team, the IBEW. We have been involved in the biggest, most important construction projects and technology projects the country has ever known. We run the nuclear power plants, we repair 15,000 KV power lines in rain storms. We build natural gas pipelines and we build and maintain railroads. Look around , if there is a project and there are hard hats on site you can almost bet there will be an IBEW member there, making sure the job is done right and no one get's hurt.
I've saved peoples lives while on the job, how many people can say that? I think it's because of the training I have received and my own work ethic and also, because we have negotiated living wages so people stick around and they gain experience and they share it with the next group. And we are protected from potential egomaniac management who have to follow proper channels when dealing with us.
I'll bet we have fewer lazy scammers on our jobs than most offices in America.
Emanuel really being tough on unions in the end, is sort of like saving Greece from bankruptcy. In the end, neither is going to happen. It's all about saving face, putting on appearances.
I skimmed the story real quick and to me it looks like the school district is adding many hours of work onto their schedules and requiring more training and education for them to keep their jobs.
Seems that in the private sector you would have to pay more if you expected more from your employees and required them to go back to college and add to their education?
30% over 2 years may be high but I think 20% is reasonable and I'm sure that is their target in these negotiations.
These are talented people you are talking about. Many of them have other options than the difficult job of teaching young people.
But please, don't let me rain on your anti union rants.
I'm glad to see at least someone read the link.
Its funny yet pathetic at the same time how the right wingers just see "teachers" and "chicago" then automatically kick in the "I hate unions rabble rabble!" garbage without a clue as to what the discussion is even about.
Last edited by TempesT68; 02-17-2012 at 04:12 PM..
I laugh when clueless republicanazis say ignorant stuff like the op. Little do they know that teachers in Chicago have had zero pay increases the past few years. they need raises like this just to keep up with cost of living, with back pay raises owed. And yes, let's hope a major tax contributor like Chicago fails and thus less money can be siphoned off to support poor ignorant bible thumping southerners
They don't "need" any such thing. And no back raises should be "owed".
You act like this is some kind of booming economy here.
Those raises they "need" are being paid for by taxpayers in the private sector who aren't getting raises because there's a recession on in case you hadn't heard.
Poor ignorant bible thumping southerners, eh? Nice to see liberal tolerance and diversity on full display.
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.
ible thumping southern
ers
