Discussion in 'General Education' started by czacza, Feb 25, 2018.
Feb 25, 2018
Janus case being heard in SCOTUS this week. Any thoughts?
I hope the plaintiff wins. I don't like the idea of anyone being forced to contribute their hard earned income to ANY organization whose viewpoints may not necessarily reflect their own. (Taxes excluded, that is a whole separate discussion.)
I think the plaintiff is likely to win, and that will be a big loss. Unions have brought us so many benefits.
Why exclude taxes? I may disagree with how the government spends “my money” but I must pay nonetheless.
No free lunch, as they say.
Unions have done good, but this particular union is a little too tied into the government.
Really? Im not seeing that at the state or federal level
Well, it's certainly not a private union. Of course, I'm not in that state and don't know the ins and outs of how it works there, but it's one thing to pay taxes. It's another to have to agree to certain political views in order to keep an unrelated job.
The current ruling is that unions can collect a ‘fair share’ from non union staff in exchange for collective bargaining. Their fees may not be used for political action. In my 18 years in my district, I know of only one person who went this route.
OK then I think non-union employees should have a different contract and not reap the benefits of collective bargaining or representation. I don’t know how that would work though.
I excluded taxes only for the sake of this discussion. Joining a union (and/or paying dues) should be voluntary. Taxes should not be.
I absolutely do not think paying union dues should be voluntary. In Ontario, its mandatory. When someone (who teaches) complains, I say, "Why don't you go work for a private school?" And they usually say, "They don't pay so well." Duh? Why do you think we get paid so well? The UNION!
I'm in a right to work state. It's irritating that some can choose not to pay union dues and get the same benefits as everyone else. IMO, those that choose not to join the union should get the "first offer" that the district makes in contract negotiations (salary, plan time, etc.). Then if they want to try to negotiate a better offer by themselves, they're welcome to. They shouldn't get the benefit of having the union negotiate for them.
But why? Union dues is what we pay for all of the work done for the good of the whole. Same thing with taxes.
That's right---and my union dues have done a lot more good for me than my tax dollars (at least as far as my quality of life is concerned!)
I don't look at it as getting the same benefits as everyone else. Sure, the district may opt to pay all employees - union members or not - on the same salary schedule and with the same employee benefits. However, that's the district's call. The union cannot dictate how non-union members are compensated by the district. Even if the district does compensate all employees the same, non-union members are not getting the same benefits from the union that it offers to its members. For example, non-union members are not getting the benefit of representation in meetings with administrators, nor are they getting member discounts, access to PD opportunities sponsored by the union, liability insurance, or legal representation. Unions offer a lot more to their members than collective bargaining. Just because someone doesn't want to take advantage of all of that, or just because they don't want to engage in the political action and possible strikes that unions sometimes lead, doesn't mean that they should be prohibited from receiving the compensation and benefits that the district has chosen to offer them.
I think what @GTB4GT is saying is that it is not fair to have an organization represent you with differing beliefs AND have to pay for it, especially if you don’t agree with their ideals. I, for one, don’t agree with a number of policies enacted in recent years by public school districts, which is one of the many reasons why I work at a private school instead. (FYI, my private school is not affiliated with any school district and so I don’t have to pay union dues or deal with bureaucratic nonsense.)
This is anecdotal, but public school districts in CA take out a lot: 2% for union dues, 8% for pension plans, 9-10% for healthcare, plus FICA (minus Social Security) and state and local taxes. This adds up, so much so that teachers can make 50-60% of their gross salary in some cases. To demonstrate, I currently make $55,000 as a 4th-year teacher and if I worked in a public school I would lose an automatic $5,500/year right off the top just from union and pension fees alone. When I initially interviewed for a public teaching job and all of the fees were explained to me, I laughed at the union rep and told them that’s not happening and walked out. I can do better investing in the private industry than investing in a 403b. Case in point, I made over $20,000 investing in cryptocurrencies in three months and $15,000 recently from other stocks. My portfolio continues to expand and I’m only 25. Why would I put someone else in charge of my retirement plan when I can do a much better job myself, but I digress.
The case can be made either way. However, the people against mandatory union fees, myself included, don’t like people having further say in what we do with OUR own money. We resent it when other (entitled) people think they have a right to our paycheck.
Well I don’t want to get shut down for being political, but there is very little I agree with what the current government does with my money, which I have to pay or go to jail; does that make those who agree “entitled?”
I am going to share a secret with you.This is not anectodal but one based on personal experience. Before becoming a teacher, I worked in business. In management. I have negotiated labor contracts on behalf of management and owners. With companies that had unions. And those that didn't. In all cases, management, knows EXACTLY what it will pay for wages and benefits and other terms of employment. It will never pay more than that figure and is willing to pay less. In NOT one single case that I was involved in DID a union EVER negotiate a better deal than it's non-union counterparts. In fact, the best deal ever negotiated was by a non-union group that was one of the best performing operations of its type in North America. It negotiated a deal worth almost 100% of the full value that we were willing to pay. And the owners were glad to pay it as they knew they would get significant ROI on this deal.
You can believe the union people if you want to. Of course, I'm fairly certain that your union leaders will tell you otherwise. However, if you have been involved in contract negotiations yourself, I'm willing to listen. Unions had a purpose in our country maybe 40+ years ago. But now they exist to make their leaders rich. And for no other reason.
Please read the above sentence in bold again. That is not speculation. Or hyperbole. If you have data to the contrary, please share it.
Teachers unions are not a branch of government, capiche?
My union dues basically paid for themselves. I was volunteering to advise a club for my school once per week before school. I wasn't getting paid for it. My union rep reached out to me, and said "Hey, that's a popular club you've got going. Would you like us to see if we can get it a stipend in place for it?" Surely enough, they were able to get me a stipend in less than a month's time. The amount of the stipend isn't enormous, but it's about equal to the same as what I pay in union dues per year so I view it as already having paid for itself.
I know our union reps work tirelessly negotiating the contract, and spend many, many nights negotiating with the board during negotiation season. I've never directly participated so I can't really say what goes on in those meetings, but I am willing to believe they are getting us a better deal than would be offered without negotiating.
I am going to share a secret with you. You are not the only one to have professional experience outside of education or to negotiate contracts.
I have negotiated contracts in both arenas.
And, why yes, I know unions (or associations as we call them in my state) are not a branch of government, by the way.
Separate names with a comma.