Ohio Chatter
Ohio Chatter

Forums

All Threads Serious Business Sports Politics Archive Pick 'ems
Log In Create Account

Senate Bill 5 Targets Collective Bargaining for Elimination!

Home ▸ Archive ▸ Politics ▸ Senate Bill 5 Targets Collective Bargaining for Elimination!
O-Trap's avatar

O-Trap

Chief Shenanigans Officer

14,994 posts
Feb 17, 2011 1:08 PM
Con_Alma;681924 wrote:...and maybe it will be worse. The point is with limited resources their must be flexibility in order to match expenses with revenue. If the people provide less money to educate there must be an ability to lower expenses without having a committed contract in place.

Right. The evidence thus far points to it being better to get rid of collective bargaining, but it could indeed turn out worse.

You're right, though. If you have a smaller budget to work with, you need to cut something. No ifs, ands, or buts.
Feb 17, 2011 1:08pm
G

Gblock

Feb 17, 2011 1:23 PM
CenterBHSFan;681875 wrote:See, I think that was where you missed the goal of my post. You and others clearly do not think you will be able to bargain, manage, negotiate by your individual selves in your careers and for your best interest. I have the opposite view in that I absolutely think that you can. As I've said before, public unions are not the Borg. I'm thinking that each of you are (or should be) bright enough and competent enough to face your superiors and negotiate. I'm actually in the line of thought that alot of you could probably do a better job of managing your own independent selves 10x's better than some union rep EVER could.

BTW, I didn't get the chance your answer to our previous exchanges, I'd like to do so now.
You completely missed the whole point of my post. I was NOT trying to compare you/others to children. I was not trying to be insulting. My whole point was that you are possibly about to face an unknown. Which (as I have said repeated, my comparison and generalization was only small and minor) was what my example was all about. Of course it isn't on the same level at all, but the parallel is there.

As I've said before, I've been a member of AFL-CIO. But I was also in non-union jobs before and after that period of time. So, perhaps I didn't have the tendency to depend on a mouthpiece that you and others have done, but I also have the knowledge and personal experience that tells me that there is more than one way to go about doing things.

if it truly did become an open market and i could then negotiate with many districts for my services then yes that would be very exciting and i would feel like i had some barganing power on my own and could create some competition for my talents. as it stands now i cant leave my job for another district except to go into administration. if you leave and start at another district that would cause me to go ten steps down on the pay ladder to year 5. so this job security that looks so great is also a trap for us. if i could I would much rather apply for a job in hilliard, new albany, olentangy, dublin etc...
Feb 17, 2011 1:23pm
tsst_fballfan's avatar

tsst_fballfan

Senior Member

406 posts
Feb 17, 2011 1:38 PM
Gblock;681947 wrote:if it truly did become an open market and i could then negotiate with many districts for my services then yes that would be very exciting and i would feel like i had some barganing power on my own and could create some competition for my talents. as it stands now i cant leave my job for another district except to go into administration. if you leave and start at another district that would cause me to go ten steps down on the pay ladder to year 5. so this job security that looks so great is also a trap for us. if i could I would much rather apply for a job in hilliard, new albany, olentangy, dublin etc...
The union is the causation of that trap not the answer to it! :shrugs:
Feb 17, 2011 1:38pm
I

I Wear Pants

Senior Member

16,223 posts
Feb 17, 2011 1:39 PM
Then why don't you work to get rid of the "trap"?

Districts should be willing and allowed to pay good teachers to come to their school without having to pay them next to nothing. Just like teachers need to be allowed to work at the school that suits them best without having to basically start their careers over. An excellent teacher whose been teaching for 15 years should be able to go to a different school without that school being forced to pay that teacher the same as a 5th year one by the union.
Feb 17, 2011 1:39pm
G

Gblock

Feb 17, 2011 1:44 PM
I Wear Pants;681964 wrote:Then why don't you work to get rid of the "trap"?

Districts should be willing and allowed to pay good teachers to come to their school without having to pay them next to nothing. Just like teachers need to be allowed to work at the school that suits them best without having to basically start their careers over. An excellent teacher whose been teaching for 15 years should be able to go to a different school without that school being forced to pay that teacher the same as a 5th year one by the union.
that is just one part of the equation...i am all for reform just not this bill
Feb 17, 2011 1:44pm
G

Gblock

Feb 17, 2011 1:46 PM
tsst_fballfan;681963 wrote:The union is the causation of that trap not the answer to it! :shrugs:

not entirely...if the union had its way i would be able to transfer and get 15 years credit...if the district had their way i would start at year 3...compromise is at year 5
Feb 17, 2011 1:46pm
tsst_fballfan's avatar

tsst_fballfan

Senior Member

406 posts
Feb 17, 2011 1:57 PM
Gblock;681971 wrote:not entirely...if the union had its way i would be able to transfer and get 15 years credit...if the district had their way i would start at year 3...compromise is at year 5
If there is no union you would start at what the market would bear for your skill, qualifications, and experience.
Feb 17, 2011 1:57pm
G

Gblock

Feb 17, 2011 2:02 PM
tsst_fballfan;681988 wrote:If there is no union you would start at what the market would bear for your skill, qualifications, and experience.

well maybe one day we'll get the chance to see what that number looks like
Feb 17, 2011 2:02pm
redstreak one's avatar

redstreak one

Senior Member

1,152 posts
Feb 17, 2011 2:04 PM
QuakerOats;681862 wrote:from O-Trap: "Actually, we can. Private schools, which have no unions, often teach at a MUCH higher level. When I came out of private school, the first two years of public school were basically a recap of what I'd already learned a grade or two earlier in private school."

EXACTLY. And moreover, these good educations come at a substantially LOWER cost than in public schools. And it is not because teachers are not paid a good wage; it is because CARING, and accountability and parental involvement are paramount. More money is not the answer at all.
When you can find a way to make 100% of parents and those other adults in a kids lives believe in that, I would work on merit system no problem!lol

You cannot compare a private school with a public school straight up!
Feb 17, 2011 2:04pm
FatHobbit's avatar

FatHobbit

Senior Member

8,651 posts
Feb 17, 2011 2:10 PM
If this passes, how quickly will it go into effect?
Feb 17, 2011 2:10pm
G

Gblock

Feb 17, 2011 2:10 PM
redstreak one;681995 wrote:When you can find a way to make 100% of parents and those other adults in a kids lives believe in that, I would work on merit system no problem!lol

You cannot compare a private school with a public school straight up!

my guess is you will see public schools go away before you see teacher unions go away....then we will see what the market will bear.
Feb 17, 2011 2:10pm
ernest_t_bass's avatar

ernest_t_bass

12th Son of the Lama

24,984 posts
Feb 17, 2011 2:12 PM
redstreak one;681995 wrote:You cannot compare a private school with a public school straight up!

I had a private school teacher tell me that his job is much different than mine. In a private school, the "school day" is a part of the kids every day schedule. They are accountable to someone if they fail. In public school, the "school day" is an interruption of the kids' every day schedule. When mom and dad don't care about their grades, they know they're not going to college, why do they care to try, regardless of the effort given to them at school.

I know that the easy answer will be, "try harder on these kids! Guide them!" Only a teacher knows some of the "lost cause" kids of whom I speak. They are out there.

This bill has been written by a woman who has never been an educator. I should write new laws for the medical field. Why not.
Feb 17, 2011 2:12pm
derek bomar's avatar

derek bomar

Senior Member

3,722 posts
Feb 17, 2011 2:14 PM
while we're on the topic of education...why the hell don't we have year-round (Qtr system) schooling? Kids take 2.5 months off and they forget everything. I never understood summer break.
Feb 17, 2011 2:14pm
G

Gblock

Feb 17, 2011 2:16 PM
derek bomar;682007 wrote:while we're on the topic of education...why the hell don't we have year-round (Qtr system) schooling? Kids take 2.5 months off and they forget everything. I never understood summer break.

our district offer three schools that go year round and elementary a middle and a high. they go to school for 9 weeks and then take off 3 year round
Feb 17, 2011 2:16pm
ernest_t_bass's avatar

ernest_t_bass

12th Son of the Lama

24,984 posts
Feb 17, 2011 2:16 PM
derek bomar;682007 wrote:while we're on the topic of education...why the hell don't we have year-round (Qtr system) schooling? Kids take 2.5 months off and they forget everything. I never understood summer break.

I'm sure you loved it as a kid though! The original school calendar was developed around farmer's schedules. Start Labor Day and end Memorial Day.
Feb 17, 2011 2:16pm
ernest_t_bass's avatar

ernest_t_bass

12th Son of the Lama

24,984 posts
Feb 17, 2011 2:17 PM
Gblock;682009 wrote:our district offer three schools that go year round and elementary a middle and a high. they go to school for 9 weeks and then take off 3 year round

I think I might like that better.
Feb 17, 2011 2:17pm
derek bomar's avatar

derek bomar

Senior Member

3,722 posts
Feb 17, 2011 2:21 PM
ernest_t_bass;682010 wrote:I'm sure you loved it as a kid though! The original school calendar was developed around farmer's schedules. Start Labor Day and end Memorial Day.

that doesn't make it applicable for kids today...I think kids should go year-round, and teachers should have to teach year-round.
Feb 17, 2011 2:21pm
G

Gblock

Feb 17, 2011 2:22 PM
the reason we don t have more year round is because parents in general resisit it because they like the family time in the summer and vacation time and such....i think it has some advantages and disadvantages as far as being a teacher...it is surely better for students. plenty of places in the world go year round and on saturdays.
Feb 17, 2011 2:22pm
ernest_t_bass's avatar

ernest_t_bass

12th Son of the Lama

24,984 posts
Feb 17, 2011 2:23 PM
derek bomar;682014 wrote:that doesn't make it applicable for kids today...I think kids should go year-round, and teachers should have to teach year-round.

You asked a question and I answered it. Of course it's not applicable today.
Feb 17, 2011 2:23pm
ernest_t_bass's avatar

ernest_t_bass

12th Son of the Lama

24,984 posts
Feb 17, 2011 2:24 PM
Gblock;682016 wrote:the reason we don t have more year round is because parents in general resisit it because they like the family time in the summer and vacation time and such....i think it has some advantages and disadvantages as far as being a teacher...it is surely better for students. plenty of places in the world go year round and on saturdays.

I've also heard the argument... let's let kids be kids, and enjoy their childhood. It's funny how many people forget what it is like to be a kid.
Feb 17, 2011 2:24pm
FatHobbit's avatar

FatHobbit

Senior Member

8,651 posts
Feb 17, 2011 2:31 PM
ernest_t_bass;682004 wrote:In public school, the "school day" is an interruption of the kids' every day schedule. When mom and dad don't care about their grades, they know they're not going to college, why do they care to try, regardless of the effort given to them at school.

I know that the easy answer will be, "try harder on these kids! Guide them!" Only a teacher knows some of the "lost cause" kids of whom I speak. They are out there.

I was a tutor for at risk kids for a while. They weren't dumb or bad, they just didn't have ANY parental involvement. They had zero discipline and nobody gave a crap if they did their homework. All I had to do was ask if they had done their homework. Invariably they would say no, so I would ask why not? They would do their homework and then I would check it. It was something their parent(s) should have been doing.
Feb 17, 2011 2:31pm
Thread Bomber's avatar

Thread Bomber

Message Board Terrorist

1,851 posts
Feb 17, 2011 2:34 PM
The Teachers unions in this case are a red herring.

This is a not so subtle attempt to break up the public schools and put this cause into the "Education for profit" sector.

The conservative right has been trying to force the "voucher system" for years and this is just a way to achieve it.

Public schools are definition a socialist agenda, and forced upon us. The Idea and justification of public schools are wonderful, but because they are run by the government, the are a cesspool of waste.

The line are being drawn yet again..On the right, They you have you put it in the private sector and let competition dictate that the schools would operate more efficiently and effectively. On The left, they say that there is no room for profit in the education system.

There is no guarantee that getting rid of the unions will help the education in the state. I see nothing in this bill that would convince me otherwise.
Feb 17, 2011 2:34pm
A

Al Bundy

Senior Member

4,180 posts
Feb 17, 2011 2:34 PM
derek bomar;682014 wrote:that doesn't make it applicable for kids today...I think kids should go year-round, and teachers should have to teach year-round.

I think most teachers would be willing to teach year round, but I highly doubt districts would be willing pay for that. If you look around the country, many places have added teacher furlough days to reduce pay. The trend has been to redued the number of instructional days, not increase it.
Feb 17, 2011 2:34pm
B

Bigdogg

Senior Member

1,429 posts
Feb 17, 2011 2:40 PM
Fab4Runner;681403 wrote:I would like to have the freedom to choose.


There I answered for you. And no I'm not kidding.

Your rights end where mine begin. If you choose not to buy health insurance and then you get cancer, you still get treated under the current law. I and other taxpayers still have to pay for your right to chose not to bear the burden and personal responsibility of purchasing health insurance. To compare this with forcing you to purchasing a car or life insurance is just stupid. If you want to not purchase health insurance then you should sign away your rights for treatment or there should be a penalty. Pooling the risk and spreading it across everyone is the only way to reduce the cost of health care, which this is really about if you eliminate all the partisan BS.
Feb 17, 2011 2:40pm
FatHobbit's avatar

FatHobbit

Senior Member

8,651 posts
Feb 17, 2011 2:45 PM
Bigdogg;682033 wrote:If you choose not to buy health insurance and then you get cancer, you still get treated under the current law.
There's the problem. Although I'm not sure cancer treatment would be covered. But when insurance is available, why should anyone else pay for you when you chose not to purchase it?
Feb 17, 2011 2:45pm