2010 Midterms AKA The Crying Game and lame ducks

OptimusZed

nexuscrawler wrote: »

RedTide wrote: »

nexuscrawler wrote: »

speaking of Nj maybe they wouldn't need a teachers union if the govt didn't do things like lay off all their teachers for like a week at the end of every school year

They wouldn't need a union if the government actually funded their pension obligations and there was a system in place that guaranteed that good teachers weren't crushed under heel for standing up for their students.

The problem with the bad teacher argument is that for every shitbird that you can't shake because they have a union behind them, theres another teacher thats doing an excellent job that the union kept the administration from running out because they became some principals personal vendetta.

or thats its easier to fire a good experienced teacher and hire a new kid for less cash

This is EXTREMELY common. Working for more than 7 years in one school in Pennsylvania is rare, because that's when the major pay raise comes in.

If I want to go on to get my PhD, I'd better have tenure first or I'm going to be out on my ass.

nexuscrawler

Demiurge wrote: »

What are the benefits of being a member of a union in the US aside from the bargaining tool? In Denmark, our unions also act as a safety net.

If you pay into the optional "A-kasse" you get wage protection if you get laid off in the amount of a minimum wage payout each month for up to 5 years. So say you get fired, your union will go "okay, we'll give you X amount of money which corresponds to a little below mimimum wage to keep you going until you find a new job"

Its exceedingly successful and some of the larger, more legitimate unions easily weathered the employment bust during the last 2 years for their members this way.

in the US?

Being union is basically the only way you'll ever get health insurance in a blue-collar job for one

shryke

Saammiel wrote: »

shryke wrote: »

You realise the biggest PACs and lobbyists are corporate, right? That's where all the money is.

And those guys are FAR better at influencing elections.

Ummm, this cycle they were fairly big, but unions are hardly absent from the lobbying scene. Here is the list from opensecrets. #1 through #4 are all corporate donations, but both 5 and 6 are unions, one of which is explicitly a public sector union and the other of which is a blend I believe.

Not to mention you can oppose the efforts by both groups to capture rents.

So you are against collective bargaining all together then?

Because if you are against both, there's absolutely no reason to single out just public sector workers and deny them the right to organize.

Hachface

OptimusZed wrote: »

Being a certified teacher is roughly akin to being an albino buffalo in purely numbers terms.

Slightly off topic, but is this actually true? Like, true in subjects other than math and science?

OptimusZed

shryke wrote: »

Saammiel wrote: »

shryke wrote: »

You realise the biggest PACs and lobbyists are corporate, right? That's where all the money is.

And those guys are FAR better at influencing elections.

Ummm, this cycle they were fairly big, but unions are hardly absent from the lobbying scene. Here is the list from opensecrets. #1 through #4 are all corporate donations, but both 5 and 6 are unions, one of which is explicitly a public sector union and the other of which is a blend I believe.

Not to mention you can oppose the efforts by both groups to capture rents.

So you are against collective bargaining all together then?

Because if you are against both, there's absolutely no reason to single out just public sector workers and deny them the right to organize.

Except of course the fact that they're government employees. Which obviously makes them less worthy of the right to organize, somehow.

Captain Carrot

Modern Man wrote: »

A politician who opposes a union might find himself out of office as a result of that union's actions.

Show me when that has ever happened. Unions helping a challenging Democrat win an extremely close race against the incumbent anti-union Republican don't count, because every group that helped the Democrat shares that.

Captain Carrot

Saammiel wrote: »

shryke wrote: »

You realise the biggest PACs and lobbyists are corporate, right? That's where all the money is.

And those guys are FAR better at influencing elections.

Ummm, this cycle they were fairly big, but unions are hardly absent from the lobbying scene. Here is the list from opensecrets. #1 through #4 are all corporate donations, but both 5 and 6 are unions, one of which is explicitly a public sector union and the other of which is a blend I believe.

So in other words, that doesn't contradict what shryke said in any way.

OptimusZed

Hachface wrote: »

OptimusZed wrote: »

Being a certified teacher is roughly akin to being an albino buffalo in purely numbers terms.

Slightly off topic, but is this actually true? Like, true in subjects other than math and science?

In Philadelphia we have people with emergency certificates (i.e. the holy-shit-we-need-a-teacher-and-there-aren't-any-more-grab-some-dude-off-the-street certification) teaching in 20% of classrooms last I knew. And that's just public schools. Charter schools can have up to 20% of their teachers with no certification whatsoever and Private/Parochial schools can hire whoever the hell they want.

English, history, etc are less lacking, but it's still pretty grim.

ElJeffe

It seems as if we're done discussing midterm elections, then.