Opinion of teachers' unions

[Franzl]

Teachers have a right to unionise. Simple as that.

Whether or not such a right exists......it's possible to have an extremely negative opinion of teachers unions (like I do), irrespective of the principle question.

[afleitch]

Teachers have a right to unionise. Simple as that.

Whether or not such a right exists......it's possible to have an extremely negative opinion of teachers unions (like I do), irrespective of the principle question.

Then why have an extremely negative opinion if you believe they have a right to form them? An 'extemely negative' opinion suggests that you see very little positive in them. Such a low tolerance threshold is usually reserved to those who feel an issue, group or concept has no basis or legitimacy

[Franzl]

Teachers have a right to unionise. Simple as that.

Whether or not such a right exists......it's possible to have an extremely negative opinion of teachers unions (like I do), irrespective of the principle question.

Then why have an extremely negative opinion if you believe they have a right to form them? An 'extemely negative' opinion suggests that you see very little positive in them. Such a low tolerance threshold is usually reserved to those who feel an issue, group or concept has no basis or legitimacy

Not necessarily. I think I can get behind the theory of it all...collectively bargaining in order to ensure fair pay for fair work....etc, etc.

The structures of the teachers union, though, and their effects on society, IMO, are almost exclusively negative.

I'd love a way to reform the unions without abolishing them. I tend to doubt any meaningful "reform" will happen with American teachers unions, so that's probably why I come accross as quite fed up with them.

[Mr. Taft Republican]

HP, I don't think government employees need a union like private sector's do.

[Хahar 🤔]

HP, I don't think government employees need a union like private sector's do.

Why should they not have the right to organize?

[opebo]

This thread is yet more evidence against the ridiculous claim that this forum leans left or has an American liberal bias.

Lefties can't hate the teacher's union?

No, not really.  It would be like a Christian hating Jesus.

[Grumpier Than Uncle Joe]

This thread is yet more evidence against the ridiculous claim that this forum leans left or has an American liberal bias.

Lefties can't hate the teacher's union?

No, not really.  It would be like a Christian hating Jesus.

Gotcha.....thanks for making my mind right.

[Roemerista]

If you didn't HAVE to join a teacher's union, well, then I would be fine with it. But as that is not the case in good ol' MA, I really have a low opinion of them.

[feeblepizza]

Horrible people, the lot of them (well, management, at least).

[opebo]

If you didn't HAVE to join a teacher's union, well, then I would be fine with it. But as that is not the case in good ol' MA, I really have a low opinion of them.

You don't have to join one, MQuinn. 

[The Dowager Mod]

Yup all of us are horrible greedy leeches.

[Franzl]

Yup all of us are horrible greedy leeches.

No, I never claimed that individual members of the teachers unions are the problem.

[afleitch]

Yup all of us are horrible greedy leeches.

No, I never claimed that individual members of the teachers unions are the problem.

Yet you have problems with the unions; which is the collective sum of it's members. It's perfectly reasonable to dislike leaders and governance of a union (I know I do with mine) but to say you hate the union because of it's leadership is a bit of a slight against the people who make up that union.

[Associate Justice PiT]

Yup all of us are horrible greedy leeches.

No, I never claimed that individual members of the teachers unions are the problem.

Yet you have problems with the unions; which is the collective sum of it's members. It's perfectly reasonable to dislike leaders and governance of a union (I know I do with mine) but to say you hate the union because of it's leadership is a bit of a slight against the people who make up that union.

     The topic is called "Opinion of teachers' unions", but that doesn't mean everyone will answer it in reference to the sum total of their members. To do so would be to make this a rather drab topic, considering the diversity of people in teachers' unions, like any other group.

     To put it more plainly, I am rather neutral on teachers in general. I am rather neutral on most groups, aside from ones that voluntarily self-identify with repugnant ideas, causes, & actions. I would qualify Klansmen or child molestors as being HPs in general.

     My point is, to answer the question as referring to the sum total of the members of teachers' unions ultimately makes the question less to do with teachers' unions & more to do with the answerer's value judgments in re groups. I highly doubt that the poster of the topic intended replies to be biased in such a fashion.

[Mr. Taft Republican]

HP, I don't think government employees need a union like private sector's do.

Why should they not have the right to organize?

Because the government is not capable of perpetrating on it's employees what has happened in the private sector.

[Gustaf]

Among all the unions, they are my least favorite.  While I would not go so far as to favor stripping them of their right to organize (though I have fantasized about it in my angrier moments), they desperately need to change their structure in a way that doesn't put so much emphasis on seniority which all too often favors older, frequently incompetent teachers at the expense of younger, more talented ones who are usually the last to be hired and the first to be fired in a budget crunch.  While it isn't so much of a problem in other unions, when it concerns educating children it is downright despicable.  And I lay much of the blame for the poor quality of public schools at the teachers unions' doorstep.  Too many teachers are not much better educated than their students -and yet they're still there, teaching.  

Oh and vouchers are obviously not a workable idea on a large scale. Anyone that disagrees should take a look at american universities right now under student loans and the semi-public university system... It would be just like that.  You'd just wind up with us subsidizing increasingly expensive schools indirectly through vouchers and/or the 'private' schools that accepted vouchers becoming more like the dumbed down, test-driven, overly bureaucratic school systems that parents fled in droves initially. Why so many 'small government conservatives' and 'libertarians' think they're a serious long term solution strikes me as a pretty severe case of cognitive dissonance honestly.

Yeah, it isn't as if vouchers exist as a working system anywhere.

I don't like unions for public employees in general.

[Grumpier Than Uncle Joe]

Yup all of us are horrible greedy leeches.

No, I never claimed that individual members of the teachers unions are the problem.

No, but TG is understandably a bit upset with what's going on.  She should know none of this is personal toward her.  In fact, I'm not sure anyone here has bad-rapped teachers......nor should they.

[tmthforu94]

Somewhere in the middle, but I'd lean towards FF.

[Roemerista]

If you didn't HAVE to join a teacher's union, well, then I would be fine with it. But as that is not the case in good ol' MA, I really have a low opinion of them.

You don't have to join one, MQuinn.  

ROTC instructor in "hot water" for refusing to pay dues, because he believed that his position was not classified amongst "classroom teachers"
http://www.telegram.com/article/20100611/NEWS/100619956/1116

He was not a member of the Union but because of the Union's existence "he benefited from them" and "had" to pay. He was actually suspended upon Union request for a time, but was not fired. This was not  because he wasn't a dues paying member, rather because being ROTC put him in a special category.

You are right you do not have to join a teacher's union, that is if you do not wish to be a teacher: “At the end of the day, there's a strong rationale that (Maj. Godin) and the other ROTC instructors should not be subject to these rules."

Rules refering to of course, the reasioning that they have to pay because their employment is benefited from the existence of the Union.

[Torie]

I cast my vote.

[Filuwaúrdjan]

My Grandad was a member of one for getting on forty years (thanks, ultimately, to the miners union as it paid for his training), so yeah.

[Nym90]

Father was the head of the local teachers' union for many years.

[Grumpier Than Uncle Joe]

Father was the head of the local teachers' union for many years.

And I'm sure he did a fine job for his members and a fine job as a teacher........no one is saying they overall aren't good people doing a good job who deserve compensated......but the non-salary and legacy costs have to be trimmed.  They're just not sustainable.  And tenure must go (but I don't think that's an issue they're addressing....unless I missed it)

[opebo]

Father was the head of the local teachers' union for many years.

And I'm sure he did a fine job for his members and a fine job as a teacher........no one is saying they overall aren't good people doing a good job who deserve compensated......but the non-salary and legacy costs have to be trimmed.  They're just not sustainable.  And tenure must go (but I don't think that's an issue they're addressing....unless I missed it)

Tenure's at the university, and almost unheard of nowadays.  We're all discussing public school teachers.

[© tweed]

they are disappointing to the extent that they are internally undemocratic, which is an unfortunate problem in just about all labor organizations today and provides the business class opposition with those painfully useful stereotypes that we constantly hear about: Big Labor's "union bosses" tending to their "political dynasties", etc.