Fucked up removal and arrest aside, is a superintendent making $140k that unreasonable? And would the extra $30k a year they’re paying for that job make any noticeable difference if spread evenly among all the faculty and staff?
Sigh. I wish that weren’t true, but it is. About 35 years ago, I was a member (non-voting parent representative) of our local school board. One case we discussed involved a teacher who simply could not maintain order in his classroom. The principal amassed a large dossier filled with complaints from students, from parents, and, most damning of all, from the teachers in adjacent classrooms whose classes were disturbed by the chaos next door. He was fired, the union took the school board to court and, astonishingly, won. The judge ruled that the principal must have started the school determined to get the teacher fired else he wouldn’t have compiled that dossier.
A second case involved a teacher who never showed up (she was apparently suffering deep depression). Although the firing would have held up (I assume, but so did the union), the union came to the board and said, in effect, “Look, it will cost us at least $25,000 to fight this case and it will cost you the same. Are you willing to offer her $50,000, half from each of us, to resign?” They were and she took it.
Our meetings were always open to the public, but hardly anyone came. All the real decisions were taken in a “committee of the whole” that took place just before the public meeting, which just rubber-stamped them.
No, they do not. My cite is every union charter ever; what’s yours?
Oh that’s so much better isn’t it.
This might surprise you but union members pay for union support, and expect in return to receive a service.
As a union rep I do not get to make a judgement on a personal case, my remit is to fulfill my role by providing support for which the member has paid, I don’t get to choose how well or how badly I do that, I don’t get to choose whom I support.
Do we argue that the main purpose of attorneys and lawyers is to ensure that criminals are set free? Idiots might decide that this is indeed their purpose, but in fact the real purpose is to hold authorities to account and provide evidence and proof and ensure that due process are followed.
This is similar to the role of the union advocate, as a union rep I do not write the contracts, but I may have a hand in negotiating terms and conditions - but this is at the behest of members and frequently it is useful for managers to have one place to refer their queries instead of deal with thousands of employees as individuals.
I am so disappointed with the arguments that right wing folk make, especially those on this board who surely should have the intellect to have some understanding of the need for adequate and effective representation, its as if they genuinely believe that the overthrow of society and complete destruction of its values is the only reason that unions exist.
I would have hoped that Dopers would be intelligent enough to understand that anecdotes are not data, that one personal case does not represent the whole gamut of work that union reps undertake, or even that the reality is that industrial power tends to lie with the employer and the majority of the time the power holders get what they want.
Lets imagine a world without worker representation then, what would it look like?
Do you think that employers would universally offer their staff fair terms and conditions?
How do you imagine workers got anything at all - the clue is to look at early industrial relations - you might also look at safety laws - who do you think is one of the major contributors to the consultation process?
If you imagine that employers are happy to spend lots of money keeping their workforce alive and well - well good luck to you, your world must be extremely gentle and fluffy, because I have dealt large numbers of assaults on workers by members of the public and offenders, I know many workers who have suffered ill effects from asbestos, from coal dust - and guess what - they still would be no protection from such hazards were it not for unions.(I live in a mining town)
Unions act as a counter to power, if you want to live in a world where your fate is controlled only by the whims of managers then feel free to move to China - or to the many other nations that do not give a damn about their workforce - you have plenty to choose from, I invite you to live in a managers paradise, I’m pretty sure it will soon become as unattractive as the polar opposite which is the workers paradise of Russia.
Its about balance, its about ensuring truth is spoken to power, its about democracy, its about those at the bottom having some sort of leverage in a world where they would otherwise be powerless.
Clearly you have not observed the working conditions of staff in countries such as Bangladesh, or the powerless workers in the US who happen to have no advocates because they are illegal migrants.
Yes I have seen incompetent and lazy individuals hang on to their jobs equally I see lots of corrupt and greedy Ex Os who dodge their tax and get the current administration to ‘reduce their burden’ I see executive pay going up and up for no additional value to the shareholder, I see plenty of corruption, incompetence and greed at the top - but somehow its the ones at the bottom who tend to find themselves facing disciplinary proceedings, whilst the executives at the top seem to get away Scott free.
That’s the way things are, it will not change in a hurry if at all, unions are simply a reaction to the powerful - who tend to abuse that power - if you want to rid yourself of dealing with unions, maybe it would be a good idea to remove the reasons that workers feel they need to organise and collectively protect themselves from the powerful - most of us just want a quiet life to live in our own little worlds with a modicum of dignity, its just that the wealthy don’t seem to want that to happen.
I already live there. I’m good with it.
I don’t disagree with everything you are stating, but there are millions of people, myself included, that don’t belong to a union, and I guess are “controlled only by the whims of managers” right here in the US of A.
It’s Louisiana, a state notorious for giving low salaries to government employees. For instance for a long while as a regular patrol officer I was making considerably more than the chief of the New Orleans Police Department. Recently it seems to be getting better. $140,000 is still a very good salary for the area.
Wrong link.
Sorry about that: Officer involved has a history of using excessive force.
No, because it was the efforts of unions and unionized workers that had laws passed for things like minimum wage, worker protections, 40 hour weeks, over time, paid vacations, sick times, and so forth. Non-union workers reap the benefits of union workers’ efforts all the time, but they don’t know history so they think they got all that for free, or because the oligarchs are somehow benevolent.
I’ve never belonged to a union, either, but I don’t have the illusion, as so many do, that I haven’t benefited from the effects of unions on the country.
I don’t have that illusion either. I was simply taking offense with the statement that only places like China have people who don’t belong to unions and they have crappy working conditions.
Mind-blowing that things like this can happen. For over a decade it has been a given that at least 80% (totally just made that up) of the members of any given audience will have a cell-phone camera on them, and that someone can be counted on to be getting footage either overtly or on the sly. I mean, no officials do anything in public without a super good chance someone is recording it. Heck, even cops making a traffic cop can count on being recorded by at least one of the trifecta of their cruiser’s dash cam, their own body cam, or the cell phone of the person they’re approaching. And STILL they act up like they have a prayer of turning it into a “he said/she said”. I don’t get it.
The rough stuff didn’t happen until he got her out into the hallway and though they were going to be alone.
One wonders if that is they way he treats anyone he arrests. If so, the question then arises, is he an evil bastard or merely stupid?
Let’s take the question of whether unions are good or bad to another thread. Any further hijacking of this thread will be moderated.
Exactly my point. Turns out he also had a blonde close enough to rifle through his utility belt had she wanted to, and someone else rolling the video. He assumed he was alone when anyone with any sense (like, with any sense) would have known otherwise. I got nowhere to go with this, I’m still marveling at Officer Unfriendly’s noncop skills.
I’ve watched the twelve minute video … the teacher was giving the time to express her concerns before the vote … the vote didn’t go her way … so she stood up again to express her concerns after the matter was settled … the second time she was “out-of-order”, and just repeating what she had already said when she was “in-order” … I’ve presided over meetings like this and her behavior after the vote was disruptive …
She could have followed the police officer’s instructions … but she didn’t … and bad things happened to her afterward … there’s plenty of blame to spread around here, just saying this teacher deserves her share …
So a breach of Robert’s Rules of Order is an arrestable offence in the United States?
[Johnny Carson voice]I did not know that![/Johnny Carson voice]
LAE is an affiliate of the American Association of Educators, which is not a union. It provides the same protections of a union without getting involved in politics like the NEA and AFT do.