If your friends thought teaching was a job to get into for the money, they are ignorant. I don't see a problem with teachers notifying parents about detention. Parental involvement would greatly help with students ability to learn. I'm not sure why you have a problem with parents being notified. As far as not having a say in the curriculum it differs from district to district and even school to school. But I will say this, teachers that stick with it, learn the curriculum programs, and study the standards they are supposed to teach will find ways to have a say even within the program. It takes more training. When I started I thought the whole thing was just a script I was supposed to say. But with more training and taking a deeper look at the program from experts it helps, and you realize there is a way to really make almost anything work. Finally it helps to always keep in mind teachers should teach the standards and not a program. The program is just the 'how' to teach the standards. All of this stuff requires a lot of time, and way more than 40 hours a week.
Well we are talking about job security for the public sector, and the public sector was mostly protected from the recession. So people claiming the incoming layoffs to the public sector indicate that the public sector doesn't have good job security (relative to the private sector) are misrepresenting the facts. From Jan 2008 - May 2010, the public sector gained 590,00 jobs while the private sector lost 8 million. http://mercatus.org/publication/private-sector-job-losses-dwarf-government-gains
http://www.waow.com/Global/story.asp?S=14231018 <iframe title="YouTube video player" width="480" height="390" src="http://www.youtube.com/embed/yj9lto2fcIQ" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe>
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/42151681/ns/politics Judge temporarily blocks Wis. union law Opponents contend the state's open meetings law was violated MADISON, Wisconsin — A Wisconsin judge issued a temporary restraining order Friday blocking the state's new and contentious collective bargaining law from taking effect, raising the possibility that the Legislature may have to vote again to pass the bill. Lawmakers had passed Gov. Scott Walker's measure last week, breaking a three-week stalemate caused by 14 Senate Democrats fleeing to Illinois. Demonstrations against the measure grew as large as 85,000 people. The law bars most public employees from collective bargaining. Pushed by the Republican governor, the bill was aimed at plugging a $137 million state budget shortfall. A part of the measure also would require state workers to increase their health insurance and pension contributions to save the state $30 million by July 1. Dane County District Judge Maryann Sumi granted the restraining order in response to a lawsuit filed by the district attorney alleging that Republican lawmakers violated the state's open meetings law by hastily convening a special committee before the Senate passed the bill. Sumi said her ruling would not prevent the Legislature from reconvening the committee with proper notice and passing the bill again. Walker spokesman Cullen Werwie would not comment on whether the governor would push to call the Legislature back to pass the bill again, either in its current form or with any changes. Werwie said Walker was confident the bill would become law in the near future. "This legislation is still working through the legal process," Werwie said. Opponents of the law were hopeful the judge's ruling would lead to concessions. "I would hope the Republicans would take this as an opportunity to sit down with Democrats and negotiate a proposal we could all get behind," said Democratic Sen. Jon Erpenbach, one of the 14 senators who stayed in the neighboring state of Illinois for three weeks in an attempt to stop the bill from passing. The head of the state's largest teachers union said the Legislature should use this as a chance to listen to opponents of the measure, not vote to pass the same bill again. "Wisconsin's educators call upon the Legislature to take this as a clear signal that Wisconsinites will not tolerate backroom deals and political power plays when it comes to our public schools and other valued services," said Mary Bell, president of the Wisconsin Education Association Council. Dane County District Attorney Ismael Ozanne filed the lawsuit this week alleging the open meetings law was violated because 24 hours' notice wasn't given for a meeting of the special legislative committee convened to amend the bill.
"I would hope the Republicans would take this as an opportunity to sit down with Democrats and negotiate a proposal we could all get behind," said Democratic Sen. Jon Erpenbach, one of the 14 senators who stayed in the neighboring state of Illinois for three weeks in an attempt to stop the bill from passing. Kill the unions.
I do not understand this mindset. Have some unions gotten the upper hand over some businesses? IMO, yes. Even if you accept that as true, does that give a reason to kill the unions? NO. If you get rid of all unions, you wind up with a worker with no bargaining power trying to get the best deal from a business that holds all of the cards. This is sure to produce unfair results as well. In the case of Wisconsin there needed to be a flow of information to the union and the agreement could have be renegotiated with the economic realities of the day. This did not have to be the pissing contest we now have.
Business/Government offers what they are willing to pay, if it is worth it to the employee than they except. The results are not unfair because nobody is being forced to work (there is no slavery in America). BOth parties agreed to the arrangement. An employee can except the offer if the offer is worth it to them. As for bargaining power; The bargaining power of the employee is his/her skill set. If the company does not offer him/her enough (in the employee's eyes) they do not get his skillz.
It has already been pointed out repeatedly that the unions had agreed to all of the financial concessions asked for by the Walker Admin.. Walker still insisted on doing away with most collective bargaining.
And what is wrong with a group of employees collectively deciding what they consider to be a fair offer from the employer for their skills?
A government not recognizing a union is a financial concession. If the government does have to negotiate with a union then they can offer whatever they want to potential employees. Thus saving loads of money. ethically? An adult should want to get paid what their skills are worth, not what they can get by other colleagues bargaining their own skill sets. legally? Their is nothing wrong with forming a union. A person can quit for whatever reasons they want (their is no slave labor in America), so any group of employees can tell their employer 'give us all this or we all quit'. But what the public employees in Wisconsin are demanding is that the government recognize their union which is not their right. An employer is under no obligation to recognize/negotiate with an employee union.
Wrong. By Wisconsin's own laws they wouldn't have been able to pass anything that was an economic measure without the 14 missing Dems. So striking that from the contract couldn't be economic.
