EARTH SHATTERING NEWS ALERT: Teachers' Union Busting in Philly

[PCIntern]

http://www.philly.com/philly/blogs/school_files/SRC-cancels-teachers-contract.html


In a stunning move that could reshape the face of city schools, the Philadelphia School Reform Commission voted Monday to unilaterally cancel its teachers’ contract.

The Philadelphia Federation of Teachers was given no advance word of the action — which happened at an early-morning SRC meeting called with minimal notice — and which will certainly result in a legal challenge to the takeover law the SRC believes gives it the power to bypass negotiations and impose terms.

PFT spokesman George Jackson said that union had no comment “at this time.” He said PFT President Jerry Jordon would respond after noon.


MORE AT THE LINK...This is a Big Fucking Deal.

[CK_John]

1. There will be a lot of whining and OMG they can't do that. But.....

there will be no action since teacher unions rarely have strong support.

[daleanime]

20. Then it's pass time that they got some support....

if we don't value our teachers, what do we value?

[WinkyDink]

28. Uh....The entire Democratic machine and Democratic voters will back the union. You know nothing.

[H2O Man]

64. Not

[belzabubba333]

2. this is about forcing teachers to pay something towards their health care

[Demit]

4. And canceling benefits to retired teachers too.

It's the old "Haha, you fucked up, you trusted us" routine of promising benefits deferred for labor now. Never gets old, does it.

[msanthrope]

7. The benefits aren't cancelled, but switched to a health plan run by the district. Rx

dental and vision will not be automatically covered, but available.

[Demit]

11. They're canceling previously-free benefits, prescription as well as dental and vision.

If it used to be paid-for and now isn't, I hardly see the point of your distinction.

[Orrex]

13. My local restaurant used to offer free refills on coffee, now they charge $0.25.

They haven't cancelled refills; they've stopped offering them for free. But they're still readily available.

[quakerboy]

34. they cancelled free refills

[Demit]

36. So, it canceled FREE refills. FREE refills are no longer a benefit there.

They have ceased to be. They are bereft of life, they rest in peace, they are no more. They have rung down the curtain and joined the bleedin’ choir invisible. They are ex-free refills.

[Orrex]

46. In reply #11 you claimed that "they're canceling previously-free benefits"

That is, the benefits aren't cancelled at all, which IMO is the central point.

A store sells shoelaces for $2.00 per pack and then raises the price for the same shoelaces to $2.50 per pack. They haven't "cancelled" the $2.00 shoelaces; they simply don't offer the same shoelaces at that price.

Assuming that the benefits now offered are substantially identical to the previous benefits, then they haven't been cancelled except by your antics of pedantic semantics.

[kwassa]

55. They aren't canceled. They are only resting.

[Demit]

61. You've run rings round me logically.

[dsc]

70. but you didn't pay for the refills that they decided not to offer

Teachers over the years have bargained to trade pay raises in the present for benefits in retirement. In short, they paid for those health care benefits by forgoing money while they worked.

[WinkyDink]

31. Are you speaking from knowledge, that this is happening in Philly school districts?

[Demit]

39. I read the article at the link.

"The benefits change would also have a significant impact on retirees. The existing PFT Health and Welfare Fund, which has about $40 million built up in it, has opted to pay for retired workers’ prescription, dental and vision benefits. The district will not continue that practice, officials said."

[msanthrope]

50. They aren't cancelling benefits. They are still available, but not for free. nt

[belzabubba333]

9. yea youre correct theyre screwing them both

[WinkyDink]

29. Will not happen. The state handles pensions, not individual districts.

[Arkana]

41. Right, because they didn't already.

Oh, wait, they did, and you're a liar.

[belzabubba333]

52. what did i lie about?

[haele]

51. Will it increase the current retiree's pensions to pay for the costs that they now have to pay?

RANT

This is a major problem to a teacher who retired back when they didn't also get to pay into social security, and still a significant problem for teachers whose pensions are just about in line with social security.
My father was a 30 year retired teacher (because he couldn't get a tenured position until he was in his late 30's) who could have opted for the "free" medical, dental, vision, and long-term care retirement package his district offered back in the 1980's (in lieu of paying into SS and FICA), his pension would only have been $2000 a month.
Because he didn't, because he had other options like an equally hard-working spouse, his pension ended up being $2500 a month.
He had enough social security and FICA with the other non-teaching jobs he had worked back before he was tenured to make ends meet to qualify for SS and Medicare. But he was in a rather unusual position compared to most of his fellow teachers - especially many of his old-school male colleagues who had a stay-at-home spouse because the $25K - $35K a year job in the late1980's/early 1990's was enough to keep a house and raise a family fairly comfortably.

Most retirees who depend on a pension expect that the bargain they had with the school district be kept, especially if the compensations, the amount of money the district was supposed to have put aside for the medical costs, etc had been agreed to. For the most part, these teachers aren't living high off the hog in retirement, going on international travel for a month every year, with winter homes in the Bahamas and a summer vacation timeshare in Wyoming to bring the grand-kids to.

Most of them are lucky if they have the house paid off - and that and a couple IRAs or T-bonds are the most valuable investments they will hopefully be able to leave to their heirs.

It's always "interesting" to see how these official and oh-so-responsible fiscal organizations can get away with not providing a just compensation to the employee while they are working in the name of providing a pension and benefits for after retirement, and then deciding not to pay that employee what was promised when it comes time to do so. "Oh, they're nothing but a burden...there's no value to paying them anything now, they aren't doing anything for us...just sucking up taxpayer money".

Well, assholes, if you paid them full freight up front in lieu of the pension promise, you'd have had to pay them the burdened wage out of pocket at that time instead of passing it on as a book-keeping figure to put in the line at the end of the year after you sucked the interest off the holding period of the allocated funding.

That means in 1980, instead of paying all those teachers a beginning salary of $12 - $15K a year, you should have been paying them $17 - $20K a year - and paying into that SS and FICA every month. And then, only then, you can now complain about "poor lifestyle choices", as if being anything but an investment manager or venture capitalist was a bad lifestyle choice.
But no, if you paid your teachers and other labor what they were actually worth at the time without cheating on the pension and health benefits, you couldn't play bookkeeping games with taxpayer funds and pretend you had a good enough budget you could give board members, advisers, and administrators obscenely high wages, could you?

Hypocritical sack of shit bean counters.

RANT/

Haele

[belzabubba333]

53. i agree, it's a theft and theyre gonna steal that pension money and give it

to the pirates of coporate america

[malthaussen]

3. "No comment at this time."

"Since we were totally unprepared for such a move, we are completely fucking stunned and words fail us."

This is getting ridiculous.

-- Mal

[fadedrose]

5. Unions are the big trouble

and can be blamed for much of what is wrong.

They don't stick together.

The teachers should be supported by the bus companies, food servers, cleaning people, cops, firemen, etc.

And the way the corporations are making fortunes while workers are earning less than they ever did is also a problem for the unions....why no strikes any more?

Short of the unions getting their balls back again, the only other thing that would help is a stock market crash with lots of windows in skyscrapers handling a lot of the problem... before the guillotines in another post take care of grumblers like me...

http://www.democraticunderground.com/10025627213

[msanthrope]

6. As a former member of this union, I am not surprised. The union played with

fire over the contributions issue, and they lost.

[badtoworse]

8. Did anyone seriously believe that free health insurance would continue indefinitely?

Everyone is paying at least part of their health insurance costs. Why should the teachers get a pass?

[belzabubba333]

10. "Why should the teachers get a pass?" while youre pointing out that they get too much

someone less fortunate is wondering why do you get so much. should we let them decide how much salary youre worth?

[Demit]

12. No, everyone is quite familiar with the misery-loves-company aspect of the American people.

Let's all race to the bottom & see who wins!

[YoungDemCA]

14. Are you on the right forum?

nt

[jeff47]

15. Health insurance is just compensation, not magic pixie dust.

People are paid in a variety of ways:
-Money
-Health insurance
-Life insurance
-Vacation time/Time off
-Stock options/similar investment vehicles
-Retirement plans/benefits
-Access to a credit union or other "deals" from businesses

and so on.

"Free health insurance" just means they're getting paid more in health insurance, and getting paid less in those other methods of payment. It isn't some sort of magic that absolutely must be paid by the individual.

If the school district took away $500/mo in salary, how would you react? That's exactly what this is - it's a pay cut. It's just a cut in insurance instead of a cut in salary.

[TxVietVet]

32. You've explained it quiet well.

I worked for many years under union contracts. ALL BENEFITS, including health insurance, is part of the wage package. When the cost of our health insurance went up, our raises or money from our hourly wage was used to make up the difference. The teachers aren't getting anything "free". They are getting raped by the school board. I usually lost up to .50 cents an hour when changes came. Our health insurance covered medical, dental and pharmacy.

[marions ghost]

48. Right

---!

[Scuba]

69. Finally, somone gets it. Thanks jeff47.

[TBF]

16. When was health care ever free Skippy?

While you are busy shipping jobs to Sri Lanka and cutting every salary as much as you can (except for those at the executive table) actual workers are paying through their labor for every single benefit they get (which seem to be fewer and fewer on a daily basis).

Next we'll discuss raising the minimum wage and see how you react ...

[badtoworse]

18. I support raising the minimum wage

[daleanime]

22. To?

[badtoworse]

24. I'd like to see some studies of the expected impact at various levels.

Off the top of my head, maybe $10. I think that the current $7.25 federal minimum is too low, but I'm not committed to a particular number.

[daleanime]

30. Too low.....

and you want to shackle individual workers with paying for health care profits?





Is Badtoworse your posting name or your hope?

[badtoworse]

37. They're already shackled with it through the ACA

How many places paying minimum wage offer any benefits at all?

BTW, what's your number?

[daleanime]

44. How many jobs 'offer' benefits at all?

In general the whole concept is being junked to allow for better sifting of funds upstairs.



Me? I favor a minimum of $15, a maximum of 4 or 5 million(should be enough to squeak by on), and removing profit from the health care system entirely.

[badtoworse]

49. If the maximum were implemented, what should be the disposition of the money not paid to executives?

Would your maximum apply to sports figures and entertainers?

As for the $15, I'd be personally fine paying the increased costs that would follow (waiters, checkout clerks, etc.), but I wonder what the impact would be on businesses, especially small ones. As the minimum wage gets higher, there will be more businesses that cannot afford to retain staff and the impacts become negative on the economy as whole. It's an optimization exercise which is why I said I'd like to see studies.

[daleanime]

67. Studies are available....

most studies not funded by corporate interest show the impact on business, staffing and prices, to be minimal.


For income over the maximum, we would go back to pre-raygun tax rate. 70% for income over 4 million. It would do the budget good. And yes, I would include athletes, musicians, artist, etc...




What would business do with the extra money not given to executives? After paying a living wage to their employees, maybe they could cut their prices? Have you seen what it cost to take a family of four out to the ball game?

[A Simple Game]

25. Did anyone believe a party to a contract would not live up to that contract?

Maybe I am reading your post wrong but you seem to be blaming the union for taking an offer during contract negotiations, but what of the other side? If it was not feasible that the obligations you offered could not be met why were they offered? That is negotiation in bad faith if done knowingly. This problem had to be known for years and the can was just kicked down the road in hopes of a miracle.

I blame the party that offered what it knew it couldn't afford and then reneged.

[badtoworse]

40. I do not believe there is a contract currently in place, so there is no bad faith

That article said they have been without a contract for 21 months. My interpretation of this is the city is taking the position that free health insurance won't be available in any future contracts.

[A Simple Game]

58. I was referring to the former contract(s) when the benefits in question were negotiated.

Rereading my post I see I didn't make that clear. What I meant was the city shouldn't have let it get this bad. They should have been harder in their previous contract negotiations. But I still know one thing, if you are foolish enough to offer it the union would be fools not to take it.

But yes the contract ran out last summer which should leave the former contract in place until a new one is signed or the union is disbanded or management cancels the contract. I haven't kept up on this stuff so things may have changed in the last few years.

But this appears to be obvious union busting on the part of the City. Teachers unions seem to be targets for many municipalities lately and the City seems to be trying to gain the most cuts from them. Concessions should have been sought in each of the last few contracts if it was known there were going to be future problems and let's face it, if the City didn't know there were going to be future problems at least 10 years ago they weren't doing their jobs. Anyone that didn't see what was happening with medical costs and still negotiated these costs out for over 5 years is a fool and had to have had their heads in a dark hole. Only a lazy negotiator would even offer anything as a pay it forward option.

But Philly is not the only one getting into trouble with the pay it forward contracts, it's happening everywhere. We are seeing the same problem in my area with teachers, county workers, town and village workers, etc. It boils down to lazy negotiators passing the buck down to the future negotiators which leave the future negotiators with a rock and a hard place to negotiate from.

[badtoworse]

62. No argument about city negotiators not doing their jobs

The fact that previous negotiators did a crappy job isn't really relevant. The city is where it is and the current negotiators have to clean up the mess. The reality is that the costs of certain benefits, like free health care insurance, are exceeding the ability of many towns and cities to fund. In such a situation, the town or city has little choice but to take the action that Philadelphia did.

The union people don't want to face this, but they are paid by taxpayers who many times are struggling themselves to make ends meet. Where is the money supposed to come from when the tax base is tapped out?

[A Simple Game]

63. The fact that the previous negotiators did a crappy job is very relevant.

If they had not been so lazy and done their homework they wouldn't have caused the situation to get to this point. But as you say most are in the same situation and sadly something has to be done now.

The same is happening with accumulated sick, personal, and vacation days in my area. No one was smart enough to bank for these future expenses or they stopped banking or stole the money to cut tax increases.

I think we are near total agreement on this subject, thanks for the discussion.

[Spitfire of ATJ]

26. Because teachers matter.

[WinkyDink]

33. Because teachers historically have been paid less than other sectors (even factoring in the yells

about "BUT...SUMMER!!&quot .

Moreover, all contracts were---get this---COLLECTIVELY BARGAINED.

IT TOOK TWO TO TANGO.

[quakerboy]

38. Did anyone seriously believe that our Minimum wage would continue indefinitely?

Around the world, everyone else is making much less, why should Americans get a pass?

Hot digity, i think you've got it. Tear it all down. CEO's deserve money, not people, and so our current system must continue to change!

[Orsino]

56. That's how wingnuts always attack every union.

Why should workers retain benefits they fought for? Because they fucking unionized, and why the hell hasn't everyone?

[badtoworse]

57. When does the taxpayers' ability to pay for the benefits become an issue?

Or is that irrelevant? Is it OK if the city has to cut social services to the elderly, the homeless and others to pay the open ended costs of providing free health care?

[Orsino]

74. After the wealthy are taxed.

The money exists. The Right just pretends it's untouchable because the richest families have it.

[badtoworse]

75. Sounds great. Put the taxes in place and the city is in a position to deal,...

...but right now, it has to deal with fiscal reality as it currently exists.

[Orsino]

78. Raise taxes right now.

Continue deficit spending to meet obligations.

[badtoworse]

79. "Continue deficit spending to meet obligations." - That is how Detroit got to where it is today.

Why would any city want to follow Detroit's lead?

[Orsino]

80. Detroit got where it is today because we allowed predators to descend on it.

They didn't have to dismantle the city for profit, but deficit scolding was their excuse.

[badtoworse]

81. That's baloney. They were about $15 billion in debt with little tax revenue.

They kept borrowing to fund operating deficits instead of reducing spending to what they could afford. Eventually, they maxed out their credit and became insolvent. That was sheer stupidity. It wasn't the "predators" fault that Detroit was being managed by morons..

[Orsino]

82. Predation ruined the economy, and more predators descended on the bones of Detroit.

http://mediamatters.org/research/2013/12/04/fox-ignores-facts-to-blame-pensions-for-detroit/197137
http://theeconomiccollapseblog.com/archives/bankrupt-decaying-and-nearly-dead-24-facts-about-the-city-of-detroit-that-will-shock-you

A lack of investment in a changing economic landscape led to the debt, and the bankruptcy will steal even more from the people of the city.

[badtoworse]

83. We're not going to agree on Detroit

The job of the city managers is to play the hand they were dealt and if the tax base is dwindling, it was their job to deal with it.

In the end, I don't see borrowing money to continue providing free health insurance to city employees as either fiscally or politically prudent. Beyond that, the chances of getting more tax revenue are sketchy too. At best, your idea is a long shot. Who do you think would back it?

[Orsino]

87. We might not agree that the problem began and ended with the city managers.

But it didn't.

[AwakeAtLast]

68. IT IS NOT A PASS! It is a fairly bargained document.

If it was a contract like my previous contract they may have bargained for better health care in exchange for lower, or no, raises. We have also recently given up some of our sick days. When you are around 750 sneezing, coughing, puking children, you might need better health care.

Ten years ago my district had completely free health care, but our raises were 1% or 0%, depending on the year. This was a fairly bargained and agreed upon contract - which means both sides agreed.

When the contract period was over, guess what? The district complained that our health care costs were too high (it was what they originally brought to the table, not teachers) so we lost the better health plan AND our raises!!!

[badtoworse]

71. The contract had expired and apparently, the union wouldn't budge on sharing health insurance costs.

After 21 months, the city basically said we're done with providing free health insurance. The costs of providing free health insurance are open-ended and have likely been escalating at a significantly higher rate than the tax revenues have been increasing (if they've been increasing at all). Agreeing to continue funding an unbounded cost with limited revenues would not have been prudent (see Detroit), so with no concessions from the union, Philadelphia had no choice but to take unilateral action.

[alcibiades_mystery]

17. If they have no contract they should take a strike vote immediately

The Chicago Teachers Union cleaned Rahm's clock two years ago with a teachers' strike, and they had plenty of support, contrary to the know-nothingism spouted above. Indeed, Karen Lewis is still a potential and viable challenger to Rahm.

[Half-Century Man]

19. The expressed reason is health care.

The underlying reason is the insane practice of injecting parasitic business practices into everything.

Fuck Corporatism.

[certainot]

21. penn st broadcasts sports on/endorses 6 limbaugh stations, pitt 1, and those stations

do teacher hating union busting ALEC propaganda all day long

http://www.republicanradio.org

students at those unis can support teachers and their unions by demanding the schools dissociate and find apolitical alternatives

[WinkyDink]

35. Oh, brother.

[certainot]

76. like voter suppression they push, a lot of the ALEC agenda to privatize public ed starts on stations

like those.

there are hundreds of schools that shoot themselves in the foot by supporting rw radio.

colleges are pissing on their own mission statements, undermining the activism of their students and scientific community, and helping the republicans defund education and raise tuition.

[NutmegYankee]

23. Why is it contracts issued by big corporations are sacrosanct, but union contracts can be discarded?

It's enough to make you want to scream.

[stillwaiting]

42. Because both situations benefit the wealthy elite.

They win in both cases. They seem to be winning every day, every month, and every year (generally) over the past few decades. Neo-liberalism is here in a big, big way.

It's the way America runs now and will continue to run until more Democrats decide to build consensus for and vote for true progressives.

[NutmegYankee]

45. Sorry, I was posing a rhetorical question.

Wouldn't want to make our corporate masters and the 1% elite cry now would we?

[stillwaiting]

47. No need to apologize.

It's just difficult to know how we mean things online without tone of voice and all!

Just glad to know we're working together on things in this country...

[WinkyDink]

27. This IS a BFD. As in REVOLUTIONARY. NO WAY will Philly get away with this.

Silver lining: Republicans could kiss all of PA good-bye forever.

[stillwaiting]

43. If more Americans paid attention to what was happening in the world I would...

...perhaps agree strongly with your assessment.

With that said, I damn well hope you are correct!

[belzabubba333]

54. if the aca couldnt i doubt this will

[WinkyDink]

59. Well, except for the SLIGHT difference in that the ACA HELPS PEOPLE.

[badtoworse]

65. The mayor and 14 out of 17 City Council members are Democrats

Why will Republicans get the blame?

[PCIntern]

66. Because you could add together the I.Q.'s of the entire City Council

and you would still have a two-digit number.

You know what we call a City Council member with a room-temperature I.Q.?
A genius.

[dsc]

72. because the state is currently running those schools

and the state is run by the GOP but other than that no real reason.

[badtoworse]

73. I believe that 4 of 5 members (including the chairman) of the School Reform Commission are Democrats

The Chairman, William Green is a life long Democrat. Marjorie Neff, Sylvia Simms and Wendell Pritchett were appointed by Mayor Nutter and I would assume they are Democrats. Farah Jiminez is a Republican appointed by Governor Corbett. It's interesting to note that Green is on record as saying he would take this action if concessions could not be obtained from the Teachers Union.

Looking at the backgrounds of the commission members, I think it would be difficult to paint this as a partisan decision.

[malthaussen]

77. Sounds like you don't know PA very well.

Most of the people outside of Philadelphia are ecstatic when anything bad happens in Philly. Ditto Pittsburgh. The cities are not loved in the rest of Pennsyltucky.

-- Mal

[WinkyDink]

85. I'm PA born and bred, TYVM, and live 50 miles north of Philly, TYVM. THE CITIES KEEP PA BLUE.

Why, pray tell, are the Phillies, Flyers, Steelers, and EAGLES beloved throughout the state?

Methinks YOU don't know Pennsylvania.

[malthaussen]

88. Born in Pittsburgh, myself. Now live 5 miles north of Philly.

So we differ. Yes, it is the cities that keep PA blue. Consequently, those outside the cities (who are pretty deep red), are not too unhappy with anything that happens in the cities.

Most of the folks around here don't think much of the Steelers. Since I spent the first ten years of my life on that side of the state, I have a different perspective.

-- Mal

[KamaAina]

60. See you in court!

Bastards.

[n2doc]

84. Some more info, this 'deal' is really disgusting

http://www.democraticunderground.com/11249463

There are some major work rule changes, too - the one that jumped out at me was teachers no longer being able to use reasonable force to defend themselves. The district would no longer be required to provide copy machines, or "a sufficient number of instructional materials and textbooks." The district would no longer have to provide a teachers' lounge, water fountains, parking facilities, desks for teachers, a designated room for speech and language staff and psychologists or "accommodation rooms" for students with special needs. Counselors would no longer be guaranteed to have rooms with privacy and confidentiality, a telephone, a locked filing cabinet and a door.

[PCIntern]

86. Repulsive but expected.

This crowd is ruthless and utterly uncaring. Of anyone.