I don’t actually want to offend anyone too badly, so if you are a strong union advocate, you might want to skip over what I write and just assume that I hate all large-scale unions. A little history lesson before I rant:
The AFL was founded in 1886. (Formerly the Knights of Labor)
The CIO was founded in 1938. (The two now make the present day union organization)
The initial “unions” were called trade guilds and their roots trace back to pre-industial era times.
Now for my ranting.
I firmly believe that most unions (generally large scale ones) are the bane of our society. They represent the archaic, outdated economic practices during the early part of, “modern history.” Originally, unions were opressed and destroyed by the corporatinos that faced them, but over time, they grew very powerful into the monstrosities we see today. Yes, I know unions help workers get benefits, increase salaries where richly deserved and keep the greedy corporations from reaping all of the profits. The problem is, such unions are just as greedy and just want a piece of the corporate pie. Unions now have so much power that companies can barely run day-to-day operations without having the union approval stamp. The federal goverment has a history of helping unions (being bribed in many cases, no doubt) and union members are as actively involved in how their unions are run as I was in creating the Earth. (That’s called sarcasm to you nitpickers) this is not the full extent of my venting, but I will let others respond so I can tear them to shreds for their stupidity.
IF YOU DARE! TRY TO SUPPORT TEACHER UNIONS! TRY IT AND I WILL TEACH YOU A FEW THINGS ABOUT COMMON SENSE! ABOVE ALL ELSE, I WANT TO ADDRESS TEACHER UNIONS AND THEIR SHEER STUPIDITY!
Sua,
I’ve been around thanks.
Could you explain then the UAW?
Perhaps since I never mentioned anthing on the decline in union membership, (% wise) (thank God for collective bargaining) the amount of people in unions is not the point I’m driving at. I am more concerned about union influence and corruption. Alos, all “Great Debate” topics are rants of one sort of another, but I want to learn more about unions and why people support them as much as I want to prove them wrong. So not to worry, I will not rant much more, i merely want to make cause for discussion.
Get back to us when you can point to a UAW or AFSCME scam that is even 0.1% the size of Enron. (Interesting that you picked the UAW which, in comparison to the Teamsers, for example, has an exemplary record of honesty.)
(You wouldn’t happen to actually possess a fact to which you could allude?)
The federal government also has a history of helping corporations. Conrail, Chrysler, the domestic airline industry after Sept. 11. Was this entirely a bad thing? Was the government bribed in these cases?
In my experience as a member of the United Steelworkers from 1972 to 1981, union members were at least as involved, on average, in the workings of the union as the general electorate is in the workings of the Republican or Democratic parties. Are we implying a double standard here?
In any event, if the thesis is “unions are bane of our lives”, whose lives are we referring to? Are you contending that the costs of certain goods and services are impossible for the average person to meet because of the existence of unions? If so, how about submitting an example?
While I think that a valid argument could be made that many unions have little to do with representing their members, and a lot to do with supporting Democrats, I don’t see unions as being the ‘bane of our society’.
I don’t have a lot of love for unions myself, but I think godogs is overstating their power. A different division of the company I work for pretty much slapped the Teamsters local 89 around like its personal beyatch. After a ten-week strike, the workers approved a contract that was virtually identical to the first one it was offered. So, strikers got a ten week non-paid vacation and pretty much cemented distrust between the union and the company. Oh, and now the union is suing the company. Yeah, happy day!
Teachers unions are one of the most important organizations working for positive changes in America today, and the entire country would probably have gone down the tubes a long time ago without them. Teaching is quite possibly the most difficult job in America today (if you don’t believe me, try supervizing a group of thirty eight-year-olds for just one day), and teachers are highly underpaid while subject to a ridiculous number of demands on their time. Needless to say, without the teachers unions, pay would fall even more, thus discouraging any talented people at all from entering the field. What many people don’t realize is the lengths that city and county governments go to in order to make life miserable for the teachers. In many districts, the teachers are forced to renegotiate their contract every year, and when they do, the government often fights hard in an attempt to minimize pay and slash every benefit that they get.
Of course, people will always whine about how the teachers unions try to protect the job of “bad” teachers. These days, needless to say, “good” teachers are the ones who will teach to the ridiculous and meaningless set of high-stakes tests established by hostile state legislatures that in reality care more for their approval ratings than for the good of the state’s children, while “bad” teachers are the ones who insist on focusing on skills that the children will actually use in life. Other than that, the case against teachers unions rests entirely on a bunch of completly groundless charges (“Teachers unions support child molesters!”) drummed up by right wing politicians and pundits.
Well, I don’t have a cite for this, but IMHO, teacher’s unions are way more concerned with getting more jobs for lousy teachers than they are with improving the state of education in the U.S.
Their stance against vouchers is very transparent: jobs for marginal teachers are more important than improved education for poor children.
I would say that teachers’ unions are even more necessary today than they were twenty years ago. These days, more parents are “involved” in their children’s education, which means they spend more time lobbying teachers for higher grades (which is, of course, the child’s job). My boss at the job I had a few years back explained to me how he was planning to sue the school district to get his daughter into an AP class in 9th grade, since not getting in would damage her self-esteem. The district backed down and found a place for her, but the thoughts he expressed of recriminations he had were idle fantasy.
My own father was a union teacher for 35 years, and for most of that time made considerably less than bus drivers with equal tenure. Also, my brother-in-law’s face started going numb around 1pm every day, it was the Teamsters who made sure he got his doctors bills paid for, since the company had hoped to “rightsize” him.
Not that I need to say this, because even a common fool would undrstand it, but is it or isn’t it true that teachers (including all seven in my immediate and extended families) are not to expect the best pay for their jobs? Nobody ever told me that if I wanted to make money, become a teacher because in truth teachers are paid horribly. Now you union defenders, explain your support to my father, a private school teachers with over 30 years experience being payed pittance for his job. He is renowned as one of the formost teachers in my community, and I daresay one of the best teachers I have ever had myself. Explain to him how your unions justify teacher stikes right before terms start in September. Explain to him that after Sept. 11, by mid December actually unions were demanding still more from schools. Defend how tenured teachers are among the most reviled by students. Explain why teachers even need tenure. I never had a problem without it (being vwery good at what I do, mind you) Explain why teachers need paid vacation when we get summers off? Justify why all of you tenured teachers out there would rather use every vacation and sick day you have when my father has missed only three days of school in the past ten years. (only one of which was due to illness) I know you cannot justify or explain these, and guess what? Unions are the reason for these problems. I am not really complaining becasue I enjoy my job and I can control my classes without help, but I am concerned that I have to face teachers who really don’t care about their children.
The bottom line is: If you want to make money, become a stockbroker. If you want to improve the lives of others, become a teacher. Of course teachers are paid horribly, that is given when signing up for the job. Did any of you expect to make money from teaching? And yes, ITR champion, the problem IS there are too many bad teachers out there, and if YOU whine about teaching being too hard, (because I agree it is the hardest profession TO DO WELL) find another line of work. I would rather face a class of fifty and know I can teach than to face a class of twenty and know that other stuents are getting a terrble teacher. These problems are fueled by teacher unions and the support they rally.
Y’know, rants utterly lacking in substance really do belong in the BBQ Pit. If you can provide nothing more than sweeping generalizations, unsupported by facts, then you are in the wrong place.
(Here’s a first clue: while many unionized teachers are making somewhat more money than many non-unionized teachers–although that is not universally true–no primary or secondary school teacher is getting wealthy.
Here’s a second clue: if we really want the best people to do a job that requires longer-than-average hours while putting up with elevated levels of direct interference from management, parents, and government, perhaps we should pay them better and attempt to reduce the levels of interference–which is the general object of unions.)
Not all unions are wonderful. Not all ideas emanating from unions are wise. Not all actions encouraged by unions are appropriate. Whining that unions are “bad” because in your unsupported opinion your father has reaped fewer rewards than if he had joined a union (which was his choice, by the way) simply makes you look petulant, as well as ill-informed.
Unfortunately tomndebb, you are wrong on many counts. My “sweeping generalizations” are not unsupported nor are they even generalizations. I am not complaining that unionized teachers are being payed more, that is what should happen with unions. My problem is that too many teachers, and if you are one you know what I mean, treat the job as a job. Teaching does entail long hours of arduous work without pay, but if you want pay for your work, get a different job! Nor was I complaining that my father made too little not being in a union, I mentioned him because he is an outstanding teacher who does not need union backing (although he is part of a collective bargaining group which is very much different than a union) He chose the lower pay becasue he is a true teacher, as am I. He did not and does not need higher wages and benefits to be happy and he is the proof. I don’t know what makes you think these are my opinions because if you are a teacher, you cannot refute the truth, and if you aren’t, you might want to get a clue before speaking. I do not have any problem with teachers vying for better pay, my problem is (pay close attention please) that too many teachers, because of unions, become teachers because they expect good pay. When they don’t get it, it is THEY who whine (ever been part of a strike in early Sept for example?) that they are not paid enough. I gladly accept what I am paid without worry because like many of my colleagues, we value teaching more than we value money. What we really need is to motivate teachers to care about their students, and giving us more money only makes us more greedy, defeating the whole point.
GDG
P.S. Of course not all aspects of unions are bad, but please admit that they only facilitate greed that should not exist in the first place.
The place to fight greed is through religion or philosophy, not by denying others the right to seek a better life for their dependents by securing a fair salary.
Your generalizations are still too broad and unsupported. Please provide a reference indicating that unionized teachers only address financial issues in contracts rather than addressing working conditions. It would seem that you are actually protesting your father’s approach, in which he only seeks better pay (collective bargaining) without addressing the other issues of micromanagement in the classroom by outside forces. (You have claimed to be a teacher, please do your homework and demonstrate some facts* and logic. This remains an unsubstantiated rant.)
**E.g.*, provide a source indicating that the primary issue on the majority of contract disputes is getting the highest possible salary ouut of the district; provide a source that shows that unions never address the issues of teacher safety, teacher hours, non-teaching duties, etc.
So, what’s the story, godogsgo13? You prefer that only people with lots of money push other people around? If anyone who doesn’t live in a $3 million apartment tries it (through sheer weight of numbers, mind you), then they’re an evil unionist?
