Where your tax dollars go, part #178,390

[pBills]

No arguments there.

But is that a function of the administration or the union?

 

 

Normally administration. Unions normally ask that there is a disciplinary hearing. They do not schedule or manage them.

[GG]

No. But excessive regulation means that the hearings can only be done in certain ways and by certain people which, the article points out, are not sufficient for the backlog. So by locking yourself in to these proceedures you are mandating that an organization devote resources to it. You basically need a full-time cadre of disciplinarians on the payroll, money which in a sane company would go to productive employees.

 

That's a side point, which pbills doesn't understand. Profit & loss is a foreign concept. You have to explain it to him in union terms.

 

By mandating the strict procedures for even basic disciplinary functions, the process lasts a lot longer than it would in a sane organization. Thus, without management devoting full-time personnel (which by union rules also must include people who will be on the side of the abuser, no matter what) the process gets bogged down. Net effect is that incompetents stay on the job for the simple reason they belong to a union.

 

pbills is incapable of understanding that the biggest complaint of unions by management is not the pay or benefits, but the work rules that promote mediocrity and render change impossible. He doesn't realize that successful companies recognize that they need a competent work force to carry on with the business.

[Simon]

Normally administration. Unions normally ask that there is a disciplinary hearing. They do not schedule or manage them.

No, but they do demand particular procedures and preconditions that force administrators to follow certain rules.

Only two kinds of people can say confidently whether these delays are a result of overprotective union demands are administrators who don't want to deal with procedures.

One is a system insider; the other is somebody with a pre-formulated agenda to push.

And there are no insiders in this thread.

[pBills]

No, but they do demand particular procedures and preconditions that force administrators to follow certain rules.

Only two kinds of people can say confidently whether these delays are a result of overprotective union demands are administrators who don't want to deal with procedures.

One is a system insider; the other is somebody with a pre-formulated agenda to push.

And there are no insiders in this thread.

 

 

 

Of course, rules would be negotiated with each contract. That way neither side can manipulate them.

[KD in CA]

No. But excessive regulation means that the hearings can only be done in certain ways and by certain people which, the article points out, are not sufficient for the backlog. So by locking yourself in to these proceedures you are mandating that an organization devote resources to it. You basically need a full-time cadre of disciplinarians on the payroll, money which in a sane company would go to productive employees.

 

Obviously, the union scum do everything in their power to avoid ever having the hearing. As you suggest, there are doubtless all kinds of specific rules designed to hinder the process. And certainly there are multiple appeals, etc. designed to keep even the worst offenders still getting that paycheck.

 

Bottom line is, millions of dollars of YOUR money is going to dirtbags to sit in a room all day doing nothing. It's amazing that people are just fine with that and will come up with whatever lame excuse they can to allow it to continue.

[pBills]

Obviously, the union scum do everything in their power to avoid ever having the hearing. As you suggest, there are doubtless all kinds of specific rules designed to hinder the process. And certainly there are multiple appeals, etc. designed to keep even the worst offenders still getting that paycheck.

 

Bottom line is, millions of dollars of YOUR money is going to dirtbags to sit in a room all day doing nothing. It's amazing that people are just fine with that and will come up with whatever lame excuse they can to allow it to continue.

 

 

 

So what do you do since you are calling me and other pro-union people scum. Let me criticize what you do.

 

By the way, you are wrong. Most union reps want to get the hearings going so that the worker can get back to work if cleared. But of course you will tell me I am wrong because you know everything and your blinders won't let you see that there is ALWAYS two sides to a story. Keep posting nonsense though. Great job.

[KD in CA]

Keep in mind that BOTH sides agree upon all contracts even if they mention procedures.

Ah yes, this tired strawman. Who exactly is the 'other side' that agreed to this? I'm pretty sure it wasn't the taxpayers who are paying for it. Where is the option to not have the union in the school at all?

 

Yet, most people wouldn't have 90% maybe more of what they do without the unions.

Hope you didn't hurt your ass pulling that ridiculous number out of it.

[finknottle]

Only two kinds of people can say confidently whether these delays are a result of overprotective union demands are administrators who don't want to deal with procedures.

 

What about the third type, the type that actually reads the article? The article say's there are only 23 arbitrators each working five days a month. It seems pretty clear that the problem is that the city does not have sufficient arbitrators on the payroll for the system it has agreed to, and that's the bottleneck.

 

Here's another piece on the cost of removing somebody there, which they claim is up to $250,000 after legal fees.

http://www.njchalktalk.com/?p=37

One positive note: the state legislature agreed that it could revoke the teaching certificate of a teacher convicted of sex crimes against students, forgoing the year-long administrative proceedure which normally follows conviction.

 

And here's a piece from the bible, from five years ago, highlighting the time-consuming difficulties:

http://www.nytimes.com/2004/01/15/education/15teach.html

Ms. Weingarten's proposal calls for expanding an existing peer intervention program for troubled teachers. Under her plan, a teacher in danger of being fired would enter the intervention program for up to 90 days. If the teacher was still ill-equipped to return to the classroom, Ms. Weingarten said, union representatives would counsel the teacher to leave the school system. If the teacher refused, an existing 90-day grievance and arbitration process would begin. Currently, city officials say they must spend at least two years building a case, with a principal giving the teacher two annual unsatisfactory ratings, to stand any chance of dismissing a teacher through the 90-day arbitration process.

[Simon]

Obviously, the union scum do everything in their power to avoid ever having the hearing. As you suggest, there are doubtless all kinds of specific rules designed to hinder the process. And certainly there are multiple appeals, etc. designed to keep even the worst offenders still getting that paycheck.

 

Bottom line is, millions of dollars of YOUR money is going to dirtbags to sit in a room all day doing nothing. It's amazing that people are just fine with that and will come up with whatever lame excuse they can to allow it to continue.

 

The fact that you're calling these people scum and dirtbags when you have no insight whatsoever into any of these cases only shows that you're one of those with a pre-formulated agenda and renders your words and opinion as utterly meaningless.

[pBills]

Ah yes, this tired strawman. Who exactly is the 'other side' that agreed to this? I'm pretty sure it wasn't the taxpayers who are paying for it. Where is the option to not have the union in the school at all?

 

 

Hope you didn't hurt your ass pulling that ridiculous number out of it.

 

 

 

Management and the Union both agree on contracts (now is the time for you to mention how the unions manipulate and place a strangle hold on management).

 

This has nothing to do with having teachers unionized. This has to do with those hearings being completed. No matter who the outcome favors teacher or school system. Who ever is not doing their job should be held accountable. I have said countless times. If a union worker is not doing their job, go through the procedures and get rid of them.

 

Ridiculous number... nice. Yes in your rose colored world all business owners and companies treat their employees well. Talk about not living in the real world. So what do you do again? Shouldn't be shy about it if you can easily call other people scum. Especially when you know crap about them or their beliefs. You just place everyone in one category because it's easy. And frankly sad/pathetic.

[Simon]

What about the third type, the type that actually reads the article? The article say's there are only 23 arbitrators each working five days a month. It seems pretty clear that the problem is that the city does not have sufficient arbitrators on the payroll for the system it has agreed to, and that's the bottleneck.

 

So you're suggesting that the fault lies with the administration and not the union?

 

One positive note: the state legislature agreed that it could revoke the teaching certificate of a teacher convicted of sex crimes against students, forgoing the year-long administrative proceedure which normally follows conviction.

Good. Even better if they tack on some jail time.

And create a co-ordinated national database of offending teachers so Henry Busyhands can't jump to another state and take a job in another school.

[Chef Jim]

Management and the Union both agree on contracts (now is the time for you to mention how the unions manipulate and place a strangle hold on management).

 

This has nothing to do with having teachers unionized. This has to do with those hearings being completed. No matter who the outcome favors teacher or school system. Who ever is not doing their job should be held accountable. I have said countless times. If a union worker is not doing their job, go through the procedures and get rid of them.

 

Ridiculous number... nice. Yes in your rose colored world all business owners and companies treat their employees well. Talk about not living in the real world. So what do you do again? Shouldn't be shy about it if you can easily call other people scum. Especially when you know crap about them or their beliefs. You just place everyone in one category because it's easy. And frankly sad/pathetic.

 

Question; whatever happened to suppended without pay until further investigation.

[pBills]

Question; whatever happened to suppended without pay until further investigation.

 

 

I know that in some counties teachers can be suspended without pay. I have no problem on that especially if the alleged offense warrants it.

[DC Tom]

Good. Even better if they tack on some jail time.

 

Legislature can't do that. That's called a "bill of attainder".

 

And create a co-ordinated national database of offending teachers so Henry Busyhands can't jump to another state and take a job in another school.

 

If someone's convicted of child molestation and/or statutory rape, they generally won't be allowed to teach again anyway. In fact, nowadays if they're found innocent, they still probbly won't be allowed to teach again.

[finknottle]

So you're suggesting that the fault lies with the administration and not the union?

 

Actually, I'm suggesting that the fault lies with the city for not allocating enough money to the arbitrator process.

 

Whether the process is reasonable or insane is one topic for discussion. But they signed on to it. And if it is going to be implemented, money must be spent accordingly else you get exactly what we have here - regulatory paralysis. So NYC should budget enough for lawyers to handle disciplinary actions in a reasonable amount of time. *Then* we can have a discussion of whether it is good public policy to have a system in which it takes a year of preparation and $250k in legal fees to remove somebody.

[DC Tom]

Question; whatever happened to suppended without pay until further investigation.

 

NYSUT apparently negotiated it away. I don't necessarily disagree...I, for one, would hate to be suspended without pay for the crime of "criminal restraint of a minor" after grabbing a kid to keep them from running out in traffic.

 

But NYSUT certainly did it because teachers suspended without pay don't pay union dues. Have I mentioned that NYSUT is a sh---ass union?

[KD in CA]

This has nothing to do with having teachers unionized. This has to do with those hearings being completed. No matter who the outcome favors teacher or school system. Who ever is not doing their job should be held accountable. I have said countless times. If a union worker is not doing their job, go through the procedures and get rid of them.

But "protecting the worker" by not holding people accountable is a basic tenet of unions, so your words ring pretty hollow. I'm guessing your not a reformer.

 

In private business, at least there is a management that actually has a vested interested in keeping this nonsense in check. Who is the 'management' in the public school system? They don't give a damn cause it's not their money. That's why this kind of thing is allowed to fester. No one is interested in fixing unless it shows up in the newspaper.

 

Ridiculous number... nice. Yes in your rose colored world all business owners and companies treat their employees well. Talk about not living in the real world. So what do you do again? Shouldn't be shy about it if you can easily call other people scum. Especially when you know crap about them or their beliefs. You just place everyone in one category because it's easy. And frankly sad/pathetic.

Oh sorry...didn't realize you had concrete evidence "that most people wouldn't have 90% maybe more of what they do without the unions". Can't wait for you to post that!

 

I've stated numerous times what I do. I run Finance and Operations for a tech company. My 'rose colored world' includes seeing the inter workings of dozens of companies, including HR and legal practices, not to mention overseeing HR directly for the past ten years at two different companies. In my experience, the vast majority of people who have problems with how they are "treated by the company" are lazy whiners who walk around with a sh--ty attitude and think they are owed grand rewards for doing the bare minimum. Meanwhile, the people who show up on time without excuses, work hard and contribute to the overall success of the enterprise never seem to have those complaints. Amazing coincidence. And one I'm sure you'll never understand.

[Simon]

Legislature can't do that. That's called a "bill of attainder".

It was one of those royal "they's".

 

If someone's convicted of child molestation and/or statutory rape, they generally won't be allowed to teach again anyway. In fact, nowadays if they're found innocent, they still probbly won't be allowed to teach again.

If someone's convicted. Three big words.

Most of the time these things don't even approach the courts.

 

But if I'm a super in a Minnesota district and you left your last two jobs in Arizona and South Carolina due to allegations of impropriety, I sure want to know about it.

[Simon]

In private business, at least there is a management that actually has a vested interested in keeping this nonsense in check. Who is the 'management' in the public school system? They don't give a damn cause it's not their money. That's why this kind of thing is allowed to fester.

So you're saying that there is a significant difference in private business and public schools? And still trying to apply the same principles to a public school that you do a private business? You might want to rethink that one.

And when you say "it's not their money", are you suggesting that administrators don't pay school taxes like everybody else?

You're making no sense whatsoever.

[pBills]

But "protecting the worker" by not holding people accountable is a basic tenet of unions, so your words ring pretty hollow. I'm guessing your not a reformer.

 

In private business, at least there is a management that actually has a vested interested in keeping this nonsense in check. Who is the 'management' in the public school system? They don't give a damn cause it's not their money. That's why this kind of thing is allowed to fester. No one is interested in fixing unless it shows up in the newspaper.

 

 

Oh sorry...didn't realize you had concrete evidence "that most people wouldn't have 90% maybe more of what they do without the unions". Can't wait for you to post that!

 

I've stated numerous times what I do. I run Finance and Operations for a tech company. My 'rose colored world' includes seeing the inter workings of dozens of companies, including HR and legal practices, not to mention overseeing HR directly for the past ten years at two different companies. In my experience, the vast majority of people who have problems with how they are "treated by the company" are lazy whiners who walk around with a sh--ty attitude and think they are owed grand rewards for doing the bare minimum. Meanwhile, the people who show up on time without excuses, work hard and contribute to the overall success of the enterprise never seem to have those complaints. Amazing coincidence. And one I'm sure you'll never understand.

 

 

No. My words do not ring hollow, you are just stuck in a mentality of hatred towards unions and do not want to listen. You constantly lump everyone into the same category, the same negative role. When in fact there are many extremely hard working union people out there. Many of whom give major portions of their paychecks to charity, many (like me) who do not have large salaries (like you think) that simply have good benefits and support their families any way they can (I work a main job, freelance and a 2nd job). By working multiple jobs, picking up extra shifts, etc. Of course in your mind they are all scum. Again, nice. Way to knock down entire group of people.

 

Now, on to your "nonsense"... I for one have stated COUNTLESS times how I appreciate and respect hard working people with great work ethics. Obviously you are having trouble understanding that with the whole lumping thing you do. If you do a little research you can easily find out how many benefits the average person has gained through the work of unions. Like the end to child labor (unless you are Walmart- yes they have been busted for that in the past), minimum wage, etc. And now protections against intimidation.

 

Have you ever thought that maybe the people you are calling "lazy whiners" are working that way because of the fact that they know that you could give a crap and you don't respect them. Why work hard for a person who could give two craps about you. Sounds like you have the horrible attitude. Although, thats a given.

 

Personally, I would work circles around you just to show you up. But then again, I can see that would get me no where... you wouldn't respect the work.