Reggie Hilts
Some interesting things in that article; thanks for linking it.
I find this interesting because in my previous link there’s this:
So the first thing is that School Board Asshat Fontana, with a gesture, gave direction to Officer Hilts to remove Miss Hargrave; Officer Hilts did not move to do that on his own. Yet School Board Jackasshole Fontana paints the picture so he personally had nothing to do with Miss Hargraves removal, it was all Officer Hilts decision (but he supports Officer Hilts’ decision and actions).
Second, he lied about the circumstances that led to Miss Hargraves speaking. There’s video; we can see that she was not speaking out of turn.
Third: what the fuck, Officer Hilts? What the fuck?
TL; DR: What a dishonest piece of shit this Fontana guy is. And what the fuck, Officer Hilts?
Wait a minute . . .
*
CNN has reached out to the city marshal’s office for comment. *
Reached out? Be careful – this woman was just arrested for reaching out to the school board. We need to find a more cuddly euphemism for investigative reporters asking hard questions.
You mean something like “CNN has poked the hornet’s nest that is the city marshal’s office for comment”?
Oh wait, you mean more cuddly, not more direct.
How about “CNN has lovingly gazed into the abyss that is the city marshal’s office for reassurance”?
Superintendent = fat cat who wants to become fatter, news at 11.
He will probably receive a raise in salary.
I admit when I first saw this reported with the title of “Teacher arrested for asking questions” my gut reaction was to think, no, the teacher was arrested for being belligerent/causing a scene after asking a question. Then I watched the video and boy was my gut wrong.
Alessan:
What does a union have to do with what happened?
I hope she sues the living crap out of the school board, the superintendent, and the marshal. They said they weren’t going to sue her? Like they’re doing her some sort of favor? Someone’s been inhaling too much swamp gas.
Glad you asked. A strong union would have negotiated pay raises (and other working conditions) that would not have led to the current situation, thus obviating the need for Miss Hargrave to speak out in the first place.
But the American public has been taught for over 50 years now that unions are evil and only want to destroy businesses and murder business owners and eat their children while performing Satanic rituals to heavy metal music… :dubious:
Live better: work union.
Snowboarder Bo:
So, because she would have gotten a raise, a raise for a superintendent who is making the teachers’ jobs harder would have simply gone unchallenged, and that’s a good thing?
I would hope someone still would have spoken up. And if they did, the school board and their goon would have done the same to them. And we’d be having this thread about that victim, and the matter of teachers’ unions would have been moot.
With the Sinclair Broadcasting Group acquisition of Tribune Media*, and the consequent very-near-monopoly on local newscasting of the new behemoth, the anti-union message will become even more ubiquitous and inescapable.
And, jeez. I join those hoping that the Louisiana teacher can teach those bullies a lesson in court.
*Apparently the final finagling of the deal includes some Sinclair stations becoming Fox stations. Won’t be a whole lot of difference, messaging-wise. From a local market, yesterday:
Denver TV stations likely in play as Sinclair, Tribune and Fox see moves
Believe it or not, there are times when raises are necessary and even okay. If the district had enough money to give regular raises to teachers, it isn’t a stretch to think that there would have been enough money for the school board to get raises as well.
If you’d like to posit a hypothetical where the teachers are screwed and the school board doesn’t deserve a raise despite the presence of a strong teachers’ union, I’d prolly agree that someone should speak up.
But the post that sparked the union discussion wasn’t about how a union would have been ineffective, so I answered the question asked: “in what way might the presence of a strong teachers’ union have been able to mitigate or avoid the current situation?”
So in your opinion any raise for the school board member is automatically wrong and should be opposed?
Snowboarder Bo:
Who says the only reason to oppose a superintendent’s raise is a lack of teacher raises? Seems to me like the school board has a policy of suppressing dissent, and a similar thing would have happened to anyone who expressed opposition for whatever reason. Maybe if there were a strong teachers’ union, this particular teacher wouldn’t have had this particular objection. But a public body using force to suppress opposition to its policies is a bad thing, and the situation would have come about at some point, it seems to me.
With a teacher’s union, it’s likely the school board would be too scared to do anything like this. Fuck with a teacher, and the union comes down on you. And they’d have to essentially collude together (which is unlikely to happen) in order to suppress the parents or other citizens.
Unions don’t exist just to negotiate contracts. They exist to create a balance of power. The problem in this situation seems to be a school board with too much power, thinking they could get away with abusing it.
I want everyone in power to be scared of what would happen if they were to abuse it. It’s the only way to moderate our natural human tendency to allow power to corrupt.
I hope she gets fired, gets a nice payout, then runs for school board and can then 1. fire that superintendent and then 2. give teachers raises.
Many years ago the school superintendent came to our school to discuss renewing a particular reading program for our district. It was an expensive, non-viable program, and things that had been promised never came to pass (adequate supplies, extra staff to implement the program, etc.) It’s an open secret that the big publishing companies pay off districts to buy new programs.
I stood up to express my concerns and to ask who was really benefiting from this deal, because it wasn’t the children. The super’s “handler” gasped his indignation, said how dare you accuse the superintendent of taking bribes! I had said no such thing, but by then they had both rushed out of the room. There were repercussions, but my teacher’s union had my back. Thank goodness for their protection!
By the next school term the super was out on his behind, accused of (you guessed it) taking kickbacks.
TL/DR: Hats off to the brave teacher for speaking truth to power, and support your unions!
They also exist to keep the incompetent and the corrupt from being fired. (Like bad cops and bad teachers.)
Yeah, that;s right, unions exist solely to ensure that workers can be lazy, inefficient and greedy - that’s the whole purpose of unions.
Whereas managers are there only to provide good well paid jobs, good working conditions and supremely good value for money and are never in place to abuse their power or award themselves large bonuses, they are never in place to cut corners on safety, they are the most munificent individuals and should never ever be challenged or held accountable.
Yeah that’s right. and we can all give oodles of examples of exemplars of such managers and unions - we can do this by carefully selecting our facts to suit our own pet right wing bias - there is never any need to actually look at the full picture - just stand on the outside of the tent and piss in.
I didn’t say the only reason-- just one of them.
No, it is Chicago Blues.