Skip to comments.Unions Aren't the Only Option If Teachers Want Protection
Posted on 01/14/2013 6:25:21 AM PST by MichCapCon
As Michigan transitions to a right-to-work state, the main benefit for teachers and others is that they will not be forced to financially support a union as a condition of employment.
Probably the biggest complaint from public school teachers about their union is the amount of money spent on politics and where that money goes. This shouldnt be surprising: The National Education Association, the largest teachers union in the country, took a survey of its membership a few years back and found that a strong majority classify themselves as politically conservative.
Yet at the same time, the Michigan Education Association endorsed 97 percent Democrats while the union pushes all sorts of left-wing social issues from Obamacare to race-based preferences to the federal stimulus program.
One consideration for teachers would be to follow the educators in Roscommon and sever ties with the MEA by forming a local association. But there are other ways for teachers to get the benefits of union membership while avoiding paying money to a political group with whom they disagree.
The Association of American Educators is one of several non-union teacher association alternatives. AAE provides liability insurance, legal counsel and other resources for teachers with voluntary professional fees significantly less than what they would pay in dues to a labor union.
who do teachers need to be protected from? in most areas, teachers work for a guy who works for a guy that is ultimately elected by the voters — or at least overseen by the voters.
why do teachers need to be protected from the voters?
unions were originally created to protect workers’ safety from being sacrificed to corporate profits. state and local government aren’t created to make a profit.
(same deal with fireman and policemen, by the way.)
The unions want to protect the gravy train and aren’t all that concerned about protecting individual teachers.
In inner city schools the teachers probably do have legitimate safety concerns but that just means they need a little top drawer protection.
Then you have the fully indoctrinated marxist teachers who see all things as a dire threat like the idiot who is suing because she has a fear of students but wants to keep getting paid.
Ohio teacher cites fear of children in discrimination suit
The trouble with teachers unions is that teachers are neither “white collar” nor “blue collar” workers, so are a poor fit to either unions or professional organizations.
Adding to the problem is that traditionally, states have horribly abused teachers in appalling ways, from using teaching jobs as political (sometimes political/religious) patronage, to racial segregation, to attrition-by-seniority, or demanding advanced degrees and then culling those who earn those degrees to avoid paying them more, and having numerous people with the power to fire them by whim. And the list goes on and on.
Colleges and universities got around a lot of these problems by creating multi-state accreditation organizations, that would refuse to accept student credentials or records from non-accredited schools.
This tended to “level the playing field” across several states for college teachers as well. However, today, such an organization could only happen in right to work states, as it would take the place of teacher unions.
One of its most important functions would be to insure that teachers are properly credentialed with strong standards in the first place, that hiring decisions are objective, and that teachers who fail and are suspended or fired, must be done so with the approval of the accrediting agencies disciplinary process.
A big issue today is the punishment of teachers for what amounts to “bad students”. And yes, there are “bad students”. A teacher in intermediate English cannot be held responsible for not teaching their subject if they get a class filled with students who are illiterate.
However, if a teacher violates the “four rules” of how teachers get fired(*), they should be fired promptly, not after years of litigation.
1. Teacher soapboxes politics, exhibits bias, does not teach their subject, or demonstrates incompetence as a teacher.
2. Teacher offends students, their parents, their faculty peers and department chairman, the administration, and/or the community.
3. Teacher engages in sexual fraternization with students, or faculty peers (at school), or is aware of it or improper student fraternization and does not report it.
4. Lying on resume or about criminal past, gossip, engaging in a criminal enterprise, or felony or serious misdemeanor arrest (even if innocent). Inebriation, assault or reckless endangerment at school.
re: “who do teachers need to be protected from? in most areas, teachers work for a guy who works for a guy that is ultimately elected by the voters or at least overseen by the voters. Why do teachers need to be protected from the voters?”
Do businesses need protection from their customers at times? Do customers EVER make frivolous lawsuits?
The protection they are talking about is liability insurance - the same as doctors, contractors, police, etc. Teachers can be sued and are sued all the time by parents. Also, school districts can bring legal action against a teacher.
The lawsuits or legal actions may be legitimate or they may not be. This is where the liability insurance comes in.
At any time a student can claim a teacher molested them or committed some act of violence or “hate-speech” toward them. A parent can claim that the teacher didn’t follow-through with their child’s Individual Education Plan, or that they said something that offended their child, or was “unfair” in regard to some assignment, etc. The accusation can be from a recent event, or from years ago.
The teacher is assumed to be guilty and must prove their innocence. There may or may not be any witnesses. Doesn’t matter. Even if a teacher can “prove” innocence they can marked forever on their record (especially if the accusation was in any way sexual in nature) and if that teacher ever leaves that school they probably will have a tough time getting hired.
Of course, there are teachers who should be sued and removed, but the liability protection is there to help pay the costs for not only the guilty, but also of the innocent.
This reminds me about what I hear of Islam, and how people say there are
good muslims out there. Well, we never hear from the good muslims now do we.
And we never hear the Good teachers standing up for the right thing to do.
If the bad teachers are not afraid of losing their jobs for doing the wrong thing,
then why should the good teachers fear reprisal from the bad for speaking up.
I know the answer, it's because the radical extremist of any group can control
the others if they don't fight back to save themselves.
And yes, I am comparing Terrorist Islam to Teachers unions because it fits.
“who do teachers need to be protected from? “
Sometimes from lunatic Principals. Say a teacher is disciplined for wearing her crucifix necklace? My childs teacher got in trouble because her class had cookies shaped like Christmas trees.
It isnt the fantasy world you imagine where dignified principals are the faithful representatives of an electorate. Modern school administrators are taught that they SHOULD ignore parents and ahere to their radical training, and remember that THEY know best.
Decent, good teachers do need protection. The NEA is the wrong choice, but many do need protection.
“If teachers want job security they should only need to do a good job.”
And when a good teacher says something positive about Reagan, or mentions that Lincolns and Washingtons birthday used to be a holiday, and is then disciplined for racist comments,,, the fact that they are a good teacher will not help them one iota.
When a teacher is ordered to confiscate unheathy lunches packed at home and say this is overstepping, a principal will turn on them. The fact that this is a good and decent teacher will not help them.
When a teacher is disciplined for getting out the red pencil on a paper written in ebonics, who advocates for them?
Teachers unions are very very bad. But today there are two groups of teachers most likely to need legal help. The extremely bad ones who are drunk in class, and are probablly doinking a student. And the very very good ones who still love America and deviate from the socialist indoctrination.
You’re making a great case for universal unionization of everyone.
You act like teachers are somehow special but every excuse you make is the same the rest of us live with every day.
re: “Youre making a great case for universal unionization of everyone. You act like teachers are somehow special but every excuse you make is the same the rest of us live with every day.”
No, I think the point is that liability insurance is necessary, not unionization.
The orginial article is pointing out that that insurance is not just available from unions. There are many other places a teacher can get it, such as the Christian Educators Association, Inc. Teachers unions often try to intimidate new teachers that without them they are defenceless, but that is not the case.
Desert Rhino is just responding to a previous poster’s question about why teachers needed protection. You have homeowner’s insurance to protect you from someone injuring themselves on your property, right? Any on the job incident opens you to a lawsuit.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.