There is currently debate in Canada about blocking public school teachers from striking.
In Canada all public school teachers are unionized, I have no idea how it is set up in the US (any one care to shed some light?).
I support this move by the government fully but I’m looking to hear the other side of the argument. I have several friends that are public school teachers and not one of them seems to be able to put together a reasonable response. It mostly boils down to, “if you don’t think we should strike, then we are important, and deserve more money.”
While it is true that teachers are important and deserve more money, I don’t believe that striking is the way to achieve that goal. Its a case there the ends doesn’t justify the means. The strike hurst the students and parents far too much. The best example is grade 12 students trying to apply to university and for scholarhips. If teachers strike and they can’t submit their marks by the university’s deadline, the student suffers.
Keep in mind that his legislation is not removing their right to collective agreement. It is meant to promote negotionations, and move towards arbitration, while stoping them from “working to rule” and then striking. The legislation has yet to be finalized so there is little other information that I can provide.