Malefactor in chief
I’m sure many of you watch Morning Joe but this morning was a foreshadowing of the Republican Noise Machine’s future efforts to Swift Boat unions. Mallory Factor, a major supporter of George W. Bush and other Republicans was allowed to spill his guts with his own overlay of unions. He may have his numbers right but his interpretation was the usual claptrap we get from GOP devotees. His book is “Shaddowbosses” a hack job on unions just going by his fervent statements this morning. He criticizes union dues, reserve funds, and union officer pay. He gave $400,000 as the annual salary of NEA President, an organization with 3.2 million teachers. GE for example has 304,000 employees. Jeffrey Immelt pulls in $14,209,267. Mr. Factor also made the false assertion that unions shut down businesses. So much for management taking any responsibility. It just does not add up. A worker’s organization would be absolutely foolhardy to destroy the source of their livelihood. Tough negotiations, you bet, but usually an agreement is settled that both sides can live with. The alternative is to determine pay and pay raises one by one between employer and employee. This process of setting salary does not go away. If employers thought about it this is a more efficient, less costly approach. Is there corruption at times in unions as there is in corporations(not on the same scale I might add)? Sure it happens and the criminals should be busted and punished as the law allows. No one is condoning mischief but we do support workers rights to negotiate collectively with management.
Now here’s where the rubber meets the road. Mallory Factor, union buster in chief, wants to take his book on the major media road. It is about to get the same attention as “The Bell Curve” and unless immediate action is taken by responsive media, tweeting, and frankly counter arguments by people who really know the actual facts, this is a Trojan Horse matter. Once it has made its way into public view it will have the same effect as Swiftboating did for John Kerry’s campaign.
So this is a wake up call. A totally erroneous view of unions is about to be foisted on the public. It must be stopped dead in its tracks right now. The same effort is being pushed by a film “Obama 2016.” Time to get off our butts and get media’s nose into the falsehoods and self serving agenda of over endowed, destructive, selfish monied interests. Another front is a supposed Navy Seal account of the Bin Laden raid. So August becomes the launching time for propaganda its most base, inaccurate, and hoax-like fashion. All the snakes of Medusa will be in full view. The best way to expose these frauds is to call them out by name, one by one. They need to be shown they are liars and smear the legitimate accomplishments of their fellow Americans.
Discuss
67 Comments . Leave a comment below.This is a reality based forum, correct? Maybe you would learn something…
I listened to this propagandist for 15 minutes on the show. During that time he promoted all the things I have written above. It is probably available on “Morning Joe” website. I also read his background and his beliefs. So it was a threefur. He summarized his book on TV, and the two articles show he was one of GW’s constituency, and is deeply involved in conservative politics. All that is reality based. I have other things on my book shelf to read besides his erroneous assumptions. He’s more in your ballpark. Maybe you can give it a read and set my record straight.
I’ll try to have an open mind as I read it (you should try it). Personally when I’ve read Democratic propagandists, even when I disagree with their hypothesis and they typically are “BO’s constituency, and is deeply involved in liberal politics”, I do end up learning quit a bit since there are plenty of facts. I would guess this guy has assembled a lot of fact and then made his own conclusions but I’ll have to wait and see.
Did Bob read it too or did you read it and write his original post?
“I would guess this guy has assembled a lot of fact and then made his own conclusions”
Why would you guess that why? On what basis?
Because to have any credibility, you have to have some facts and not just make stuff up. Above Bob recounted this…
So maybe the guy’s fact about the NEA union guy’s salary is correct, which Bob doesn’t dispute. Instead he tries to equate the salary of a union guy (who sits in an office and does nothing but make phone calls) with the CEO of GE who has control over 304,000 jobs, benefits, products, profits… But that’s all opinion.
So I’ll stick with my guess that this guy has a bunch of facts in it, like I would any book, even from a Democratic schmuck like Michael Moore.
…. guessing is that you figure he has credibility. Seems like an assumption to me. Somehow I don’t figure you’d guess the same for Moore so I’m still not sure about your reasoning.
I do believe Michael Moore would have collected lots of facts, but put them together in such a way to support his narrative and discredit the things he opposes. But I would assume there had to be facts in there or it would lack any credibility.
I didn’t say you’d wouldn’t figure that Moore would have facts, I said you’d figure that Moore wouldn’t have credibility. You commented that you’d find Factor credible like anyone and then mentioned that you figure that Moore would have facts – seeming to conflate credibility with having facts and leaving one with the impression that you’d find Moore credible as well as having facts. My impression is that you can’t stand Moore and don’t find him credible so that the conflated impression seems to go against type.
I took issue with this man because he espouses outrageous views. He has set them into a book, ignoring the greater problems with a large slice of corporate America. Now tell me why Michael Moore is a “scmuck.” Has anything he said been debunked. I don’t think so.
according to you. But many of us in the country do not like unions, some of us hate unions. So we would not call anti-union discussions as “outrageous.
His book talks about how union bosses are running unions and using their union dues… he’s not talking about how to fix America or criticizing Corporate America. That would be a different book, not this one.
Nah, I will never be able to make you feel any different about the schmuck. You just said it yourself. I can’t stand MM and have loved the obscurity he fell into, with his douchebag baseball hats. I’m surprised he isn’t around trying to make a bunch of money off another GOP bashing movie, where is he???? I she still a millionaire 1%er?
Nobody in the GOP was against the war in Iraq or after time came to that position? Better look again. The overwhelming majority of those people feel that way as they do about Afghanistan. This is off topic but you brought it up.
It looks to me as though you find him credible because you agree with him.
If someone wrote a book about corporate welfare, would you believe them? Global warming… would you believe them? I won’t deny that we ALL believe in people who are saying what we want them to say. I was meerling pointing out the opposite where people were not believing this courageous author because you don’t want to hear the truth.
You guys love the idea of teachers being FORCED to join unions and pay union dues. As UNAMERICAN as that sounds, you don’t care. And then those unions use those BILLIONS in ways which the rank-and-file have no say it, no control. You guys should hate this kind of arm twisting and lack of participation by the workers, but since those unions are buying votes for your party you are only too happy to look the other way. Sad how people will throw away their integrity to get what they want.
but get it all out. This bitter stew that is eating you up. You would rather have the government or an employer dictate the terms of your employment than having a negotiation. Using a fantastical idea of how unions are organized feeds into your need to hate your fellow Americans. Talk about being UN-AMERICAN! Try to calm down and just see who you are talking about. It’s the guy or gal sitting next to you who pays taxes, raises a family, and follows the laws. You act like they should be thrown in jail.
is allowing your fellow citizens to be exploited, the very ones that are providing you with a decent society.
I love my fellow Americans, they are MY PEOPLE. Are teachers getting exploited? Is their 9 month working period too long? Their 7 hour days? Their great pensions? They have it made. Are they being exploited? Are the State cops getting exploited when they retire at 50 years old and will get a pension in many cases longer than they ever worked? State cops average over $100K with 20 making over $200K, one trooper earned $233,582 in 2011. Exploited???? I think we the tax payers are the ones getting exploited.
because they have union representations. Besides there were other works mentioned in my response that would have been taken advantage of.
I am a very happy guy, extremely happy. Things are going great. November will be an exciting time no matter what happens.
when you talk about negotiations, remember how many jobs have gone to China and Mexico and every other country. I don’t know for sure but I would imagine a lot of the lost jobs were for people who are Democrats. I hope you acknowledge that companies have left the country because wages/employee costs were too high and they wouldn’t budge. Result – no job and I would do the dame thing if I was owned the company. I have had this discussion before on BMG and if you owned the company and gave in to these demands your liberal company would be out of business. Some will say Company “X” does it and still survives, but they just haven’t gotten any competition yet. Once the competition starts, market forces take over and you either cut costs to lower the price or you will be undersold. Why do you think WalMart (evil company Grrr…) is doing so well against they competitors.
You go start a company oetkb Inc and make widgets, then pay your people 20% more than the street plus great benefits… and see how long you last. You will either go belly up OR you will have to resort to terrible evil things like cut benefits, salaries, layoffs…
I provided health insurance of good quality and always a living wage for my workers. It also included a fully vested retirement plan. Again you speak out of school. Actually I am quite proud of my success in business and how I treated my employees. No business worth its salt should exist unless they can give a wage that sustains some modicum of living for those that work for them. Slavery ended quite awhile ago. By the way I lasted 40 years, sold the business, keeping up an over 100 years of operation in the same venue.
The allure of overseas was cheap labor pure and simple with no questions asked. The American worker makes higher quality products at about 20% more than shipping jobs overseas. With people working at higher incomes that money produces more customers. Your business model needs repair.
Your story is a great story and I’m happy for you and your employees. We need more people like you sand hopefully you have saved some of your magic pixie dust to throw over other companies. Now that you have cashed out, why don’t you fix the manufacturing industries?
See, I don’t think it’s a great thing that we have such a competitive environment, it just is. Your remarks sound quite nobel but you must have had a unique situation to have the company you did. Otherwise, you and others who think like you would be flourishing all over. Where are the companies like your old one. I worked at a company for 10 years that treated us like kings, it was awesome. But when we finally got some competition who didn’t treat their employees the same way, our company had to react in order to be competitive. Things were still good not nearly as good.
That is not MY business model, it is the predominant business model our there though and a tough one to compete with.
Most small companies are flourishing. The problems are among the minority of people a reason they are not addressed until a critical mass of trouble erupts. Once you turn to a dog eat dog world view it no longer matters what you are producing and in fact lowers quality. I believe more in achievement rather than competition. The blacksmith had his day but the automobile came along. Where we go wrong is not helping what was a stalwart of the working community properly transition to a changing world. A new niche has to be found. Why lose such productive people who are quite capable of learning new skills? It takes, sorry to say, government programs to do this. Left to the invisible hand of the market as defined by conservative thought only brings undeserved misery and a poorer economic environment. Capitalism is an economic system but can be practiced either concurrent with a Social Contract or against it. Greed and snuffing out competition as opposed to societal economic growth and cooperation to find proper niches. Just looking at today’s advertising shows you how off the beam we are. It uses glitz and false value to sell things. Capitalism is fine but its purpose in distributing goods that makes life better for all of us has taken on trappings that impoverishes too many. We do not live in an Ayn Rand world. As a true conservative your answer is, it just is. No it has a history and it can be changed.
AS I also said, Walmart is booming because people shop there, regardless of how they tree their employees, what benefits they give them or what the quality of the product sold it. How are you going to be a them?
Look at the battle between Fox and MSNBC, who’s winning? Fox is kicking MSNBC’s ass every single hour of the day, sometimes by incredible amounts.
I think your model is flawed and I don’t mean your model isn’t better for us all, I just think it doesn’t work in today’s world. Look at out addiction to energy and where is the movement to fix this? I don’t think this is anything new and we can’t blame today’s world. The Stop & Shop’s of the world have been closing the corner market for 50 years now.
If your model can work in this day and age, then you should do it. I have suggested (tongue in cheek) that you guys get George Soros to give you a bunch of his money and put together a plan to have a company that is so altruistic as you propose. He would laugh at you because he knows it wouldn’t last. Your only hope would be a product which had no competition, then you could do what you want, pay people whatever you needed, give great benefits… and just raise the price to pay for everything. That’s how government unions survive, and they just keep raising the price until we all go broke. Is that a victory, please explain.
Apple found that, in a fast-moving industry and a labor market with ferocious competition for high-caliber workers, it was far less expensive to offer salaries and benefits well above market rates. The effect was to erect a firewall against competitors poaching their workers, it created great morale in the Apple work force, and gave them enormous advantages because of the continuity of their teams.
It comes down to “scarcity thinking” versus “abundance thinking”. A company that knows that it is great, knows that it’s products are great, and knows that it is making the world around it a better place acts from a position of power and abundance. The philosophy you describe is its dark counterpart — a basis of fear, paranoia, defensiveness, and suffering. Workers never know when the axe will fall or who will be next in line. It becomes an awful game of musical chairs as the company spirals into collapse. Scarcity thinking ALWAYS loses.
In optimizing profitability, it is almost ALWAYS more effective to grow the numerator (revenues) than to reduce the denominator (costs). If that isn’t the case, the entity is most likely moribund anyway.
And — by the way — the same principle tends to hold true for the federal budget. Growing revenues is a winner (however you do it) — attempting to slash costs is a loser.
Plus, is this the Apple that has 100% of their manufacturing in China where it treats its employees like slaves?
Again, it is not MY philosophy, it is the philosophy. We’ve talked about this before. If your philosophy is so much better, where are the companies c=following it? Why can’t you, oetkb and others put your money into a company and run it your way. Start a bank and don’t charge fees, provide low interest loans to people and provide high CD rates. BINGO! Those forces aren’t mine, they are market forces that make things happen. I’d love it if companies paid people more and provided super benefits, but don’t be surprised if those companies charge more for their product and the masses buy the cheaper product.
I agree with you that that the predatory I’d-cut-my-grandmothers-legs-off-at-the-knees-if-she’s-a-competitor headset is more common.
I think the jury is very much out about whether that model results in a sustainable economy. The more extreme forms of it that you describe have evolved since the eighties. I think you’re absolutely correct that many of those are very profitable and cause excellent returns for the handful of owners who control them.
I also think that oetkb and I are attempting to present an alternative model to that, an alternative model that you apparently reject. So be it.
I have been responding and talking about what we have. Which is better for the economy, probably the one which pays workers more money and gets them spending more money and the cycle continues… no argument from me. But that just doesn’t happen.
So in my view, it’s up to those of us who value this more positive model to make it happen. I think that one way we do that is by doing all we can to influence the companies we run, work with, work for, or consult for to be this way. Another way we make that happen is to work hard to put social structure in place — including government — that supports and encourages this value system.
I view organized labor, for all its imperfections (and there are many) as a vital part of that social structure.
join us. We believe in making sure all who want it have the opportunity of living a life with enough food, shelter, health, and, need I say it, the pursuit of happiness. The present Senator for this state, Scott Brown, agrees with your present sentiment so nothing will change. If you want to take a stab at it you are going to have to take a chance on Elizabeth Warren. She believes it is within our psyche to change how we operate. So don’t give up the ship Dan, we might make good shipmates.
Here’s one for EW and the Consumer Protection Agency and Bank reforms. A very good friend of mine is trying to refinance. He was just denied refinancing because his credit report shows “disputes”. According to him, there are three disputes on his report. One is a charge for a camera which was broken and he is fighting the merchant, the other is a annual fee on a credit card which the CC company waived but out gets logged as a “dispute” and the third is a CC which he never heard of (no glance, no late payments). Now, he has no late payments but these “disputes” are enough for Fannie to throw out the loan request. Seriously???
Thank you new bank regulations! Thank you Elizabeth Warren!
This is the kind of CRAP that banks and finance companies have been doing to consumers for years.
And Fannie is not the government? And the USPS is not the government…
They are defacto the government.
Regarding either your current job or any previous job, please consider the following:
Has any job paid you an overtime rate for more than 40 hours per week?
Has any job provided you with paid sick and/or vacation time?
Has any job allowed you to have weekends to yourself, if not Saturday/Sunday, then at least two other days within a week?
Has any job offered you a pension or other retirement savings plan?
If applicable has any job offered you opportunities for professional development or other continuing training?
If you answered yes to any of these questions, you have the labor movement to thank, even if you have personally never been a union member.
You have hit on something. I am not alone as a Conservative who hates unions but who also believe unions did a great job in the past. Just like Sal DiMasi may have done wonderful things… until he started breaking the law. Lots of things were great bit then they go bad. Go ask the residents of San Bernadino about what the unions have done to their city. And make no mistake, I also blame the horrible (usually Democratic) politicians who gave these unions such wonderful benefits. But they have taken things over the edge.
Do you really think state police should retire with $100K pensions at age 50. Do the math on that one. Do you really think we should have some work their whole life as a firefighter but then have them fill in for a day as Chief and then go out injured that day (with a back injury) and we pay them a Chief’s salary/pension for the rest of their life. I hear people say the average state pension is $32K, and I have no problem with that pension as long is it was funded. Let’s all work on getting rid of these other abusive pensions which make that $32K state pensioner cringe.
My turn to ask a question… Do you think a worker should be forced against their will to join a union and pay union dues?
johnd,
There are several more salient questions than whether someone should be “forced to join” a union and pay dues:
1.) is that person going to refuse the wages that the union negotiated?
2.) Is that person going to refuse the “just cause” provisions of a contract for purposes of discipline/discharge?
3.) Is that person going to refuse all other benefits in the contract?
Before you answer those questions, Imagine, if you would, the following scenario: a person goes to the NRA or the AARP or the Knights of Columbus or the Elks and says: I’d like all or almost all the benefits of membership in your organization, but I have no intention of paying initiation or any of the costs that your organization normally charges for those benefits.
That’s the problem with your question about being “forced to join.” For all the caterwauling in the book at issue or complaining on the Wall Street Journal editorial page, the fact remains that what unions actually do is negotiate contracts and police those contracts. That takes money; that money comes from union dues. This is the system we have until we no longer have it.
For political reasons — that is, Republicans hate labor unions, always have and always will — the United States tolerates a situation in which workers get the benefits of union contracts, but don’t have to pay for those benefits. For all the hoary nonsense about “individual freedom” or the truly dumb phrase “right to work,” the proper questions are: should people get to take negotiated benefits for free? If so, why?
sorry, that should have said: forced to “join”
I get benefits from tax cuts even if I didn’t vote for them… we all collective benefit from things whether we participate/want/helped… so why should we draw this distinction. If Occupy Wallstreet had caused banks to actually do something, would they only have done it for the Occupiers? Probably not. No, I think everyone benefits. Your AARP question is good, when they lobby for benefits, the benefits go to all seniors, not just AARP members.
The problem with public unions is “the government won’t go out of business” like a business would, we just have to keep paying higher and higher taxes. Although recent events in San Bernadino and San Deigo (and a whole bunch of other cities/municipalities) is causing them to go BANKRUPT! I haven’t heard a peep from you guys about these cities but the unions are the cause of them going down. Sorry you guys won’t admit it but Firefighters making $135K and police at $100K combined with greedy pensions is just killing cities.
from wikipedia
In the United States, this provision, as well as the minimum wage, was first instituted by the Fair Labor Standards Act. The act was passed in 1938, during the Great Depression. Overtime pay was not intended primarily as a bonus to the worker but as a penalty or fine upon the employer. In order to increase employment opportunities, Congress encouraged employers to hire more workers for the same amount of time: it was better for three workers to work forty hours per week than two workers for sixty hours per week.
Or the History of the bill
… your ignoring the 1916 Adamson Act, which granted the 40 hour week and overtime to railroad workers. And Adamson clearly shows that the government was starting to move in the direction of overtime and a formalized 40 hour work week well before the Great Depression. Why? Because organized labor had been advocating for it for decades, starting as early as the 1830s.
That should be “you’re ignoring….”
people had been fighting and dying for the causes that were finally passed in You neglect to mention that the Fair Labor Standards Act. Albert Parsons and August Spies were executed for the Haymarket Bombing, though neither was guilty of throwing any bombs.
Workers at that time were called wage slaves because they had to work so many hours they had no time for leisure, self-improvement. They wanted to eliminate mandatory overtime because it made their lives miserable.
Legislation usually starts with activism. The activism that led to the FLSA started with anarchists, socialists, and the precursors of the modern labor movement.
Or, rather, I should say, within the context of the post, there’s a false imbalance. Ostensibly, Jeffrey Immelt is responsible for making sure that his 304,000 employees get paid every week (or every other week, not knowing what GE’s pay schedule is). Conversely, the 3.2 million members insure that the NEA president gets paid.
Jeffrey Immelt has a fiduciary responsibility to maximize the value of his company’s stock. That is his “prime directive”. If Mr. Immelt can increase shareholder value by not paying his employees, he will do so. If Mr. Immelt learns that he can increase shareholder value by firing half his workforce tomorrow, he will do so. Mr. Immelt is at very real risk to shareholder lawsuits if he does not do so. The power of the NEA is a vital factor in making the financial consequences of doing such things severe enough that they are NOT in the shareholder interest. Hence, your attempted comparison to Dennis Van Roekel (NEA President) is misleading.
Mr. Immelt is not working to protect the interests of his employees. Mr. Van Roekel is.
Tom, your first point is a fair one. Mr. Immelt’s primary responsibility is to his shareholders, not protecting the interests of his employees.
I don’t, however, take your second point. Mr. Van Roekel does not have employees.
Perhaps I should have been more explicit. Let me try it this way:
Mr. Immelt is not working to protect the interests of his employees. Mr. Van Roekel is working to protect the interests of Mr. Immelt’s employees.
Be it business or labor. Company specific unions are forced to be competitive – the market will not put up with overpriced products.
We will all have to admit – the industry wide unions (and management) made a mess of the auto industry in the 1970s. The products didn’t improve until they had competition from auto companies outside of Detroit.
There are a lot of very competitive union shops – but they compete with non-union and union shops. UPS is a great example.
cartels. Negotiations are local. The MTA provides a negotiator to help its locals, but local contracts, though structured more or less the same, vary quite a bit. New contracts begin with old contracts.
As far as the UAW goes, we ought to remember that President Walter Reuther survived at least one assassination attempts before his small plane crashed in suspicious circumstances.
A fair amount of teacher benefits are mandated by the statehouse not negotiated at the local level – so that is close to being a cartel.
Certainly the UAW is, if Ford or GM colluded in the way the UAW does- they would go to jail.
President Walter Reuther was killed in a Lear Jet – sort of sounds like the 1%.
I don’t know much about him – but union on union violence at that level was fairly common.
The haters are back. They don’t want to help. They want to destroy. No talk of reforms that would improve the process but instead the green monster and loathing at a mega scale. Unions are an enemy. Union leaders just sit around and don’t lift a finger to ensure decent wages and working conditions. This is a sad commentary on people who deliver things, educate children, protect citizens from harm, or make sure your rooms are clean when you visit a distant city. They are working people. How can they be your foe? And Labor Day is coming a week from Monday no less. An employee’s salary is not dictated solely by the employer nor should it be. It is a negotiation. Tension, yes. Destruction of a company or the cause of business or government failure, no. The record is tilted much more towards progress because unions were formed. Instead of recognizing that workers are showing pride in their productivity, they are vilified. Prosperity is a two way street. Owners need to be rewarded for the risks and products they have introduced into the market place. The flip side is the labor that made it possible also gets their due.
if you can guarantee that employers both public and private will never exploit those who work for them, then Unions can be done away with. That day is not here and you know it.
I have a wife, a bunch of kids, I’m a salesman, I’m a coach… I am not unreasonable and whenever I hear people (like you) talking about going back to the sweat shops of old, kids working in factories… I really have to pause before I start screaming at you. Iw irked at the old General Dynamics shipyard and had to work with union people all the time. That union destroyed the yard and ultimately contributed to the closing of the place. I ran out of computer paper and we needed it ASAP. There was paper down on the loading dock but they couldn’t bring it up till the next morning so I went down and brought up a box. The union put in grievance because I “stole” work from a union laborer and we had to pay the union for this. That is a “tiny” example of what would happen on a daily basis because of unions. Cranes would sit idle while they waited for a union rigger to put the hook on a beam, or riggers would wait while a laborer carried the hook from a storage bin…
I don’t want employees exploited but I do not want unions holding guns to our heads and demanded excessively. Go look at San Diego, San Bernadino and other cities who are ready to go bankrupt because of unions. That is no bullshit.
crap part of the MTA or other teacher unions, you’re smoking crack, John.
Moreover, I strongly doubt you have the whole picture of the General Dynamics shipyard either. What were you an independent contractor? What was the company doing to piss off workers? Sure, the union could have been wrong or misguided, but you’ve taken a single instance as representative of an entire relationship.
Teachers unions have done more to preserve the quality of education for students than any other individual or organization ever has. Aside from our lobbying, we work to preserve the working conditions are largely students learning conditions.
I was a full time employee, not a contractor. The company wasn’t pissing anyone off but it was a continuous battle between labor and management. Both sides eventually lost… all people lost their jobs! And it wasn’t s ingle incident, it happened everyday (not to me but a few times a month to me).
Teacher’s unions may do wonderful things but I only see them screwing the tax payer. I can’t comment on the other wonderful things they do to
“Aside from our lobbying, we work to preserve the working conditions are largely students learning conditions”
Because the taxpayer wants to pay us less?
Protecting criminal teachers for seconds.
John, you’re simply being ridiculous.
.
“Protecting bad teachers” and “Protecting criminal teachers”.
Do you also attack indigent defense attorneys (like our own AmberPaw) for protecting “criminal” elements? You claim to be an enthusiastic advocate of American values — yet post comments like this over and over.
Fair and effective representation, especially when accused by government bodies, is at the core of the American system of values. You apparently have a problem with that.
Unions are legally, contractually obligated to provide members with the protection they paid their dues for. That’s it. It’s the law. I can tell you from personal experience that representatives of a union local often hold their nose when they make sure that certain teachers get due process, but I don’t know of a union that protects criminal teachers for the hell of it.
The problem of bad teachers has been administrative. Bad teachers are almost always indentifiable in the first three years of teaching. For those three years, they are basically at will employees. Union contracts can’t protect them from termination. Why administrators don’t fire them is another story, but ask any teacher, and they’ll tell you it’s rare to find a teacher who does worse than they did in their first three years.
The new teacher evaluation system, which was the result of the MTA and other stakeholders, will now identify those teachers and put them on a remediation plan before termination eventually becomes an issue. (Before they were rarely observed–another administrative fault).
If you really want to see what the union cares about, follow these negotiations between the city and the union. The union cares nothing about the kids, they care about their wallets. The city should compile the sweet deal Boston teachers get now, list all their benefits, list their salaries and let the public decide who’s getting a great deal nd who’s getting screwed.
Are you willing to guarantee that employers not exploit workers so that Unions become unnecessary? If you are, the offer stands. Fair wages with decent working conditions and in return no unions. By the way you could have fooled me. A lot seems to upset you. Could we get an endorsement from the people you mentioned just how happy you are.
conditions accomplished by organized labor laying down its arms! I always wanted to work for Walmart.
I was playing tongue in cheek with John.
again, I don’t “want” the Walmarts of the world to exist, but what I do know is they can charge extremely low prices because of their salaries/benefits and Americans have responded by saying “we love it, please build one near my town”. It is not my model but it is the model we have. And I will repeat, if I owned Walmart I would probably do the same thing they are because Target would undercut my price and take over (or someone else).
We have speed laws but I can’t guarantee we won’t have speeders but we do have the law and police to enforce it.
I like this, a wonderful goal. The problem would be defining “fair” and “good”. I think me and my GOP brethren would sign up for it too, but they may not think “fair” is what you call “fair”.
Yes, I asked my family and friends and they all think I’m about as easy going as people get. Maybe that’s the problem with blogs (and emails) where someone says “what’s up?” and the other person reads it as “What the fuck is wrong?” instead of a plain hello.
I certainly have some viewpoints and I have some passion, but I seriously have too many important things in my life (like 5 kids who I want to live happy lives in this world, get jobs, work, vacation… and get Social Security/Medicare and get unemployment if they get paid off…) to let blogging upset me.
I just got back from the Cape, had a wonderful night down there, weekends going well, recovering from minor surgery, weather is awesome… I’m serious, I’m happy. And I go toe-to-toe with a liberal Democrat here in my town as I just did yesterday. He’s a great guy who I would do anything for, we actually have figured out we agree on so many things, but we disagree on how to get there. Maybe “upset” is just the wrong word.
It’s not me you ought to be screaming at, though:
I think both of our parties have loons, but I don’t take either of these people seriously. But you did get me there.
So… let’s be clear. Speaking only for myself but I don’t know any Republicans who want children to go back to the sweat shops of old. Even Newt’s idea was to help restore a “work ethic” to kids growing up where the “work ethic” is a thing of the past. But I still don’t support it.
Leaving aside the fact that the loon in question was a candidate for your party’s Presidential nomination and was elected by that party’s representatives as their Speaker, you seem to be implying that he’s the only one who wants to bring back child labor.
He’s not.
Not at all.
I don’t see anyone but Republicans advocating sending children to work.
It is the nature of capitalism to reward businesses that can minimize expenses, and there are always businessmen willing to exploit other humans to gain that reward. Unions were instrumental in placing limits on those businessmen, and the weakening of unions has allowed “loons” to push for removing those limits. They’ve been working at weakening labor laws for thirty years, with great success. Now they are testing child-labor laws. “Going back to the sweat shops of old” is a pretty accurate description of their goal.
« Blue Mass Group Front Page
Fri 24 May 7:08 AM