Re: Educating teachers who never leave the classroom

More | Report Post

On 11/15/09, Union vs. No Union wrote:
> I agree that unions are responsible for many things but
> having been part of
> a non-union state I still had a duty free lunch and a
> planning period daily. Luckily, I have never had an
> power hungry administrator. When I was in a union state
> I taught everything right down to art, music and p.e.
> and my planning time was once a week. However, I did
> have a duty free lunch and never went one year without
> a raise. Now in my former non-union state teachers will
> most likely lose 10 days of pay, which they found out
> about AFTER they signed their contracts. Perhaps I am
> wrong but at least what I seem to be finding out now in
> OH that there appears to be some sort of hierarchy that
> exists for school employees. For example, if a para
> position were to be posted then those already working
> as paras would be given first consideration before some
> "new" person in the district would be given a
> crack at the job regardless of qualifications. If I am
> a credentialed teacher with a Master's degree and
> plenty of classroom experience, why is a person more
> qualified than I am simply because he/she has been in
> the district longer. What is wrong with the most
> qualified person being the right person for the job
> rather than the next person in line?
>

You are absolutely right about this. The districts in
Ohio, at least in NE Ohio, will always hire from within
and only if there is no one qualified from within will
they open a position to a new person to the district. You
could have the highest credentials and a reference from
the president and they would still hire from within. To
me, this is a huge, huge dis-service to the children we
are supposed to be looking out for.

>
>
> On 11/15/09, Cate wrote:
>> You are 100% correct. Teachers would still be working
>> in "Little House on the Prairie" 1-room
>> school houses if unions hadn't stepped up. We would
>> still have 45 in our first grade classes. And, kids
>> would be allowed to beat us up if the unions weren't
>> there to set the laws. You wouldn't have planning
>> periods and duty free lunches, also. I will happily
>> pay my dues EVERY year!
>>
>> On 11/12/09, Yes wrote:
>>> Yes, it is true, law does not allow funds of union
>>> dues to go to political action, unless the member
>>> decides it.
>>>
>>> I don't agree with 100% of the stances
>>> either....but if it comes down to no union or
>>> union, I'll take membership, every time. I've been
>>> too much administrator power grab and bad decisions
>>> in my near 20 year career that can ruin a teacher's
>>> career in its tracks to not be a part of a group
>>> that can protect the individual. Teachers have put
>>> in too much time and effort in their education and
>>> craft to have it destroyed by an administrator or
>>> board.
>>>
>>> On 11/11/09, OEA member wrote:
>>>> You do not have to contribute to the political
>>>> action committee (PAC) of most teacher unions.
>>>> That is normally an option.
>>>>
>>
>>
>>>>> On 11/07/09, Tanisha wrote:
>>>>>> I used to work in a charter school where
>>>>>> there was no union. Now, thank god, I work in
>>>>>> a school district. I make an amount of money
>>>>>> I can live on, have good benefits, get to
>>>>>> attend professional development,and best of
>>>>>> all can advocate for my students with out
>>>>>> fear of retribution from administrators who
>>>>>> are only out to make money. We need our
>>>>>> unions! Anyways, I support all those issues
>>>>>> that the NEA supports. Go NEA!
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
 

Posts on this thread, including this one