The Anti-Teacher Hysteria ~ Why Teachers' Unions Matter

[proud2BlibKansan]

The Anti-Teacher Hysteria
Why Teachers' Unions Matter

By SHAMUS COOKE

Nowadays a newspaper cannot be opened — or a TV turned on — without one being subjected to anti-teacher misinformation. The anti-teacher hysteria looks diverse on the surface, but underneath, this public controversy seeks to dislodge teachers unions: the right-wing trashes teachers’ unions outright, while the “liberal” media takes a more subtle, sophisticated approach, blaming the state of public education on “bad teachers” who must be fired and replaced. Both styles are the same in essence.

The bi-partisan goal is to undermine and dismember public education, so that public funds may be instead channeled into paying debts racked up by multiple wars and corporate bailouts. Also, as public education is gutted, rich investors parasitically benefit from it by opening for-profit “charter schools,” curriculum corporations, or the bevy of new companies that "certify" teachers for a fraction of the cost or time of universities, ready to serve at the new corporate McEducation institutes.

Obama’s Race to the Top campaign enshrines these odious goals into governmental policy, picking up where Bush’s anti-teacher union policies left off, and racing frantically in the same direction, to the bottom.

The schools that Bush’s No Child Left Behind labeled as “failures” are to be shut down under Obama’s Race to the Top. These schools are almost entirely in poor neighborhoods, where the social disease of poverty is an easy predictor of a child’s poor test scores.

But Obama ignores this obvious fact and blames poor grades and test scores on the teachers, exclusively.

more . . . http://www.counterpunch.org/cooke03162010.html

[LWolf]

1. Thanks for trying, Proud. nt

[proud2BlibKansan]

2. Always my friend

ALWAYS :hug:

[proud2BlibKansan]

3. And the unrec crowd appears!

LOL

[LWolf]

7. Because we MUST be

the enemy. :(

[MadHound]

4. It truly is sad to see how so many Democrats and "progressives" have turned on teachers,

Ever since Obama did, they now feel free to bash an entire profession. Just as bad as dittoheads and Beck fans, the same mindless parroting of bullshit talking points.

Of course I think that sentiment has never been far from the surface in this country. Despite the rhetoric that education is one of the most important jobs in this country, all of my life I've seen teachers abused, blamed for all of society's ills, when in reality the have some of the least ability to change things.

I'm listening to Obama's new plan, and it seems worse than Bush's, they will continue to close the bottom five percent and now do testing of all subjects. More testing madness. Listening to NPR this morning, and it is sad when Margaret Spellings and Arne Duncan agree on things like this.

What people don't seem to realize is that if you take Obama's plan to the logical conclusion, every single school will, at one time or another, be in the bottom five percent, and then be closed and turned over to charter schools.

This is just becoming depressing, more so everyday.

[proud2BlibKansan]

5. It's very depressing but there is an upside here on DU

I am seeing the true colors of many. And that's always a good thing:)

Have a great St Paddy's Madhound!

[MadHound]

8. True that, always nice to know who is truly on your side

Have yourself a great St. Patrick's day, Erin Go Bragh!

[JackintheGreen]

9. For me there's a difference

between bashing the profession and bashing the institution. I was a teacher and yet very much dislike teacher's unions (while still seeing the need for unions in general. I've been a proud member of the SEIU and of the Teamsters, too, and I support what the AFT is trying to do for educators in many places.

But having been a teacher in a major metropolis, I have seen schools paralyzed by hiring rules put in place by union efforts. I have seen terrible teachers continue to ruin children year after year. I have seen do-nothings reassigned to meaningless (or just plain made up) jobs because they could not simply be fired, tying up funds that could otherwise be used to hire a better teacher.

But this is not the norm. These are the stories picked up on my the national media to "highlight" why unions are bad. Unions are not bad, but they sure are run by some assholes, sometimes.

So I can understand why a lot of people come out against teachers and teachers unions. The terrible examples are all they ever see, and I have NEVER seen a union, not in 15 years of membership and active organizing, try to improve its position (or its image) by cutting loose its own albatrosses or suggesting that maybe, just maybe, some changes could be made.

Now I am headed towards a future in academia, and I see the same problems with tenure rules. But I *want* that tenured sinecure, too. And I'll need the AFT to ensure it. Except college profs cannot unionize. So they increasingly get screwed by admins who choose to run universities like businesses.

So I see the reasons for unions as much as anybody and more than most, but I recognize their most damning weaknesses too. Why does it seem like I'm the only one?

[eilen]

10. I've seen the same thing in hospitals

however, I'd rather have the union protection than not as the latitude for abuse by management (and their willingness to wield abuse) is worse.

With a union, there is an agreement, a contract that both have to adhere to. I would like to see unions (at least service oriented ones) make some changes so that dead weight is not constantly protected. By dead weight, I refer to reception/secretaries that ignore patients, are rude to them, that spend half the day on personal phone calls and get nothing done as dead weight. That was one in my clinic I tried to remove but her manager told me it was impossible. She was very close to retirement as well but that gave her really no cause to be mean to cancer patients. That was one of the most frustrating things in working for a union hospital/network.

Another thing is the merit... Seniority is rewarded even if just phoning it in, people were not rewarded for bringing in enthusiasm, good work ethics and productivity. After awhile it is like, why bother? I get no more vacation days, no increase in pay, still get bumped off my shift or holiday by those there longer-- even if I serve more patients everyday and get better evaluations and pursue higher certifications and CEU's.

However, work in a non union hospital and you work at your capricious manager's whim. They can schedule you day night day night, short staff you and load you up with unsafe patient loads, give you crap for some cliquey bullshit. You have no grievance process for unreasonable accusations or persecution. They can put you in the same crappy assignment forever whether you request to rotate off of it for a day or two to regain your equilibrium or not. I've seen nurses floated on to floors that were very inappropriate as they had no experience in that type of nursing/patient. So I can see the benefit of a union. Of course they can try that shit in a union hospital too (and have) but you at least have a method to protect yourself where in a non union hospital, you don't.

On schools, I am mixed. My son has had some great teachers and some that were just not that great. Overall, I think he has had good quality but we are in a good school district. I did have some problems in his elementary school and took him out for a year but that was mostly due to its leadership--principal was an idiot. I wanted him to know how to write by hand. Catholic school did that for him and he really loves that year he spent there. Of course his Social Studies teacher was a nightmare (very unorganized yet expected 6th grade boys to keep organized) but I didn't care since he learned what he needed even if he did fail her class. Classroom grades are not always indicative of what a child has learned. His great fault was not keeping all the papers she handed back to turn in at the end of the marking period for her to actually grade because she couldn't manage to record grades consistently throughout the weeks. The NoteBook System sucks. She was probably really brilliant but just very unorganized (like my son).

[proud2BlibKansan]

12. I think seniority is an asset in many professions

I was blessed with many wonderful mentors when I was a rookie. I'll never not be grateful for their help.

[proud2BlibKansan]

11. Unions don't put hiring rules in place

For a supposed union member you don't seem to understand how they work. Unions don't hire or fire any union members. They negotiate contracts and make sure they are followed.

[JackintheGreen]

15. I ought to be offended by your "supposed"

but I will choose not to be.

I have, in fact, sat in on more than a few negotiations. You had no way of knowing that, of course. Nor did I ever suggest that unions hired or fired people. That you seem to have just assumed (and I really don't mean to snark. I've always followed your posts and respect you from what I've read).

Who negotiates the rules that make it difficult for employers to fire bad employees (I will not limit myself to teachers here, because the Teamsters do the same thing)? If you have an example of a school district approaching a union during contract negotiations and offering to put in place measures that make dismissals even for the rankest incompetence more than onerous, I would be most grateful to see the evidence and will withdraw my comments publicly. Again, I base this on the worst of MSM accounts, which you and I both know exist for realsies and both know are in the MINORITY. Unions certainly do make sure that contracts are upheld, and they should. I would never try to take that privilege away from even the worst/most corrupt union. Without them administrative misconduct is rampant. But in negotiating for their members best interest, are you suggesting to me that unions do not have language inserted into contracts that is onerous, admittedly for the protection of their members. Can you deny that this language is often used by awful (or just lazy) employees to cement themselves into positions from which they cannot easily (or inexpensively) be removed? And are you suggesting that this is the only way to protect conscientious employees.

I know, I know...we must all hang together or we'll hang separately. And it's true. Especially in union labor. But Jeebus, there must be a better way. A way that will not alienate the masses of people who have grown up since Reagan believing that unions are dens of iniquity, laziness, and communism. Because it is exactly these few extreme cases that kill us time and again. Why is it impossible to protect good, or at least conscientious, workers while still writing contracts that allows employers to fire the crappy ones.

And why, though this is tangential, are some unions (I'm looking at you, Teamsters) signing contracts that bend over new hires so the old ones can stand up tall? Seriously, hang together to hang apart. And this includes (I am increasingly coming to feel) employers, who aren't all rank bastards.

[proud2BlibKansan]

20. Do you not understand how a negotiation works?

Why in the world would any union negotiate a process that makes it easier to fire employees?

I've told this here before. I was once formally reprimanded for having a piece of school stationery on my desk. That prncipal was an idiot and would have fired me in a minute if she could. So you bet I value my union contract.

Instead of complaining that unions protect employees we need to insist that ALL workers are treated as fairly as union members with good contracts.

[JackintheGreen]

21. Why do you insist on being insulting?

In two responses, now, you've opened by attacking me before dealing substantively with what I have to say.

When I was a Teamster I worked with a fellow, a part-timer, who three weeks out of every four - and after a few months of this I started keeping records for my own edification - didn't show for work on Friday. He had no prior arrangement with management, he was just a young kid who liked his weekends. We talked about it on Mondays. Every time management made a move to reprimand him he'd file a grievance and everything would just go away. Usually the grievance was for a supervisor performing the duties of his job - which was rightly verboten - though if he'd bothered to show up for work, there would have been enough guys to do the job in the first place.

So what about, rather than railing against me for pointing out a weakness of unions (even if that weakness is largely political/PR), why not insist that ALL workers do their damn jobs, instead of cadging benefits from the rest of the union stiffs and gaming a system put into place by leadership?

Are unions needed to protect people like you from the excesses of idiot principals? Of course they are. I have never suggested otherwise. But it seems to me that if people want a job with union bennies and security, maybe they should make some effort towards upholder their end of the contract their leadership signed.

I'm not looking for a free ride. Never have. But there are two types of asshole that make the labor fight harder than it ought to be. And they aren't both looking at you from across the table.

[proud2BlibKansan]

22. Oh good grief

You're posting negative anti-union crap and you expect flowers?

Your stories are no different than the folks who have decided all teachers suck because they hated the one they had in 3rd grade. It's getting old.

[JackintheGreen]

23. And your's is no different than

all those who seem to believe all unions fly on angel's wings. Which is not quite as old but just as tiresome.

Why on earth CAN'T I be a proud union member/organizer/negotiator and still voice a critique. You suggest, then, that these are not valid concerns? Unions are SO important that they cannot survive critiques from their members. Lockstep right this way, my friends, and we will guarantee you good jobs with good wages and benefits with nary the work of those non-union shops!

Please.

[proteus_lives]

26. Unions are sacred cow on DU.

Any negative comment is usually responded to as "OMG, You are a fascist/repuke!"

[JackintheGreen]

27. You aren't kidding! Sheesh.

Unions are near and dear to me, though I imagine Proud believes me to be a fascist plant committed to bringing down organized labor in America. Whatever. The critique stands. Nothing is above reproach. Not unions, not religion, not "America." Certainly not me. :hi:

[proteus_lives]

29. Agreed.

Unions are a great thing and I support them but they're not without stains.

[JackintheGreen]

28. delete. dupe.

[LWolf]

31. +1,000

[Bosso 63]

6. John Stewart said, "Its like seeing a bunch of fat people

leaving a Weight Watchers meeting and thinking, what the hell are they feeding them in there?"
So it is with schools.

[Catshrink]

18. What do you mean by this?

[Bosso 63]

24. Bad correlations.

There is often an assumption that if kids have problems, then schools must be the cause of those problems. Which is like saying that if people at weight watcher meetings are overweight, then the cause is the meetings themselves.

[Catshrink]

25. Ah, I get it.

I somehow missed the context. I love Jon Stewart but don't always get to watch him due to the time of the west coast feed and the repeats of the previous day.

[Nikki Stone1]

13. EXCELLENT!

Thank you. K & R

[Name removed]

14. Deleted sub-thread

Sub-thread removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Mercuryman]

16. K&R eom

[ensho]

17. my father said, when I was in elem. school, that teachers weren't born

they were found under rocks.

I liked my teachers and even loved one of them. and I was outraged when he said that.

he was a republican.

he pushed to have my brother in college. said I couldn't go because girls only went to college to find a husband and he wasn't going to pay for me to find a husband.

I wanted to be a veterinarian. he said that wasn't a job for a woman. I then said I would be a phys ed. teacher. he said phys. ed. teachers were lesbians.

TEACHERS NEED A UNION

I'm pro teachers and pro unions.

[Starry Messenger]

19. k & r

[walldude]

30. Hysteria is a good word. You know what the real problem is?

People are angry at a number of things, things they have no control over, so they are taking their anger out on people that they can exert a level of control over.

The truth is people who are bashing teachers are COWARDS. They can't do anything about politicians or bosses or insurance companies, or wall street so they find someone they can easily pick on and take out all their frustrations on.

In your other thread there is a poster who in one post ranted about teachers who throw desks and look under girls skirts and 10 posts down they posted that the teachers they know are terrific. It's bizarre to say the least. But I understand, they worship at the alter of the mighty Obama and if Obama won't hold anyone accountable but teachers why should they.

[proud2BlibKansan]

32. Thanks for the recap

I have a rather long ignore list :)

I agree with what you say. Everyone knows a teacher and everyone has a bad memory of a teacher. I've always taken that with a grain of salt because the best teacher I ever had was my sister's least favorite. Twenty years after we were in elementary school I was blessed to work with her and my sister wouldn't come to my school to say hello because she was still angry over something that happened when she was in the 2nd grade.

[Kingofalldems]

33. Repubs hate unions and teachers-hard to overcome that

And they post here.

[proud2BlibKansan]

34. It's hard for me to imagine long time DUers

being repukes.