# I pit stupid partisan schoolteachers **URL:** \ **Category:** The BBQ Pit\ **Created:** [October 6, 2004, 6:27am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-pit-stupid-partisan-schoolteachers/267815 "2004-10-06T06:27:51Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 5
**Author:** ![Zoe](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/z/a4c791/32.png) [@Zoe](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Zoe)\ **Post date:** [October 7, 2004, 8:46am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-pit-stupid-partisan-schoolteachers/267815/81 "2004-10-07T08:46:25Z")
> [@](#): > > **Bear\_Nenno** : Either he forgot and over-stepped his authority (some principals do think they are all powerful), or he lost control in the heat of the argument and told her to grab her stuff and leave. Principals have to take courses in school law before they become administrators. They are well aware of who does the hiring and firing. It would be possible for a principal to relieve a teacher from her post of duty without firing her. Teachers usually work under contractual agreements regardless of whether or not they are members of the “union.” They are professionals and are also informed about the chain of command. The National Education Association is _not_ a union. There is a national teachers’ union (AFT), but it doesn’t have nearly as many members as the NEA. Membership dues cannot be used for political purposes. The NEA does have a Political Action Committee and members can choose to donate to that separately. **Bear\_Nenno** , would you teach your students and other crime scene investigators to jump to conclusions based on insufficient evidence, conjecture and projection and to act upon those conclusions as if they were true? Your posts indicate that you do not differentiate between fact and opinion ---
**Author:** ![Evil\_Death](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/ecccb3/32.png) [@Evil\_Death](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Evil_Death)\ **Post date:** [October 7, 2004, 10:55am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-pit-stupid-partisan-schoolteachers/267815/82 "2004-10-07T10:55:02Z")
> [@Brutus](#): > > New to that school, perhaps. [6 years a teacher](http://www.thnt.com/thnt/story/0,21282,1068611,00.html) , though, seems veteranish to me. You’re a Republican. Two years as a National Guard reservist seems veteranish to you. I don’t agree with this eating crow stuff, though. Where I come from, “crows” is another name for bogies. ---
**Author:** ![Skywatcher](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/skywatcher/32/254_2.png) [@Skywatcher](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Skywatcher)\ **Post date:** [October 7, 2004, 12:56pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-pit-stupid-partisan-schoolteachers/267815/83 "2004-10-07T12:56:12Z")
> [@Brutus](#): > > I still don’t see where even the ass-covering statement from the principal says anything about there not being a montage. In fact, it makes mention of ‘several other Presidential artifacts’. Try this: > [@](#): > > [The New Brunswick Home News Tribune](http://www.thnt.com/thnt/story/0,21282,1070431,00.html) > [Pillai-Diaz] said she also had a picture of Air Force One, and a poster with a signature of all the presidents. That’s your “Presidential montage” - pictures of Bush, his dog, the Oval Office, Air Force One, a copy of the Declaration of Independence, and a poster with all the presidents’ signatures. ---
**Author:** ![glee](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/g/b5a626/32.png) [@glee](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/glee)\ **Post date:** [October 7, 2004, 1:30pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-pit-stupid-partisan-schoolteachers/267815/84 "2004-10-07T13:30:09Z")
> [@Bear\_Nenno](#): > > **glee** , > All of your comments are equally as possible. Except this one: > > > [@glee](#): > > > > (ah, no. They actually asked if Bush had ducked military service. And what reason he had for invading Iraq. And why Rumsfeld had shaken hands with Saddam. And why so many jobs had been lost under Bush.) > > No way. I don’t buy it for a second. If the students were that well informed, they wouldn’t be pestering her. She could even invite them to debate these issues after class or something. I think the students’ comments to her were both malicious and annoyingly without content. It’s a lot more frustrating when someone says “Bush likes Hitler” than when someone says, “Bush should never have invaded Iraq”. > I think the students did pester her. And I think it was the very nature and purpose of the pestering that drove her nuts. She probably could have handled questions about job loss. Actually I think my total guesses are much more likely than your total guesses! You think she’s a reasonable debater. There is no evidence of that. This woman simply walks out of a job rather than discuss things with her boss. Even if your wild guesses are true, you paint a disturbing picture of a woman put in charge of educating children: - you state she’s an opinionated Republican. That has no place in the classroom. - you state there is no way to hide her political affiliation from students. For goodness sake! I’ve been a teacher for nearly 30 years, and no student has ever known my age, whether I’m married or who I vote for. - you come up with ridiculous statements you think the students made to her e.g. ‘Bush is trying to make all people slaves’. Apparently she can’t deal with this. Has this woman no training? - she lets slip some politically biased statements. Gotta love that ‘let slip’. I suppose if she shot a few of them, you’d say ‘it’s a perfectly understandable mistake.’ - weeks go by. She is still being pestered. Gee. If only there was someone she could talk to. Her head of department. The Principal. No, there’s simply nothing you can do about students except let the pressure build. :rolleyes: - the parents approach her at a parent’s evening and start yelling. This is so true to life. :smack: Why **at every single one of my parent-teacher evenings, someone takes out an axe and chases a teacher around the room**. And nobody notices. - the Principal doesn’t really know Ms. Diaz. She’a a new teacher Of course not. It’s not as if the Principal hired her, or has any interest in how a new member of staff is doing. 😕 > [@Bear\_Nenno](#): > > [ > I was just sharing a possibility. I don’t know how anyone could really have a definite side with all the conflicting testimony. > I can’t “debate” your comments, because that’s just how the story feels to you. But it does seem to paint the teacher in an extremely evil light. Almost storybook. > My scenario spreads the blame across all parties involved. Which is actually closer to reality. I’m sorry, but your whole scenario is incredibly unlikely, and you have no evidence for any of it. You set out to slur parents, students and the Principal, just because this teacher supports Bush. ---
**Author:** ![SteveG1](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/bb73d2/32.png) [@SteveG1](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/SteveG1)\ **Post date:** [October 7, 2004, 1:37pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-pit-stupid-partisan-schoolteachers/267815/85 "2004-10-07T13:37:54Z")
It’s the Village of the Damned. The evil children used mind control on the parents and the principal to do their evil bidding, because they knew that the teacher knew. Yeah. That’s the ticket. ---
**Author:** ![lurkernomore](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/l/d6d6ee/32.png) [@lurkernomore](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/lurkernomore)\ **Post date:** [October 7, 2004, 7:06pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-pit-stupid-partisan-schoolteachers/267815/86 "2004-10-07T19:06:03Z")
> [@SteveG1](#): > > It depends. In some cases (my workplace for example), a non-member can request union help. The union can then step in as “the sole bargaining unit” and represents the person. However, that help has to be requested. That may be true in some areas, but in others the union rep is **REQUIRED**. Especially in places where non-members must pay fees. Maybe it’s the way it is phrased, but: > [@](#): > > After the confrontation with the principal she left the building. She returned to retrieve her belongings, accompanied by a police escort, which she requested for her own safety. She was joined by union representative Sylvia Lee, and they discussed the incident for two hours with McCartney and Warfel. makes it look like she specifically requested the cop, but doesn’t mention if the union rep was there at her request or because they were required to be. > [@Steveg1](#): > > I don’t think so. People talk. As soon as word got out that this union was not acting honestly, members would leave in droves. The union, or at least the local, would die out. There is also the “other thing” about union people - being all too human, if there was a case, they would want to tweak “management’s nose” at least a little. Being human, the local membership may also feel she is a freeloader if she is not paying dues, or hurting the union’s position by NOT being a member. The union rep could also feel if she gets fired, they can get a union member in. > [@Steveg1](#): > > They do support candidates, but are not allowed to “force” anyone to support any partisan activities whatsoever. What about when they are paying members to be on a party’s board? > [@](#): > > The union actively participated in the 1996 Clinton-Gore re-election effort. In 1995-96, NEA political division director Mary Elizabeth Teasley and manager John Pacheco in Washington served as NEA representatives on the Democratic National Committee’s National Coordinated Campaign Steering Committee, known as “the national table.” > > Miss Teasley was then being paid $113,264 annually from NEA’s general operating funds, and Mr. Pacheco was paid $96,375 annually. General operating funds. Not PAC funds. And while actual contributions may come from a PAC, the PAC’s fundraisers are on the general fund: > [@](#): > > The NEA’s Washington headquarters spends more than $47 million yearly to field a national advocacy staff called UniServ, > > . > . > > According to NEA documents, UniServ directors administer fund-raising solicitations for the NEA’s political action committee, organize selection of union delegates to party nominating conventions, and organize activities to support NEA-endorsed candidates during election campaigns. > > “Documents show UniServ is paid out of NEA’s general revenues, not its political action committee,” [http://www.childrenfirstamerica.org/DailyNews/03Apr/0407032.htm](http://www.childrenfirstamerica.org/DailyNews/03Apr/0407032.htm) Steve, your union may work differently. Some do. But there are questions here about some organizations. She may be a media-hungry zealot. Or not. I think it too early to judge. Anyway, thanks for the civility lacking in many of the exchanges in this thread. [sub] oh wait - the pit… shitfuckasshole[/sub] ---
**Author:** ![Bear\_Nenno](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/bear_nenno/32/3358_2.png) [@Bear\_Nenno](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bear_Nenno)\ **Post date:** [October 7, 2004, 7:13pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-pit-stupid-partisan-schoolteachers/267815/87 "2004-10-07T19:13:05Z")
> [@](#): > > ]Bear\_Nenno, … Your posts indicate that you do not differentiate between fact and opinion. Oh please! I never claimed any of this was fact. I offered a possibility. I never tried to prove any of it, because it’s not provable. No one here has all the facts. Not even you. There are two completely different statements out right now. Are you going to take the second one to be 100% fact because it came out second? Geeez. > [@](#): > > You set out to slur parents, students and the Principal, just because this teacher supports Bush. That’s just lame. This has nothing to do with Bush. On the contrary I think you believe the teacher is 100% wrong solely because she supports Bush. If she likes Bush, every bad thing that was mentioned about her must be true. ---
**Author:** ![sqweels](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/f19dbf/32.png) [@sqweels](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/sqweels)\ **Post date:** [October 7, 2004, 7:53pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-pit-stupid-partisan-schoolteachers/267815/88 "2004-10-07T19:53:16Z")
> [@](#): > > New to that school, perhaps. 6 years a teacher , though, seems veteranish to me. Then I trust she had pictures of then-President Clinton on her bulletin board 4 years ago. ---
**Author:** ![kaylasdad99](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/kaylasdad99/32/3398_2.png) [@kaylasdad99](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/kaylasdad99)\ **Post date:** [October 7, 2004, 7:58pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-pit-stupid-partisan-schoolteachers/267815/89 "2004-10-07T19:58:35Z")
okay, **lurkernomore** , you’ve got me confused with your last post. You keep going on about the NEA, even _after_ it’s been pointed out that the NEA is not a teacher’s union. You conflate that with a somewhat vague assertion that in some [unspecified by you, but I’m willing to let that pass] areas the presence of a union representative is required when labor-management dispute issues are proceeding. If you want to move from “required to pay fees” to the NEA spending general operating funds for their members to serve on a political party’s board, you need to do a better job of connecting dots to show that the NEA took any of Ms. Diaz’s money. ---
**Author:** ![Bear\_Nenno](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/bear_nenno/32/3358_2.png) [@Bear\_Nenno](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bear_Nenno)\ **Post date:** [October 7, 2004, 8:19pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-pit-stupid-partisan-schoolteachers/267815/90 "2004-10-07T20:19:27Z")
[http://www.thnt.com/thnt/story/0,21282,1068611,00.html](http://www.thnt.com/thnt/story/0,21282,1068611,00.html) This is not making sense to me. If Ms. Diaz was talking up the president and Republicans and preaching her politics, why would the parents email the Assistant Principal complaining that she was “_suppressing free speech because the teacher **refused** to talk to pupils about why the color photo hung in the room._” If she is refusing to talk about the photo, then she is not taking every chance to preach her beliefs. Shouldn’t the complaint be, “My son asked her why the picture was there, and she told him it’s because he is a great president and because democrats are morons.” If she was doing this, the complaint would not be that she “refused to talk to pupils” about the picture. > [@kaylassdad99](#): > > I mean, for Pete’s sake, you began by casting the students, with their opinions, as the product of parents who are ignorant, uninformed trash. Want to know how I conclude that? To start, a seventh grader is only going to know/repeat what his parents say about politics. (With the exception of an extreme minority of genius 12 year olds) The students made comments to her like, ''You like George Bush? He’s killed people!" That is not the statement of an informed, intelligent person. An informed person would say something like, “You like George Bush? How can you get past the fact that because of his wrongful invasion of a foreign country, thousands of innocent lives have been lost. He is responsible for the deaths of thousands of Iraqis and Americans” So, with that in mind, and the fact that I’ve been told by middle school students that George Bush wants to “make all the black people slaves again” I’m wagering that these students are similar to the ignorant inner-city types that I dealt with. Again, I am not trying to claim this is a FACT. I’m offering a version of events that will fit all the testimony giving. Your version only seems to incorporate the Administrations spin on things. Well then I ask, if the administration is so mad about her talking about Bush and politics, why would the Assistant Principal order her to “address questions that arose because of the photo.” According to the link above, it was Ms. Diaz’s policy to not talk about politics in class. But because of all the students’ questions, and the parents’ complaints about her ignoring those questions the AP tells her she must “address” those questions. So not only did the principal and assistant principal not prevent this from unfolding, it appears they may have unintentionally provoked it by forcing Ms. Diaz to talk about the photo. ---
**Author:** ![SteveG1](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/bb73d2/32.png) [@SteveG1](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/SteveG1)\ **Post date:** [October 7, 2004, 8:45pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-pit-stupid-partisan-schoolteachers/267815/91 "2004-10-07T20:45:19Z")
> [@lurkernomore](#): > > That may be true in some areas, … > > Steve, your union may work differently. Some do. …But there are questions here about some organizations. … > [sub] oh wait - the pit… shitfuckasshole[/sub] I was only describing my own local, because that way I could be sure of my facts. I am sure there are other locals/unions that operate the same way. However I am not willing to stick my feet in my mouth by speaking for all of them. By the way, great siggy line 😃 ---
**Author:** ![lurkernomore](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/l/d6d6ee/32.png) [@lurkernomore](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/lurkernomore)\ **Post date:** [October 7, 2004, 8:59pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-pit-stupid-partisan-schoolteachers/267815/92 "2004-10-07T20:59:03Z")
> [@kaylasdad99](#): > > okay, **lurkernomore** , you’ve got me confused with your last post. You keep going on about the NEA, even _after_ it’s been pointed out that the NEA is not a teacher’s union. You conflate that with a somewhat vague assertion that in some [unspecified by you, but I’m willing to let that pass] areas the presence of a union representative is required when labor-management dispute issues are proceeding. > > If you want to move from “required to pay fees” to the NEA spending general operating funds for their members to serve on a political party’s board, you need to do a better job of connecting dots to show that the NEA took any of Ms. Diaz’s money. actually, we were discussing educational unions and a political lean. I never said she was directly associated with NEA. As far as union reps going to meetings, here are some quotes: > [@](#): > > In accordance with the applicable provisions of the Federal Service Labor/Management Relations Statute, the Union has been recognized as the exclusive representative of the employees included in the bargaining unit > . > . > . > However, when an Employee(s) personally presents a grievance in accordance with Article 8, the Union will be notified of and given an opportunity to attend any meetings to present, discuss, or resolve the grievance, and upon request, will be provided with any written responses, agreements, or settlements. [http://www.afge1309.org/librarycontract/a06.html](http://www.afge1309.org/librarycontract/a06.html) So there the union CAN choose to attend a meeting they were NOT ask to go to. similarly, > [@](#): > > In the case of an individual grievant proceeding without Union representation, the Union must be given the opportunity to present and offer its view at any meeting held to adjust the grievance. [http://www.local3721.org/working\_conditions/wc\_article31.html](http://www.local3721.org/working_conditions/wc_article31.html) so there are several places where the union CAN go to a meeting whether the grievant wants them or not. Maybe not required, at least in these cases - but where the grievant did NOT have a choice. ---
**Author:** ![DMC](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/dmc/32/18049_2.png) [@DMC](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/DMC)\ **Post date:** [October 7, 2004, 9:34pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-pit-stupid-partisan-schoolteachers/267815/93 "2004-10-07T21:34:22Z")
> [@Brutus](#): > > Please point out the specific line that refutes what I quoted. The line that looks like this, right above the words “Charter member”? > [@](#): > > Brutus ---
**Author:** ![Brutus](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/91b2a8/32.png) [@Brutus](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Brutus)\ **Post date:** [October 7, 2004, 9:43pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-pit-stupid-partisan-schoolteachers/267815/94 "2004-10-07T21:43:10Z")
Actually, the line above ‘Charter Member’ looks like this: \_\_\_\_\_\_ ---
**Author:** ![Skywatcher](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/skywatcher/32/254_2.png) [@Skywatcher](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Skywatcher)\ **Post date:** [October 7, 2004, 10:02pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-pit-stupid-partisan-schoolteachers/267815/95 "2004-10-07T22:02:01Z")
> [@Brutus](#): > > Actually, the line above ‘Charter Member’ looks like this: \_\_\_\_\_\_ Perfect summary of your opinions. 😃 ---
**Author:** ![Brutus](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/91b2a8/32.png) [@Brutus](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Brutus)\ **Post date:** [October 7, 2004, 10:04pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-pit-stupid-partisan-schoolteachers/267815/96 "2004-10-07T22:04:47Z")
> [@Lute Skywatcher](#): > > Perfect summary of your opinions. 😃 😕 Ya, I have always leaned towards horizontal opinions… ---
**Author:** ![Skywatcher](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/skywatcher/32/254_2.png) [@Skywatcher](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Skywatcher)\ **Post date:** [October 7, 2004, 10:17pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-pit-stupid-partisan-schoolteachers/267815/97 "2004-10-07T22:17:11Z")
> [@Brutus](#): > > 😕 An empty line. 🙂 ---
**Author:** ![Brutus](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/91b2a8/32.png) [@Brutus](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Brutus)\ **Post date:** [October 7, 2004, 10:22pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-pit-stupid-partisan-schoolteachers/267815/98 "2004-10-07T22:22:41Z")
> [@Lute Skywatcher](#): > > An empty line. 🙂 And I wasn’t being obtuse, either! ---
**Author:** ![kaylasdad99](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/kaylasdad99/32/3398_2.png) [@kaylasdad99](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/kaylasdad99)\ **Post date:** [October 7, 2004, 10:31pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-pit-stupid-partisan-schoolteachers/267815/99 "2004-10-07T22:31:47Z")
> [@Brutus](#): > > And I wasn’t being obtuse, either! Well , if you’re waiting for **me** to say you’re acute poster, you can just go on waiting. You’ll be getting no complememts from me. ---
**Author:** ![Zoe](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/z/a4c791/32.png) [@Zoe](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Zoe)\ **Post date:** [October 7, 2004, 11:57pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-pit-stupid-partisan-schoolteachers/267815/100 "2004-10-07T23:57:21Z")
**Lurkernomore** , I don’t know how to say it any clearer. The National Education Association is **not** a union. Union rules do not apply. I was a member in good standing for twenty years. I was also a member of the Tennessee Education Association and the Metropolitan Nashville Association. Because I was a member, I had the right to request their assistance in the handling of any grievances. If I had not been a member, I would not have had that particular benefit. The **union** is the American Federation of Teachers. Union rules apply there. I am pro union but I was not a member. It was not necessary or appropriate where I live. You are confusing things just as your sources did. It is a common mistake to refer to NEA as a union. But it is **not**. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-pit-stupid-partisan-schoolteachers/267815.md?page=4) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-pit-stupid-partisan-schoolteachers/267815.md?page=6)