I think you guys create a boogeyman out of unions because it's politically expedient. I don't see the bad side of it or how unions protect the weak because in my school poor teachers are bought out. Education is very important in my district. I don't want to get into specifics because you could narrow down my district very easily if I told you too many details. I'll just say my district within the last 5 years was the top district in the State of Ohio and we have been recognized by two national publications as exemplary. We have had a turnover ratio of 10 percent of our staff either by retirements or buy outs. If you are not performing you get a years salary and a handshake. It's taken as a thank you for trying gesture. We let go of a teacher this past year because he didn't fit the culture. This idea of protecting the weak is foreign to me but I do understand that it exists.

(06-30-2015 10:04 PM)Machiavelli Wrote:  I think you guys create a boogeyman out of unions because it's politically expedient. I don't see the bad side of it or how unions protect the weak because in my school poor teachers are bought out. Education is very important in my district. I don't want to get into specifics because you could narrow down my district very easily if I told you too many details. I'll just say my district within the last 5 years was the top district in the State of Ohio and we have been recognized by two national publications as exemplary. We have had a turnover ratio of 10 percent of our staff either by retirements or buy outs. If you are not performing you get a years salary and a handshake. It's taken as a thank you for trying gesture. We let go of a teacher this past year because he didn't fit the culture. This idea of protecting the weak is foreign to me but I do understand that it exists.

I dislike unions because they sent goons every night to destroy a building my father's company was completing (legally) without union labor.

A bunch of low IQ, Neanderthal thugs.

(06-30-2015 10:04 PM)Machiavelli Wrote:  I think you guys create a boogeyman out of unions because it's politically expedient. I don't see the bad side of it or how unions protect the weak because in my school poor teachers are bought out. Education is very important in my district. I don't want to get into specifics because you could narrow down my district very easily if I told you too many details. I'll just say my district within the last 5 years was the top district in the State of Ohio and we have been recognized by two national publications as exemplary. We have had a turnover ratio of 10 percent of our staff either by retirements or buy outs. If you are not performing you get a years salary and a handshake. It's taken as a thank you for trying gesture. We let go of a teacher this past year because he didn't fit the culture. This idea of protecting the weak is foreign to me but I do understand that it exists.

You fired a teacher because he "didnt fit the culture".

Wow. I would love to here how that is legal

You can let go of a teacher for any reason in Ohio in their first five years. They could have bad halitosis and they are gone. Piss off the wrong community member. Done. I always laugh out loud when people act like teachers have a job for life. It's simply not the case, at least in Ohio.

Prior to attaining tenure, a probationary teacher may be dismissed at the discretion of the school district, subject to contractual and constitutional restrictions. Laws other than those governing tenure will apply to determine whether a discharge of a teacher is wrongful. If a probationary teacher's dismissal does not involve discrimination or does not violate terms of the teacher's contract, the school district most likely does not need to provide notice, summary of charges, or a hearing to the teacher. - See more at: http://education.findlaw.com/teachers-ri...html#.dpuf

(06-30-2015 08:32 PM)Machiavelli Wrote:  I would counter by looking at the quality of life for those in public sector unions vs people who are not in unions at comparable jobs. It's a no brainer hands down win for those in a union.

I would not deny that. As long as one is comfortable with the public sector union paradigm that strong arms money from tax payers?...fine. Im not sure I would be comfortable with it. Id have to relinquish some of my principles to do be a part of that.

We had a tenured teacher who developed some back problems and got hooked on prescription drugs. It spiraled out of control. I always thought he should have taken a FMLA thing or something. He took the years salary handshake. Put it this way. Tenure no tenure. You can be bought out and if they want rid of you they can get rid of you.

(06-30-2015 10:37 PM)Machiavelli Wrote:  Prior to attaining tenure, a probationary teacher may be dismissed at the discretion of the school district, subject to contractual and constitutional restrictions. Laws other than those governing tenure will apply to determine whether a discharge of a teacher is wrongful. If a probationary teacher's dismissal does not involve discrimination or does not violate terms of the teacher's contract, the school district most likely does not need to provide notice, summary of charges, or a hearing to the teacher. - See more at: http://education.findlaw.com/teachers-ri...html#.dpuf

Im against tenure. And for the record so was my mother who taught school for 31 years.

I've seen too many things over my years that let me know how important tenure is to a family. I've seen coaches fired because they didn't play a board members kid. In my situation the school district could fire me because I have a sick kid. Save millions of dollars in insurance costs and blame it on another reason. How about a tax levy fails. You get rid of all teachers that make over a certain amount and pay a teacher out of college. You have to have tenure in my opinion, but even with it you can get rid of a teacher if you really want to.

(06-30-2015 10:58 PM)Machiavelli Wrote:  I've seen too many things over my years that let me know how important tenure is to a family. I've seen coaches fired because they didn't play a board members kid. In my situation the school district could fire me because I have a sick kid. Save millions of dollars in insurance costs and blame it on another reason. How about a tax levy fails. You get rid of all teachers that make over a certain amount and pay a teacher out of college. You have to have tenure in my opinion, but even with it you can get rid of a teacher if you really want to.

Wanna shocker. I'm pro tenure. I think teachers deserve the intellectual freedom tenure provides. Idealistic but a good teacher stretches you. Even if you don't agree. I had professors that would spew outrageous crap to make you think. It worked. People need to learn how to think and question.

(06-30-2015 10:27 PM)shere khan Wrote:  

(06-30-2015 10:04 PM)Machiavelli Wrote:  I think you guys create a boogeyman out of unions because it's politically expedient. I don't see the bad side of it or how unions protect the weak because in my school poor teachers are bought out. Education is very important in my district. I don't want to get into specifics because you could narrow down my district very easily if I told you too many details. I'll just say my district within the last 5 years was the top district in the State of Ohio and we have been recognized by two national publications as exemplary. We have had a turnover ratio of 10 percent of our staff either by retirements or buy outs. If you are not performing you get a years salary and a handshake. It's taken as a thank you for trying gesture. We let go of a teacher this past year because he didn't fit the culture. This idea of protecting the weak is foreign to me but I do understand that it exists.

You fired a teacher because he "didnt fit the culture".

Wow. I would love to here how that is legal

"Here"? It was probably your English teacher.

(06-30-2015 10:58 PM)Machiavelli Wrote:  I've seen too many things over my years that let me know how important tenure is to a family. I've seen coaches fired because they didn't play a board members kid. In my situation the school district could fire me because I have a sick kid. Save millions of dollars in insurance costs and blame it on another reason. How about a tax levy fails. You get rid of all teachers that make over a certain amount and pay a teacher out of college. You have to have tenure in my opinion, but even with it you can get rid of a teacher if you really want to.

The situations you are describing are administrative in nature and should not happen if a diligent process of review is in place before any "firings" occur. I am sure that on occasion those processes fail and that is unacceptable.

Even without tenure and union representation....there are so many steps required to fire anyone in the public sector that you have to admit that in the vast majority of cases you really have to be a royal fckup to get fired. Why would you be in favor of having a lousy tenured teacher in your ranks? Im for paying good teachers very well. I know it is a hard job if done with passion and dedication. I watched my mother work at least 2 hours per night(Sunday through Friday) for decades..grading work and preparing lesson plans. I have to say though that I know what she did was an exception... not the norm. She knew who the teachers were that as she said.."clock out at 4 and clock back in at 8." I expect Mach...You know them also. I have no compulsion to see that kind of teacher succeed financially. I want them gone from the classroom. Tenure allows poor teachers to benefit from mediocrity.

(06-30-2015 10:58 PM)Machiavelli Wrote:  I've seen too many things over my years that let me know how important tenure is to a family. I've seen coaches fired because they didn't play a board members kid. In my situation the school district could fire me because I have a sick kid. Save millions of dollars in insurance costs and blame it on another reason. How about a tax levy fails. You get rid of all teachers that make over a certain amount and pay a teacher out of college. You have to have tenure in my opinion, but even with it you can get rid of a teacher if you really want to.

I'm union-skeptical....but tenure I think is important in education, especially higher ed.

(07-01-2015 02:59 AM)RobertN Wrote:  

(06-30-2015 10:27 PM)shere khan Wrote:  

(06-30-2015 10:04 PM)Machiavelli Wrote:  I think you guys create a boogeyman out of unions because it's politically expedient. I don't see the bad side of it or how unions protect the weak because in my school poor teachers are bought out. Education is very important in my district. I don't want to get into specifics because you could narrow down my district very easily if I told you too many details. I'll just say my district within the last 5 years was the top district in the State of Ohio and we have been recognized by two national publications as exemplary. We have had a turnover ratio of 10 percent of our staff either by retirements or buy outs. If you are not performing you get a years salary and a handshake. It's taken as a thank you for trying gesture. We let go of a teacher this past year because he didn't fit the culture. This idea of protecting the weak is foreign to me but I do understand that it exists.

You fired a teacher because he "didnt fit the culture".

Wow. I would love to here how that is legal

"Here"? It was probably your English teacher.

Publick edumacation kreaytive spellins

entation....there are so many steps required to fire anyone in the public sector


This is simply not true and it's the zombie of all zombies. Now you may find certain systems that are so over burdened that administrators pick and choose their battles but there are no where near the protections that you assume. I have shown you laws that prove my point. They don't need a reason for a probationary teacher. In some systems that probabtion period can last up to 8 years. I can not say this enough. The misnomer that a public employee has a job for life is simply not true.