Belly35;679242 wrote:Do the government employee and teacher get less when the economy around them is bad?

In the past, yes, we have. It is not as immediate as the private sector, but that is because we operate on a budget. If we are hurting, then it is either take cuts/freezes, or people lose their jobs.

ernest_t_bass;679216 wrote:Can you at least agree that you understand why we don't want it to go? We're going to fight for it!

I can understand why you don't want it to go. It sucks. Last year we had a company wide 10% salary reduction and they dropped our 401k match. No fun at all.

I also think that big wig unions like UAW, Teamsters, etc. set poor examples. I'm not saying that the OEA is a perfect example of how a union should be run, or that they are not corrupt in certain areas. I just think the private sector unions set poor examples.

Kinda like big city districts, like TPS, set VERY poor examples for education in general. Big city districts may be the eventual demise of small rural schools.

I do more continuing education than any of you. We train every single day. I work more hours than you. I am away from my family 1/3 of my life. We are placed in some of the most stressful situations you could think of, and sometimes wouldn't want to think of. Our life span is shorter than the average person. Yet, I am overcompensated. Give me a break.

ON average, teachers don't make that much anyway. Again, schools like TPS give us a bad name. Here's a link:

http://moneywatch.bnet.com/saving-money/blog/college-solution/the-best-and-worst-college-degrees-by-salary/577/

Yes, it's redundant b/c we've discussed it before, but might as well share it.

ernest_t_bass;679258 wrote:ON average, teachers don't make that much anyway. Again, schools like TPS give us a bad name. Here's a link:

http://moneywatch.bnet.com/saving-money/blog/college-solution/the-best-and-worst-college-degrees-by-salary/577/

Yes, it's redundant b/c we've discussed it before, but might as well share it.

Exactly, but those are Republicans for you. Instead of fixing the problem, they want to throw the baby out with the bathwater.

ernest_t_bass;679142 wrote:I still think that depends on the pay scale that each individual BOE develops. Local boards might still decide to have a pay scale based on experience. If I leave my district, I still might be unhirable based on the new district's pay scale.

I see that as helping. If you have experience, you would be more hirable, not less.

ernest_t_bass;679164 wrote:Are you saying that it is OK for a GOOD teacher, who is old, be let go b/c they make too much money, and just hire a younger one? Districts can now do this, if this passes.

What most people don't understand... THERE ARE WAYS IN PLACE NOW, TO GET RID OF BAD TEACHERS. Most admins just don't want to go through the hassle of it.

Yes, hassles created by unions and CBA. Without both of these entitites, it would be easier to get rid of the bad teachers and keep the good teachers IE layoffs based on seniority will know longer apply, it could be based on performance.

jc10380;679189 wrote:So, lets compare apples to apples.

I go into your company and tell you are now getting paid less, and have less benefits to do the same job; but I still expect you to be a hardworking, good employee, who gives 100% all the time. Good luck with that.

What a joke. Many people on this board have already experienced it, welcome to the real world. Hell, I was layed off from my previous job because of cutbacks. I am not saying you aren't worth X amount of dollars, but the reality of the situation is the money isn't there anymore.

ernest_t_bass;679195 wrote:I don't think you answered his question. How would YOU react? Would you pay more attention to different things (like my beer driver friend)?

There are certain details that are taken care of now that will no longer be taken care of, and you will not be able to fire the workers b/c they will be doing what their contract states.

It sounds like your beer driver friend is actually doing his job now (pre and post trip inspections). Sounds to me like the company corrected the problem of the employee not finishing or completing all of his work.

ernest_t_bass;679208 wrote:We have taken pay cuts, pay freezes, etc. But I don't like the fact of taking away our bargaining power. IMO, there is a HUGE difference.

If you have already taken paycuts and payfreezes, what bargaining power did you really have in the first place? It befuddles me how people are so blind to believe they have any illusionn of bargaining power with CBA's and unions. Even if these CBA's are eliminated, it doesn't necessarily mean you will be living at the poverty level. People understand the importance of public sector employees, but the time of being immune to economic hardship is obviously over for said employees.

ernest_t_bass;679213 wrote:How does a special education teacher make money on a merit based system? A SPED teacher's kids could keep getting worse and worse, with no increase in "test" scores. A core teacher has test results, but school "classes" differ in intelligence. What about elective teachers? Teachers of the Arts?

I think a special education teacher would not be subject to the same merit system. I personally believe that the BOE or state would have different standards for the SE teachers to abide by.

ernest_t_bass;679247 wrote:In the past, yes, we have. It is not as immediate as the private sector, but that is because we operate on a budget. If we are hurting, then it is either take cuts/freezes, or people lose their jobs.

On a budget is the key here. And the budget has shrunk to so little, drastic changes must be made. If I was a young teacher, I'd welcome this change. My good friend is a high school math teacher and has been for the past 5 years. Due to layoffs and his low seniority status, he is losing his job. He can thank the union and the CBA for that. Althogh he may outperform his counterparts in his department, since his seniority is low, he gets let go. This is ridiculous; how does that improve the quality of education? Just because a teacher is experienced doesn't make them a better teacher. This is the flaw in the argument of CBA's helping keep the education quality up to par. It is an illusion, CBA's don't help anymore than if they didn't exist.

dwccrew;679260 wrote:I see that as helping. If you have experience, you would be more hirable, not less.

Please, not when you can hire a younger person for half the cost.

dwccrew;679260 wrote:It sounds like your beer driver friend is actually doing his job now (pre and post trip inspections). Sounds to me like the company corrected the problem of the employee not finishing or completing all of his work.

The company was MORE EFFICIENT before they went to hourly. They got more work done in less amount of time. In the free market, we strive for efficiency, don't we?

ernest_t_bass;679265 wrote:Please, not when you can hire a younger person for half the cost.

Exactly

dwccrew;679260 wrote:I think a special education teacher would not be subject to the same merit system. I personally believe that the BOE or state would have different standards for the SE teachers to abide by.

Then I see that as flawed. Every teacher, regardless of their subject matter, is just as important. Maybe not to all students, but to some. The measly OWA teacher that does little, may be the best influence his or her student has.

When you put a pay scale in place based on "worth," then the class system will enter the school workforce. Science teacher, who gets paid more b/c of the new merit system, will think they are better than the measly SPED teacher, and so-on.

Cry me a river, I know.

dwccrew;679260 wrote:

What a joke. Many people on this board have already experienced it, welcome to the real world. Hell, I was layed off from my previous job because of cutbacks. I am not saying you aren't worth X amount of dollars, but the reality of the situation is the money isn't there anymore.
.

My point is you are going to be disgruntled. That is the point.

Instead of being disgruntled, I am going to fight like hell to avoid it, which if you had the option, you would do the same.

dwccrew;679260 wrote:On a budget is the key here. And the budget has shrunk to so little, drastic changes must be made. If I was a young teacher, I'd welcome this change. My good friend is a high school math teacher and has been for the past 5 years. Due to layoffs and his low seniority status, he is losing his job. He can thank the union and the CBA for that. Althogh he may outperform his counterparts in his department, since his seniority is low, he gets let go. This is ridiculous; how does that improve the quality of education? Just because a teacher is experienced doesn't make them a better teacher. This is the flaw in the argument of CBA's helping keep the education quality up to par. It is an illusion, CBA's don't help anymore than if they didn't exist.

I WILL agree with this one, and see it as a flaw. There are many situation where I feel seniority should not be the overwriting circumstance.

Alleluia ….. sing to Jesus.

And as for the opening comment about Ohio 'working families opposing this bill', that is liberal speak for union workers oppose the bill. There are millions of Ohio working families that obviously, and quite correctly, SUPPORT such a bill.

Here is a post I made back in May '07 (on a different site) ....... applicable again now:

Teachers are, by education at least, professionals. As professionals they should be able to negotiate their own marketability. They should denounce the herd mentality of unionism that continues to institutionalize mediocrity and the expense of the customer (i.e. student) and work product (i.e. education). If you want to begin to change the system for the better you have to stare down the special interest group (NEA/OEA), you have to BE the professionals that your educational attainment says you are and that you claim to be, and thus decertify these unions that are crushing the system. Once that is accomplished then the real professionals in the group will be handsomely and commensurately rewarded, and the poor performers will go by the wayside. That's the way it is in all other 'Professions', and that is why all other 'Professions' continue to make significant advances in their fields of endeavor.
Strong medicine I know, and change is never easy, but it will occur one way or another.

QuakerOats;679304 wrote:Alleluia ….. sing to Jesus.

And as for the opening comment about Ohio 'working families opposing this bill', that is liberal speak for union workers oppose the bill. There are millions of Ohio working families that obviously, and quite correctly, SUPPORT such a bill.

Because they are stupid. This bill makes a huge hit directly at the middle class.

Never in my life did I think that the public would turn on people who make it their duty to educate them and keep them safe.

There WILL BE a ripple effect. This bill will KILL small communities.

Typical liberal mentality: if you disagree with their view, you are "stupid".

Great way to talk about the hardworking people who pay your salary.

Shame on you and that elitist bullshit.

ernest_t_bass;679318 wrote:There WILL BE a ripple effect. This bill will KILL small communities.

No it won't. That's union hyperbole to try and scare people into supporting their side of the issue.

Public sector employees cost more than private for 85 of 88 counties.

http://www.buckeyeinstitute.org/uploads/files/The%20Grand%20Bargain%20Is%20Still%20Dead.pdf

Writerbuckeye;679321 wrote:Typical liberal mentality: if you disagree with their view, you are "stupid".

Great way to talk about the hardworking people who pay your salary.

Shame on you and that elitist bullshit.

Here we go. Now I'm the villain.

Services will suffer, and once again. After someone calls 911, ask them what we are worth in pay?

Writerbuckeye;679323 wrote:No it won't. That's union hyperbole to try and scare people into supporting their side of the issue.

Union didn't tell me to say that. Our union is actually pretty weak. Economic principles taught me to say that. There are MANY small communities where the school is the largest employer. I could see as much as $200 less per pay check. That's less money in my pocket to spend, meaning more money I will need to save, etc.

That $400 out of pocket per month will end up being $600 or so due to personal cutbacks. Take that on a per employee basis, and that is less money. Yes, I understand "living within means," etc. But, when a factory (private sector) lays off or cuts wages, etc., does the town NOT see the same ripple effect? It's modern economics, friend.

OneBuckeye;679329 wrote:Public sector employees cost more than private for 85 of 88 counties.

http://www.buckeyeinstitute.org/uploads/files/The%20Grand%20Bargain%20Is%20Still%20Dead.pdf

Look who did your research, a conservative thinktank.

What private sector job am I supped to go to as a firefighter/paramedic?

Are you telling me that rent-a-cops are doing as good of a job as a public police officer? There's a reason they are looked at as a joke.

Less money in a public sector wallet means more money in a taxpayer's wallet.

jc10380;679315 wrote:Because they are stupid. This bill makes a huge hit directly at the middle class.

Never in my life did I think that the public would turn on people who make it their duty to educate them and keep them safe.

They are far from stupid. They understand quite well the ridiculous and unaffordable promises made by spineless politicians in return for votes. It is time to face economic reality, and pay for service in an affordable manner.

It has nothing to do with anyone "turning" on another; it has everything to do with math.