Egypt, Bahrain...Wisconsin

[sabresrule30]

There are extremes for both areas. You can use examples to show where unions have abused their power, but can't use that to explain that all unions are like that. Correlation does not equal causation.

baby out with the bathwater

[miketheknife]

Sorry I thought we were commenting on the article above, which lists a horribly wasteful practice as standard procedure for the entire New York public school system, not a rare occurrence of one incompetent worker remaining on the job. Where were we discussing that again?

Do you know how many teachers the NYC system employs? How many are in that "rubber room" at any one time?

You mean how many are sitting around contributing absolutely nothing to the school system but getting a full paycheck anyway? More than there should be. You don't hear about things like this in non-union context. I guarantee if there's a dispute in our office that shit will be figured out and handled immediately, no one's going to get paid to sit around not contributing to the company.

That being said--I do agree with you guys that you can't lump all unions together.

[miketheknife]

In the interest of fairness I googled 'NYC rubber rooms' and came up with this link

http://www.nytimes.com/2010/04/16/nyregion/16rubber.html

Which is from last April and states that NYC is getting rid of the rubber rooms because of all this bad publicity, so that's great. I don't see any more recent link on how it's going but at least they identified the problem and started fixing it according to this article.

[miketheknife]

There IS a newer update that i missed

http://cityroom.blogs.nytimes.com/2011/03/11/most-teachers-in-disciplinary-limbo-have-returned-to-class

Which is great. I will shut up now.

[ptrain86]

If there is a rubber room to get rid of the rubber rooms. I'm in.

[DrTHE0P0LIS]

PS. Here's an article from that bastion of conservative, anti-union politics, The Village Voice. For those of you who have not hear of the Rubber Rooms or why people might not hold teacher's unions in the highest regard.

http://www.villagevoice.com/2007-04-17/nyc-life/class-dismissed/

and this is common practice?

happening nationwide in great numbers?


yeah, those are dumb and those people SHOULD lose their jobs, but lets not focus on what Unions have done for the american worker.

HAVE done is precisely why I'm not anti-union. I want to be, but then I think of Pullman, Haymarket, the WV Mine wars, and I can't bring myself to say that unions should be disbanded entirely. But I don't think that this is an isolated example. An extreme example, to be sure, but by no means isolated. It is extremely difficult to fire or even reprimand a union employee for all but the most egregious offenses. I don't care who you are, the fear of potentially losing your job is a motivator. For some it's a minor motivator and personal pride/dedication to your job/desire to excel in your field takes the forefront. For others it is the sole motivator. Take that away and plenty of people will gladly do the bare minimum and collect seniority-based raises until retirement. If I can't get paid more than the next guy on the assembly line for being more productive, why should I be more productive?

To quote my personal hero Peter Gibbons:

"My only real motivation is not to be hassled, that, and the fear of losing my job. But you know, Bob, that will only make someone work just hard enough not to get fired."

How much harder woudl Peter have been to fire if he was a unionized employee? How much lower would the "just hard enough" bar have been set? I think collective bargaining is fine. Great, even. But when the unions have the power to control the labor market rather than management, the scales simply tip the other way. Instead of artificially suppressed wages, we get artificially inflated wages. Instead of capricious firing, we have near-absolute job security and immunity from the consequences of our actions (I'm talking about performance, not layoffs). I simply feel that in many cases the unions got their taste of imbalanced power and some just ran with it to the point that the union itself became a business every bit as greedy, insular, and unconcerned with the greater good as the old enemy was. Unions are no longer representing the working man. The union represents the union, and the working man is simply their raison d'être - their justification for existence. And yes, without unions the old enemy would resurface very quickly. He never went away. He's just a bit more politically correct these days; got rid of his handlebar mustache and black top hat. Very few individuals or groups with the ability to shape market forces use that power to drive the market to the middle ground.

[Clem]

Here's a little something from the Oshkosh Northwestern:

http://www.thenorthwestern.com/article/20110321/OSH0101/303210029/1987&located=rss

Of note on page 2 are the union concessions the school district is looking for in order to balance their budget. In addition the wage freezes and contributing to insurance/pension that we've heard about, teachers will no longer receive 90 sick days PER YEAR.

And if I'm reading the article correctly, it seems like they are saying that any of the unused 90 days per year are paid back to the employee. So if there are 181 days in a school year and a teacher takes no sick days, are these Oshkosh teachers getting a year end "bonus payout" equal to half their salary? I just want to make sure I'm not misunderstanding this so that I know whether to categorize this as "the union looking out for the basic rights of the little guy" or "it's all for the children".

[sabresrule30]

Here's a little something from the Oshkosh Northwestern:

http://www.thenorthwestern.com/article/20110321/OSH0101/303210029/1987&located=rss

Of note on page 2 are the union concessions the school district is looking for in order to balance their budget. In addition the wage freezes and contributing to insurance/pension that we've heard about, teachers will no longer receive 90 sick days PER YEAR.

And if I'm reading the article correctly, it seems like they are saying that any of the unused 90 days per year are paid back to the employee. So if there are 181 days in a school year and a teacher takes no sick days, are these Oshkosh teachers getting a year end "bonus payout" equal to half their salary? I just want to make sure I'm not misunderstanding this so that I know whether to categorize this as "the union looking out for the basic rights of the little guy" or "it's all for the children".

90 days is excessive, Ill admit. Is this commonplace throughout the nation?

Whats the source of the report? I know its the newspaper, but where did they get their info?

[Clem]

Whats the source of the report? I know its the newspaper, but where did they get their info?

For fuck's sake, Sabres. Did you even read the article? The "source" is the Oshkosh School District.

[rabb]

uh, the only 90 days of anything I get is work

[Jammer]

90 days out of the required 181 days of a school year.

[sabresrule30]

Whats the source of the report? I know its the newspaper, but where did they get their info?

For fuck's sake, Sabres. Did you even read the article? The "source" is the Oshkosh School District.

No I didnt read the article. Were the sick days in lieu of some other benefit? 90 days is a shit-ton. I think I earn 1.5 days a month, not sure.

How about the school board, do they not deserve some of the blame for voting to accept that contract as well?

They may have given sick days in lieu of a pay raise.

[Clem]

They may have given sick days in lieu of a pay raise.

I'd wager that it was COLLECTIVE BARGAINING and the union "LOOKING OUT FOR THE LITTLE GUY" that brought these sorts of benefits. How the fuck is the school board going to reject a contract with your precious COLLECTIVE BARGAINING in place?

[sabresrule30]

They may have given sick days in lieu of a pay raise.

I'd wager that it was COLLECTIVE BARGAINING and the union "LOOKING OUT FOR THE LITTLE GUY" that brought these sorts of benefits. How the fuck is the school board going to reject a contract with your precious COLLECTIVE BARGAINING in place?

You hate unions, I get it. I dont. I think theyre necessary. You dont.

Agree to disagree.

While those 90 days are excessive, I dont think teachers in general deserve all the shit theyre taking, and union workers either, for ruining the economic recovery. Its clearly union-busting thats riding the wave of conservatism sweeping the country.


I dont forsake you the benefits you receive in your job. I dont know if your job has a public sector equivalent, but Id venture a guess and say that if it did, the wages would be considerably lower than in the private sector. You take the good with the bad dont you? You choose your poison so to speak. No collective bargaining in the private sector but increased wages..........

Im not trying to get into a pissing match with you Clem, you may think Im ignoring your point, but I clearly conceded it. I wont concede that unions are the reason this country is in the shape its in.

[ptrain86]

I live in Oshkosh and have taught summer school for them, not to mention did my student teaching there. There is no way that a teacher gets 90 sick days a year. Jesus. They may get around a total of 10 sick days and 3 personal days which is around the norm in this area with a day less or more depending on the district. I will read the article, but I guarantee the Northwestern either screwed it up or the reporter is just stupid.