• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Big Loss of Teachers Union in California

Fishstyx

DP Veteran
Joined
Sep 13, 2011
Messages
1,527
Reaction score
766
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Independent
Huge loss: teachers unions in California case - POLITICO.com

This case is a pretty big deal. Hope the movement spreads across the nation like a wild fire. Think the biggest is getting rid of statutory restrictions in firing d-bag teachers making extremely expensive and timely. The immediate dismissal of substandard teachers is a no brainer. The removal of the tenure system would help to prevent complacency in tenured teachers.
 
Huge loss: teachers unions in California case - POLITICO.com

This case is a pretty big deal. Hope the movement spreads across the nation like a wild fire. Think the biggest is getting rid of statutory restrictions in firing d-bag teachers making extremely expensive and timely. The immediate dismissal of substandard teachers is a no brainer. The removal of the tenure system would help to prevent complacency in tenured teachers.

Good. I think unions could be good, but more often than not they are more destructive.
 
Huge loss: teachers unions in California case - POLITICO.com

This case is a pretty big deal. Hope the movement spreads across the nation like a wild fire. Think the biggest is getting rid of statutory restrictions in firing d-bag teachers making extremely expensive and timely. The immediate dismissal of substandard teachers is a no brainer. The removal of the tenure system would help to prevent complacency in tenured teachers.

Tenure and and trial processes to fire teachers is the most idiotic thing ever. Teachers teachers should be hired and fired just like anyone else in the labor market. If anything public sector union contracts should be voted on by the tax payers during high turn out elections, not some piece of **** politician or suit who does not have the interests of the tax payers at mind.
 
Huge loss: teachers unions in California case - POLITICO.com

This case is a pretty big deal. Hope the movement spreads across the nation like a wild fire. Think the biggest is getting rid of statutory restrictions in firing d-bag teachers making extremely expensive and timely. The immediate dismissal of substandard teachers is a no brainer. The removal of the tenure system would help to prevent complacency in tenured teachers.

For ease in responding:

...Treu found that the statutes permit too many grossly incompetent teachers to remain in classrooms across the state — and found that those teachers shortchange their students by putting them months or years behind their peers in math and reading.

He ruled that such a system violates the state constitution’s guarantee that all children receive “basic equality of educational opportunity.” In a blunt, unsparing 16-page opinion, Treu compared his ruling to the seminal federal desegregation case Brown v. Board of Education, decided 60 years ago last month. “The evidence is compelling. Indeed, it shocks the conscience,” Treu wrote.

In adopting the language and legal framework of the civil rights movement, Treu gave a major boost to school reformers from both parties who have long argued that the current system dooms poor and minority students to inferior educations.

He might also have put further strain on the already-shaky alliance between teachers unions and Democrats.

In recent years, high-profile Democrats — up to and including President Barack Obama — have broken with their traditional union allies over issues such as charter schools, standardized testing and the feasibility of evaluating teachers by how well their students perform on standardized tests. But many other Democrats in state legislatures and Congress remain loyal to teachers unions. Those ties are especially strong in California, where the unions wield strong political influence. The ruling’s scorching finding that union policies violate students’ civil rights could put those longstanding loyalties to the test.

Indeed, even before the verdict, members of the plaintiffs’ team were talking confidently about plans to present their evidence to California Gov. Jerry Brown, a close ally of the teachers unions, to prod him into joining the reformers’ side, at least on key issues such as teacher tenure.

Reformers also plan to take the fight to other states, hoping the strong language of the ruling will prompt Democrats elsewhere to reconsider ties to teachers unions. They’re considering similar lawsuits in Connecticut, New Jersey, New Mexico, New York, Oregon and elsewhere. And they plan a relentless public relations campaign, backed by millions of dollars from reform-minded philanthropists, to bring moms, dads and voters of both parties to their side.

Jim Finberg, a lawyer for both major California teachers unions, said he wasn’t worried by the ruling or the coming public relations juggernaut. The case, he said, was all about “busting the teachers union,” not supporting children. “People who really care about education will see through that,” he said. “The truth will out.”

Randi Weingarten, president of the American Federation of Teachers, echoed those comments, accusing the plaintiffs of seeking to divide and conquer rather than support public schools. “The other side wanted a headline that reads ‘Students win, teachers lose,’ ” Weingarten said. “This is a sad day for public education.”

But Education Secretary Arne Duncan signaled his support for the ongoing campaign to reform hiring and firing laws. He noted that “millions of young people in America … are disadvantaged by laws, practices and systems that fail to identify and support our best teachers and match them with our neediest students.” And he called the ruling “a mandate to fix these problems.”

...

Though the ruling was couched as “preliminary,” there was nothing tentative about Treu’s opinion. He found “no dispute that there are a significant number of grossly ineffective teachers currently active in California classrooms” and that the legal system protects them by making it all but impossible for districts to fire even the worst teachers.
He also expressed outrage at a system that shields veteran teachers from layoffs, regardless of their competence. “The logic of this position is unfathomable and therefore constitutionally unsupportable,” he wrote.
What’s more, Treu added, evidence at trial showed that teacher protections embedded in California law disproportionately hurt black and Hispanic students, who are far more likely than their peers to be assigned truly bad teachers.

The California Federation of Teachers and the California Teachers Association plan to appeal to the state Supreme Court. Treu decided the disputed laws should remain in place pending that appeal. He will also take both sides’ comment under advisement before finalizing his ruling within the month...

More here:

Read more: Huge loss: teachers unions in California case - POLITICO.com

Let's hope is stands the challenge to the California SC.
 
Huge loss: teachers unions in California case - POLITICO.com

This case is a pretty big deal. Hope the movement spreads across the nation like a wild fire. Think the biggest is getting rid of statutory restrictions in firing d-bag teachers making extremely expensive and timely. The immediate dismissal of substandard teachers is a no brainer. The removal of the tenure system would help to prevent complacency in tenured teachers.

It is high time that we end all public employee unions. There is no reason that a public servant should not be held accountable to actually perform their assigned job as directed in an effetive manner. Unfiortunately, it seems that "better distribution" of good teachers is the "reform" plan rather than actually dismissing the underachievers. The current system is much like the Caltholic church deciding to simply move child molesters around instead of actually firing them and reporting their activiites to authorities.

But Education Secretary Arne Duncan signaled his support for the ongoing campaign to reform hiring and firing laws. He noted that “millions of young people in America … are disadvantaged by laws, practices and systems that fail to identify and support our best teachers and match them with our neediest students.” And he called the ruling “a mandate to fix these problems.”

The Education Department has been slowly drafting a plan to nudge states to better distribute effective teachers.


Read more: Huge loss: teachers unions in California case - POLITICO.com
 
Good. I think unions could be good, but more often than not they are more destructive.

Yeah, I mean look at how much worse working conditions have gotten since unions first formed.
 
Tenure and and trial processes to fire teachers is the most idiotic thing ever. Teachers teachers should be hired and fired just like anyone else in the labor market. If anything public sector union contracts should be voted on by the tax payers during high turn out elections, not some piece of **** politician or suit who does not have the interests of the tax payers at mind.

education shouldnt be a part of labor market
 
Yeah, I mean look at how much worse working conditions have gotten since unions first formed.

Safe working conditions have been codified. So if thats their only useful purpose, they're not necessary anymore. The union pendulum has swung way past the point of reason. Any objective observer can see it.
 
Safe working conditions have been codified. So if thats their only useful purpose, they're not necessary anymore. The union pendulum has swung way past the point of reason. Any objective observer can see it.

It's been my experience that most of the people supporting public sector unions are (or were) members of same. Hardly impartial.
 
Safe working conditions have been codified. So if thats their only useful purpose, they're not necessary anymore. The union pendulum has swung way past the point of reason. Any objective observer can see it.

I support doing away with tenure and being able to get rid of sub-par teachers, but, there are other things unions do and I dont support doing away with them entirely. Other than safe work places, unions and their contracts, ensure work is distributed fairly, work shifts arent changed arbitrarily, employees arent punished for non-cause, and these just name a few things.
 
Last edited:
Public school teachers should not be permitted to unionize in the first place, unless the taxpayers of each district get a direct vote on every union contract.
 
education shouldnt be a part of labor market

Yes it should.Teachers should be hired and fired just like anyone else in the labor market is. If they **** up then they should fired just like anyone else in the labor market is.If they excel at their job then they should be rewarded and or promoted just alike anyone else in the labor market is. Teachers are no more and no less sacred than any other employee in the labor market is. The education of our children is vastly way more important than the job security of any teacher.
 
Yes it should.Teachers should be hired and fired just like anyone else in the labor market is. If they **** up then they should fired just like anyone else in the labor market is.If they excel at their job then they should be rewarded and or promoted just alike anyone else in the labor market is. Teachers are no more and no less sacred than any other employee in the labor market is. The education of our children is vastly way more important than the job security of any teacher.

yes thats why education shouldnt be a part of any market.
 
Public school teachers should not be permitted to unionize in the first place, unless the taxpayers of each district get a direct vote on every union contract.

If it is possible to have the people vote on the contract, I would have a problem with that otherwise it would be between the union and the school board.
 
Public school teachers should not be permitted to unionize in the first place, unless the taxpayers of each district get a direct vote on every union contract.

why ?
 
Safe working conditions have been codified. So if thats their only useful purpose, they're not necessary anymore. The union pendulum has swung way past the point of reason. Any objective observer can see it.

Or, if they want to be around, how about they are only permitted to negotiate work conditions?
 

Because tax payers are the employers and the ones footing the bill.That should be blatantly obvious to anyone with a brain.
 

Because we pay their salaries, pensions, benefits, etc.. No public sector unions should be legal, unless those paying their salaries, the taxpayers, get a direct vote on their union contracts.
 
Because tax payers are the employers and the ones footing the bill.That should be blatantly obvious to anyone with a brain.

arent they a part of labor market ?
 
Or, if they want to be around, how about they are only permitted to negotiate work conditions?

That is all unions can do for Federal jobs.
 
Or, if they want to be around, how about they are only permitted to negotiate work conditions?

I firmly think public sector unions should be illegal. As far as the private sector, I'm fine with it as long as no one is forced to join if they don't want to.
 
I agree that it should be easier to get rid of bad teachers and keep them form being concentrated in low income/minority schools.

I also support the right of all workers to organize and unionize, including public sector employees. That right is protected by the first amendment. Teachers in particular, need protection from false accusations and being blamed for their student's pre-existing problems.

We all need to be very wary of the forces that are exploiting legitimate concerns about education quality to advance an anti-union and privatization agenda. Look at who is funding those campaigns, the support of the top funders is based on greed and lust for power, not a genuine concern about educational quality.

"....Here are some of the top millionaires and their organizations waging war on our education system:

– Dick DeVos: The DeVos family has been active on education issues since the 1990′s. The son of billionaire Amway co-founder Richard DeVos, Sr., DeVos unsuccessfully ran for governor of the state of Michigan, spending $40 million, the most ever spent in a gubernatorial race in the state. In 2002, Dick DeVos sketched out a plan to undermine public education before the Heritage Foundation, explaining that education advocates should stop using the term “public schools” and instead call them “government schools.” He has poured millions of dollars into right-wing causes, including providing hundreds of thousands of dollars into seed money for numerous “school choice” groups, including Utah’s Parents for Choice in Education, which used its PAC money to elect pro-voucher politicians.

– Betsy DeVos: The wife of Dick DeVos, she also coincidentally happens to be the sister of Erik Prince, the leader of Xe, the mercenary outfit formerly known as Blackwater and is a former chair of the Republican Party of Michigan. Mrs. DeVos has been much more aggressive than her husband, pouring her millions into numerous voucher front groups across the country. She launched the pro-voucher group All Children Matter in 2003, which spent $7.6 million in its first year alone to impact state races related vouchers, winning 121 out of 181 races in which it intervened. All Children Matter was found breaking campaign finance laws in 2008, yet has still not paid its $5.2 million fine. She has founded and/or funded a vast network of voucher front groups, including Children First America, the Alliance for School Choice, Kids Hope USA, and the American Federation for Children.

- American Federation for Children (AFC): AFC made headlines recently when it brought together Govs. Scott Walker (R-WI) and Tom Corbett (R-PA) and former D.C. Schools Chancellor Michelle Rhee at a major school choice event in Washington, D.C. AFC is perhaps the most prominent of all the current voucher groups, having been founded in January 2010 by Betsy DeVos. Working together with its PAC of the same name and the 501c(3) organization also lead by DeVos, the Alliance for School Choice, it has served as a launching pad for school choice legislation across the country. AFC made its mark in Wisconsin by pouring thousands of dollars into the state legislative races, donating $40,000 in the service of successfully electing voucher advocate Rep. Kathy Bernier (R) and donating similar amounts to elect Reps. Andre Jacque (R), John Klenke (R), Tom Larson (R), Howard Marklein (R), Erik Severson (R), and Travis Tranel (R). DeVos front group All Children Matter also donated thousands to many of these same voucher advocates. Altogether, AFC spent $820,000 in Wisconsin during the last election, making it the 7th-largest single PAC spender during the election (behind several other mostly right-wing groups with similar agendas).

- Alliance for School Choice (ASC): The Alliance for School Choice is another DeVos front group founded to promote vouchers and serves as the education arm of AFC. In 2008, the last date available for its financial disclosures, its total assets amounted to $5,467,064. DeVos used the organization not only for direct spending into propaganda campaigns, but to give grants to organizations with benign-sounding names so that they could push the radical school choice agenda. For example, in 2008 the organization gave $530,000 grant to the “Black Alliance for Educational Options” in Washington, D.C. and a $433,736 grant to the “Florida School Choice Fund.” This allowed DeVos to promote her causes without necessarily revealing her role. But it isn’t just the DeVos family that’s siphoning money into the Alliance for School Choice and its many front group patrons. Among its other wealthy funders include the Jaquelin Hume Foundation (which gave $75,000 in 2008 and $100,000 in 2006), the brainchild of one of an ultra-wealthy California businessman who brought Ronald Reagan to power, the powerful Wal Mart Foundation (which gave $100,000 in 2005, the Chase Foundation of Virginia (which gave $9,000 in 2007, 2008, and the same amount in 2009), which funds over “supports fifty nonprofit libertarian/conservative public policy research organizations,” and hosts investment banker Derwood Chase, Jr. as a trustee, the infamous oil billionaire-driven Charles Koch Foundation ($10,000 in 2005), and the powerful Wal Mart family’s Walton Family Foundation (more than $3 million over 2004-2005).

- Bill and Susan Oberndorf: This Oberndorfs use their fortune, gained from Bill’s position as the managing director of the investment firm SPO Partners, to funnel money to a wide variety of school choice and corporate education reform groups. In 2009, their Bill and Susan Oberndorf Foundation gave $376,793 to AFC, $5,000 to the Center for Education Reform, and $50,000 to the Brighter Choice Foundation. Additionally, Bill Oberndorf gave half a million dollars to the school choice front group All Children Matter between 2005 and 2007. At a recent education panel, Bill Oberndorf was credited with giving “tens of millions” of dollars of his personal wealth to the school choice movement, and said that the passage of the Indiana voucher law was the “gold standard” for what should be done across America.

- The Walton Family Foundation (WFF):The Wal Mart-backed WFF is one of the most powerful foundations in the country, having made investments in 2009 totaling over $378 million. In addition to financing a number of privately-managed charter schools itself, the foundation showered ASC with millions of dollars in 2009. It also gave over a million dollars to the New York-based Brighter Choice Foundation, half a million dollars to the Florida School Choice Fund, $105,000 to the Foundation for Educational Choice, $774,512 to the Friends of Educational Choice, $400,000 to School Choice Ohio, and gave $50,000 to the Piton Foundation to promote a media campaign around the Colorado School Choice website — all in 2009 alone. WFF’s push for expanding private school education and undermining traditional public schools was best summed up by John Walton’s words in an interview in 2000. An interviewer asked him, “Do you think there’s money to be made in education?” Walton replied, “Absolutely. I think it will offer a reasonable return for investors.” (He also did vigorously argue in the same interview that he does not want to abolish public education)...."
REPORT: Meet The Billionaires Who Are Trying To Privatize Our Schools And Kill Public Education | ThinkProgress
 
Because we pay their salaries, pensions, benefits, etc.. No public sector unions should be legal, unless those paying their salaries, the taxpayers, get a direct vote on their union contracts.

l find it too funny l think..

teachers dont pay tax ?
 
I firmly think public sector unions should be illegal. As far as the private sector, I'm fine with it as long as no one is forced to join if they don't want to.

Public sector unions are important to ensure proper work conditions are met. I do agree that no one should be forced to join a union but that would also mean that the union shouldnt be forced to defend them either.
 
Back
Top Bottom