The Supreme Court hasa cepted for review a case called Friedrichs v. California Teachers Association. It is a challenge to the fair share fees that unions charge non members. If the CTA loses, unions would be weakened by a loss if members and revenues. The Democratic Party would also be weakened. Some of the most conservative judges have been carefully biding their time, waiting for a case to finish off organized labor. Will this be the case that lands the death blow to public sector unions.
Without teachers’ unions, there will be no one to fight for adequate funding of schools, smaller classes, decent salaries, or teachers’ rights to due process.
Here are some readings:
http://inthesetimes.com/working/entry/17595/friedrichs_v_california_teachers_association
Here is the unions’ reaction:
Diane Ravitch's blog 
Since Florida is a ‘right to work’ state (as are 24 other states) we do not have fair share fees.
I have several people at my school who benefit from our bargaining and advocacy but who refuse to pay the membership fees, which are tax deductible on federal returns. Penny wise and pound foolish in my view.
They often come to me in a panic when an administrator bullies them but when I tell them I can’t help them since they are not a member they get angry. I guess they don’t feel obligated to pay for what they want. Oddly they are almost all conservative Republicans and anti-union yet they come running to the union building rep whenever trouble comes along.
Our union is weak and poor but it still represents our membership to the best of our ability. Having laws that prevent us from engaging in the political process or advocating for particular candidates, parties, or platforms during work hours (huge penalties attached for violation), even discussing actions that could be construed by management as disruptive to the workplace (astronomical fines are attached to cripple the union and ensure no actions ever take place) make it nearly impossible to function as a traditional union.
At some point the right-to-work state unions that exist will have to decide if it is worth it to risk bankruptcy, jail time, and utter destruction by staging wildcat strikes and other actions in order to protect the jobs of the rank and file membership. Until that time we are little more than toothless scolds trying to put out forest fires of management bullying and intimidation with the teaspoons of water available to us through the grievance process.
ALEC’s latest move is to get legislatures to pass Scott Walker inspired legislation that outlaws negotiating anything but salary — work conditions are off limits. That will effectively neuter what’s left of the very weak union powers in these states.
Unions were illegal and persecuted by the oligarchs and government in the past. It was only when the workers developed the will to fight for a better life for everyone in solidarity that things changed and there were bloody, violent battles fought to win those right that we are watching slip away. Are we too timid and afraid to emulate our forebears?
The NEA and AFT delegate assemblies are proving that the answer to that question is “yes, we are not willing to pay the price for our rights and freedom” and that is very, very sad.
LikeLike
Indiana is also a right to work (for nothing) state. Salaries in NW Indiana have gone down an average on $3,000. in one year.
Teachers are not allowed to bargain for better working conditions and they are not allowed to strike.
Politicians in Indiana say they are making the state a better place to attack business. Statistically Indiana ranks 44th in the nation for economic progress.
LikeLike
This is 100% about driving down wages. It ripples too- when they drive down wages in one sector it harms every other working person in the state, including small business.
LikeLike
There is no benefit to being a Union member in Florida as no one benefits from any bargaining because ultimately the teachers get screwed over. For example, the biggest raise I ever got as a teacher was close to $500 during my 13 year career. Now why would I pay $800 in dues annually to go 6 years without a raise while seeing my job security eroded my pension taxed and my insurance rates increased? All of the terrible things that have happened in education have occurred under the so called Unions watch. National Board stipends in Florida gone. Supplement pay reduced significantly. Professional Contracts gone and the list goes on and on. Unions should have to earn their dues and frankly they haven’t earned shit within the last decade or so and that is the reason I never joined that sorry excuse of a Union.
LikeLike
I hear you and I don’t disagree with everything you say. I can only speak for my own county union. I was a chapter leader in the UFT in NYC before moving here nearly 14 years ago and things were very different here and much more limited. NYC has leveled down to where we are in FL, which is sad.
Having said that I will, however, defend my local. Our dues aren’t even half what you quote, I’m assuming from Miami-Dade County or one of the other big counties?
We were able to negotiate a stopgap for the next 2 years that guaranteed no teacher in our county would receive less than an ‘effective’ rating until the state verifies the validity of the new test systems.
We also have a large say in the benefits package our district provides and while we have not been able to prevent many of the increases mandated by new state laws and federal requirements we have maintained a fairly good benefits package.
We have gone without a meaningful raise for 10 years now. We are among the lowest paid counties in the state but we were able to negotiate a far better starting salary for new teachers a few years ago and maintain our ‘steps’ for now.
I have been able to defend and save the jobs and careers of several colleagues in the last few years as a union representative. We are able to curb the worst abuses of a power-hungry, bullying, vindictive administrator and used our union clout to put the principal on notice that better relations are in order or the school and district face a major labor dispute we are likely to win.
We won a big victory through state labor board arbitration when a former superintendent imposed back-to-back contracts without consulting with the bargaining unit, including a substantial amount of back pay.
Could we do more? Absolutely! I get frustrated with the snail’s pace and the fear-driven pace we work but it is better than the alternative in my view. I want wildcat strikes, vocal opposition, and other things that my leadership is scared to death to even contemplate. For now I remain working on the inside but I am ready to work for a more active alternative after I retire in another year.
LikeLike
Chris;
Re: your comment of…
“They often come to me in a panic when an administrator bullies them but when I tell them I can’t help them since they are not a member they get angry. ”
….while I’ll admit that I’m not familiar with the exact status of teachers unions in Florida, if your union provided representation under the auspices of the NLRB, your declaration to the non-members would be illegal…and grounds, one would think, for dispensing with the union altogether.
So often we here of non-member “freeloaders” because of the union being required by law (in elected by an NLRB supervised election) to “represent” them…and here we have an admission by a union member who states flat-out that it WON ‘T represent them! Than non-representation is a real “surprise”, isn’t it? [smile]…although I have to admit that I really didn’t expect a union member to be dumb enough to admit that such was the case.
LikeLike
Ken you would be way off base. We are not allowed under state statute and district policy to be present to represent non-members nor can we file grievances on their behalf.
They are not members, pay no dues nor fees, and are not entitled to union bemefits other than enjoying the work conditions, benefits, and salary we negotiate without their help.
Why on earth would that be unfair and why would the NLRB do something so silly as claim we can’t exist unless we serve nonmembers who don’t join us and don’t pay any membership fees?
That may be different in states where all teachers pay a fee, member or not, but that’s not the case here I assure you. I’ve worked with our very experienced lawyers for a long time and I am fully aware of what i can and can’t do.
That’s why the anti-union folks love right to work. It costs the union lots of money when employes don’t pay anything but benefit from our work.
LikeLike
And don’t call me dumb because you disagree with my politics. You simply prove yourself to be shallow and unable to defend your own politics.
LikeLike
And let me educate you further Ken. Nonmembers are represented at the bargaining table for free along with dues paying members. When they are facing disciplinary action, which was clearly what I was referring to above, they are not allowed to have a union representative present as a member is allowed, they may not be represented by a union attorney at any hearing as members are allowed, amd they may not file a grievance for violations of the contract as members are allowed. They choose, in right to work fashion, to work free of union representation and take responsibility for their own fate at work. They are free to represent themselves and hire and pay for attorneys as needed. union members receive those services as part of their dues paying membership.
I don’t know what point you thought you were making other than you support the idea of having unions do their work for free for nonmembers who don’t want or believe in them. That makes sense how
LikeLike
Chris;
I can’t particular say just “why” the NLRB has such a requirement…but it does. And notice that I qualified my comments with the “under the auspices of the NLRB” proviso. I’m well aware that state governments – as opposed to private entities – are NOT required to recognise public employee unions at all, nor are they required to bargain collectively with them. However, my understanding is that some of them WERE organised under the auspices of an NLRB election and, as such, are obligated to follow NLRB regulations.
As for calling you “dumb”, if you didn’t know of the basic provisions of the NLRA, then you’ve pretty much demonstrated that, in labor relations terms, you’re about as “dumb” as they get. That’s who you are; deal with it.
Meanwhile, might I suggest a couple of links by which you could inform yourself?
http://education.findlaw.com/teachers-rights/teacher-s-unions-collective-bargaining-state-and-local-laws.html
….and….
https://www.nlrb.gov/reports-guidance/rules-regulations
….or……
https://www.nlrb.gov/
LikeLike
Chris in Florida, thank you for setting the record straight for Ken [smirk, smile, sneer] who fancies himself the authority on all matters union. Ken [barf] is an anti-union troll on steroids.
LikeLike
I was thinking the same thing, Ken. Locals have a duty of fair representation for all *bargaining unit* members– ie, those recognized in the CBA’s recognition clause, whether or not they join the local and pay dues. Also, locals should want to defend the terms of the CBA, even if the person bringing to light the violation is not a member of the union. If they don’t, management will soon commit a violation against a member, but then past practice will be cited and… the local has just done itself in!
LikeLike
Also, I must point out that this is NH labor law I’m citing. We have a Public Employee Labor relations Board (PELRB) here to oversee such matters. NH locals may try to negotiate agency (“fair share”) fees, but only about 3% of locals here have them.
Other states may have different laws– I know we do not deal with the NLRB at all. Just the PELRB of NH.
It would be more helpful if we stopped the ad hominem (“___ is a troll”… “___ is dumb”) attacks and stuck to informing each other of what happens in our own localities, BTW. Wouldn’t it?
LikeLike
Excellent comment, Chris. There is only strength in numbers.
LikeLike
As we saw with the Affordable care act, just because SCOTUS takes something on doesn’t mean they want to make waves.
It is hard to imagine how any decision they reach will not have far reaching repercussions (by keeping the definition narrow they can limit impact)
They are not immune to the amount of pain that a ruling against the unions would have. There is also that so many states have been becoming right to work such that if they rule for unions it is hard to imagine that a suit against right to work as stifling free speech will come – they generally defer to legislatures where possible but issues of constitutionality are thorny.
If they succeed it will kill unions as so many will become free riders that unions will lose much leverage overnight until they are starved and workers go all out for themselves competing to drive down wages.
They know they would be responsible for that spiral and ultimately could find a way if they ideologically want to kill unions but given that employees would lose representation over night, it is unlikely they will be the ones to implement it.
LikeLike
Chris is good to hear that it is better in your District than it is is where I used to work. In Broward the Union is pathetic. The Union’s website goes six months or more without an update on collective bargaining. They agree upon a three year deal and after the first year they usually change the terms of the agreement or cancel it all together. I can literally spend all day talking about how many ways the Union has screwed the teachers over in South Florida. It is beyond bad here and it is just sad. However, it is not a Dem or Repub thing as both parties are working in tandem to destroy Unions and turn the middle class into controllable working class serfs.
LikeLike
It’s* (sorry for the typo)
LikeLike
M;
Yet Germany is completely and absolutely “right to work” (no German worker can be compelled to belong to, or pay any type of fees to, a union as a condition of his employment), yet the percentage of union membership is higher there than it is here. Admittedly, it’s declining there at approximately the same rate as here….but that seems to be beyond the “right to work” thing.
For some reason, American unions seem to have to the conclusion that they have the right to COERCE funds out of independent workers…including teachers. That tyrannical attitude simply has to end.
LikeLike
Ken [smirk]:
The right to form a union — protected by Germany’s postwar constitution — is part of the fabric that makes up the country.
[smile]
LikeLike
Germany is not “right to work.” Unions members are elected to the board of major corporations. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Trade_unions_in_Germany
LikeLike
Some German companies actually encourage union membership. Recall that Volkswagen supported the unionization of workers in a plant it was planning on building in the south. The governor intervened and stated that if the workers voted to unionize he would not support Volkswagen’s plans to build a plant.
LikeLike
dianeravitch;
Diana, contrary to your assertion, Germany is EMPHATICALLY “right to work”. Again, NO German worker can be required to to either belong to a union, or pay it any type of dues or fees as a condition of their employment.
To state otherwise is an outright LIE!
That said, I’m not aware of any “union members” being elected to the actual boards of major German corporations…although it might have happened. German WORKERS (not just union members) ARE elected by THE ENTIRE WORK FORCE (again, not just union members) as “directors” on the “works councils”….but, having served on such a council myself, I know that it’s FAR from being the corporate board. And, again, it’s not “union” representation primarily on the works council, but rather EMPLOYEE representation (including white collar) that is often diametrically opposed to the positions taken by unions.
Finally, I’ll not assign all that much credibility to “Wikipedia”‘ thank you, since I’ve “been there, done that”, and LIVED it MYSELF. That said, one might note that your link doesn’t support your claim in any way, shape, or form.
Try to spread your bullsh_t somewhere else next time. Maybe you’ll find someone gullible enough to believe it.
LikeLike
I think Ken Meyer is trying to see how offensive he can be before he is barred from the blog. I think referring to your comments as B…S… qualifies him for that honor. Do you suppose the trolls have a place where they go and high five each other when they get barred from a site?
LikeLike
2old2teach;
Tell me; what would YOU term an absolute untruth? Diane *DID* lie, and what she said *WAS* absolute B.S….there’s no way around that fact. Now, if you can prove me wrong, then go right ahead; if you’re right, then I’ll apologise. But, given the fact that I am *NOT* wrong, and Diane *DID* try to B.S. her way on the board, I’ll take any censuring I get as a mark of pride…and as a demonstrations as to just how open-minded and unbiased (to say nothing of “knowledgeable”…grin!) people like you are on this board.
I’m waiting. How about it, Sport? You man enough to attempt to back up YOUR b.s.? [smile]
LikeLike
Dear angry Ken, you haven’t responded to my pointing out that NYC, union town, is doing much better than any southern city, non-union, that I am aware of. Just curious.
LikeLike
Sorry, “Sport.” I find your delivery obnoxious. You will note I did not nor will I respond to your comments. Too bad since I really do think about the merit of other positions.
LikeLike
The man with the same first name as mine–which makes me so annoying, doesn’t have same level of mental consciousness as many people because his worldview is so narrow and far-fetched. Funny how people like him espousing right-to-work mantra believe such principle is applicable to any country other than the US, which is ludicrous. Well explains where he comes from, and where he stands.
LikeLike
The name is ‘Diane’ not ‘Diana’ so there is your first apology ‘Ken’ with the fake Facebook page. Here is non-Wikipedia proof that Diane was correct so start apologizing and quit being such a baby.
You exhibit so many of the classic rightwing mental issues of name calling, smug self-satisfaction, inability to examine idead that are different from your own, threats and tantrums, stubborn refusal to admit you are wrong when proven so, blanket accusations and the use of “you people” thinking, etc. Get some help.
http://www.worker-participation.eu/National-Industrial-Relations/Countries/Germany
LikeLike
Diane said “union workers are elected to the board of major corporations.”
Eat it Ken. You are wrong, wrong, wrong.
From the above-linked article:
“BOARD-LEVEL REPRESENTATION
Employee representatives have a right to seats on the supervisory board of larger companies – one-third in companies with 500 to 2,000 employees, half in companies with more than 2,000.
Employees in larger limited liability companies (500 employees or more) also have representation on a supervisory board to which the day to day management of the company reports. The proportion of worker representatives varies from one third, in companies with between 500 and 2,000 employees, to a half, in companies with more than 2,000 workers. Even in these larger companies, the shareholders can finally win through, as the chair represents the shareholders and can cast a second vote in the event that a vote is tied. The one exception is the larger coal or iron and steel companies, where there is a neutral member of the supervisory board, in addition to equal number of employee and shareholder representatives.1
The supervisory board can normally appoint and dismiss the main management, and it reviews its performance. It gives advice, participates in setting the company’s strategy and is provided with financial and other information. In the coal and iron and steel industries, the employee representatives have additional rights in the appointment of the labour director. The employee representatives have the same rights and duties as other supervisory board members. Employee supervisory board members must not be discriminated against as a result of their membership of the board, and they must not be restricted in their work as supervisory board members. They are also entitled to reimbursement of their expenses and adequate training.
In companies with 500 to 2,000 employees, the employee representatives, who are elected by the workforce, are also normally company employees. In larger companies, above 2,000, some of the employee representatives come directly from the unions, and are usually union officials. These larger companies must also give at least one place on the supervisory board to a senior management representative.
A study for the Hans-Böckler-Foundation in 2009 found that there were 1,477 companies with between 500 and 2,000 employees and therefore subject to legislation requiring one third of board members to be employee representatives.2
At the end of 2011, figures from the Hans-Böckler-Foundation show that there were 648 companies in Germany with more than 2,000 employees, where employee representatives made up half the supervisory board. This figure, which does not include 11 European Companies (SEs), is slight lower than the year before, continuing a gradual decline, which has been continuous since 2002.3
L. Fulton (2013) Worker representation in Europe. Labour Research Department and ETUI. Produced with the assistance of the SEEurope Network, online publication available at http://www.worker-participation.eu/National-Industrial-Relations.
1. This system of board level representation in coal, iron and steel companies was introduced in 1951, reflecting the popular determination that these powerful industries should be brought under greater democratic control and should not be able to be misused, as they had been during the Nazi period.
2. Drittelbeteiligung in Deutschland – Ermittlung von Gesellschaften, die dem DrittelbG unterliegen, by W. Bayer Hans-Böckler-Stiftung.
3. Magazin Mitbestimmung 4/2012″
LikeLike
>>Chris and all,
I think we learned a lot about this person who is making a stinky noise on the post.
It’s just that certain people under no circumstances will either consider or engage in a discussion of opposing views. They come on to express dogma, stir things up, and then leave. ‘Ken Meyer’ became a troll when 1) he expressed the same opposing views as dogma without taking into account counterargument or engaging in constructive discussion, 2) he expressed views about whole peoples in a way that were antithetical to the essence of this blog (as he made it clear in his sentences), i.e., bigoted if not racialized views. The only good thing he did was that he identified himself without making coward IP laundering to anonymize himself. But, such behavior didn’t escape him foul play for avoiding responsibility for his statements because he still made himself untraceable through Facebook page
With all these factors, plus his vulgar rant toward Diane in his last words, I think it’s time to give this man a good bye. He had his say, anyway.
LikeLike
>Again, NO German worker can be required to to either belong to a union, or pay it any type of dues or fees as a condition of their employment.
That is NOT the definition of ‘right-to-work.’
LikeLike
If Democrats are “hurt by it” I would say it’s about time. Democrats don’t do much to support collective bargaining anyway, other than “boldly” coming out with rhetoric immediately prior to elections.
I don’t think DC will be able to kill the idea of collective bargaining, despite best efforts, simply because no one has ever come up with anything to replace a non-state entity to allow working people a seat at the table- the (broad) concept of labor unions isn’t going away because there is nothing else.
In fact, with government less and less responsive to “the 99%” I would imagine there’s an opportunity for labor unions. Maybe that’s what they’re scared of and why we’ve seen such concerted attacks on collective bargaining from politicians.
If government won’t do anything about wage stagnation and economic inequality and the private sector won’t do anything, that leaves only “Plan C”, which is organize.
LikeLike
Aren’t political parties sort of like unions?
LikeLike
Any group that organizes for a common purpose is somewhat like a union. The reasons unions formed was to help workers bargain with corporations, big powerful entities, collectively rather than individually. There is more power in numbers.
LikeLike
When Walker was attacking in Wisconsin, Obama’s only lame comment was,”It sounds like union busting to me.” He had nothing supportive to say.
LikeLike
Do you suppose Obama will get out his comfy shoes to picket the Supreme Court?
Maybe unions should buy him a pair — of shoes, too.
LikeLike
As I’ve stated before on this blog I think there is a possibility of improvement for teachers and their unions only after Obama is out of office. If Hillary wins, and especially on the very outside chance that Bernie Sanders wins the office, I believe unions will have more support or at least a less hostile environment. Obama has been a disaster for teachers and public education in general.
LikeLike
Michael – “especially on the very outside chance that Bernie Sanders wins the office,”
It didn’t look so unlikely in Wisconsin yesterday. 10,000 people showed up.
LikeLike
I would LOVE to see Bernie Sanders pull it off. The reality is that big money will back anybody but Sanders. Only if enough average voters really pay attention and participate and think carefully about the issues will Bernie stand a chance. Correction: Win!
LikeLike
Michael,
Why do you think Hillary is sympathetic to unions?
LikeLike
Christine;
10,00o people showed-up in MADISON! Trotsky himself could give a spiel in Madison and receive the acclaim of thousands. Fortunately, Madison is far from representative of the rest of the country….or even of Wisconsin, as the Madison-led recall election of Walker more than demonstrated.
In truth, I suspect the reception he received in Madison more than anything else turned the bulk of the state against Sanders. In that sense, he might have been better off trying to seek an audience in Oshkosh, or Appleton, or what-not. Now, instead, he’s “branded” as pertaining to “Madison”.
LikeLike
This is not looking good given the right wing bias/bent of the supreme court. My attitude is that if a given person hates unions so much, then go work at the many non-union jobs that are available. If you detest unions so much, then by all means work at a charter school, private or religious school (most of them are overwhelmingly non union). If most of the people at a given work place desire a union or vote for a union, that should be enough. The anti union people want to force an unrealistic litmus test on unions: 100% of the employees must want a union year after year. So if one parasite doesn’t want to be in a union or does not want to pay full union dues, then, according to the union haters, there should be no union or the union should be gutted. The war on unions is alive and well in the US and the right wing supreme court will gladly put the shiv in the gut of unions. This is why it’s so important to get another Democrat in the White House…….so we don’t get another right wing union hater on the supreme court. Unionization rate for the US – 11.2%, Finland – about 75%, there is no war on unions in Finland.
LikeLike
There are things we pay for via taxes you could argue compel your speech or approval but those institutions serve collective goods that outweigh your desire to deem them wasteful and not pay for it.
Unions would deserve similar protection that a community can dictate its standards for the betterment of those working for it.
LikeLike
M;
But unions DON’T primarily “serve the collective good”. Look at how many of this nation’s jobs they’ve squandered away! Look at what they’ve done to it’s educational system!
Unions don’t have the “right to tax”; instead, that belongs to the people AS A WHOLE! And that’s particular true since minority organisations such as unions have an established history of functioning as destructive elements in the national economy.
If they can’t exist on a VOLUNTARY basis, then I don’t see that they have a right to exist PERIOD!
LikeLike
Ken Meyer,
Look what unions have done to the education system! They have pushed Congress and legislators to appropriate money for students with disabilities, for English language learners, and for poor children. They have lobbied for better wages for teachers, so they could live as professionals, not as peons. The states with the strongest unions score highest on NAEP: Massachusetts, New Jersey, and Connecticut. Do you take the Deep South states as your role model: weak unions (if any), low wages, low achievement, underfunding.
LikeLike
So communities can’t make choices only individuals?
What is this exercise we call democracy?
LikeLike
dianeravitch;;
I’m sorry, but simply reiterating “gimme, gimme” demands over and over again is NOT my idea of “achievement” on the part of teachers unions.
As for your “south” aspersions, one wonders why that area of the country is GROWING and new businesses are choosing to LOCATE THERE at the expense of those states with your “strongest” teachers in them? Real weird that, isn’t it?
Of course, maybe the good people of the “Deep South” are just chomping at the bit to migrate north to the that Paradise that’s available to them in place such as “Massachusetts, New Jersey, and Connecticut” [smile]
Sorry to tickle your provincialism…but I’ve always heard that those who “vote with their feet” are the most effective voters of all. And I think, in terms of your claims, they’ve cast their ballots.
LikeLike
Wow! You seem just a tad “angry”. Actually NYC is doing much better than any southern city that I am aware of. NYC is also a union town.
LikeLike
No Ken, it’s because there are precious few worker protections in the South so greedy businesses locate here to pay the lowest wages with few or no benefits. The Southern states have the highest levels of child poverty, uninsured citizens with untreated health problems, and need for governmental assistance programs to allow the working poor to survive.
That may be your idea of Nirvana but it sure isn’t mine or anyone else’s that I know.
LikeLike
I’m not a teacher or a public employer and the political focus on driving down middle class wages as a solution to all of our problems as a country disgusts me.
It is so clearly a dodge by politicians. They’re cowards. They’re too scared to go after genuinely powerful people so they punch down.
Lower wages for middle class people doesn’t help me, my family or my community. I wish they’d stop doing it in my name.
LikeLike
And it’s global in nature. Watch how the conservatives in control in Europe are systematically trying to eliminate the leftist government in Greece in order to prove their austerity and Friedmanesque economic policies are right. It’s happening in England as well where the poor and marginalized are being forced to pay for the large living of the plutocrats who control the government’s ideology.
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2015/07/02/european-democracy-greece_n_7717658.html
History has recorded what happens when a few greedy actors make the lives of the vast majority of humans unbearable. I believe we will see similar things in the next generation. Revolution is inevitable.
LikeLike
Chris;
Why, one wonders, would those nasty “conservatives” want to “eliminate” entities that welch on their debts? Why wouldn’t they want to hand still MORE money over to them once they’ve demonstrated that they couldn’t handle what they’ve already been credited effectively?
Real mystery, isn’t it? Tell ya’ what though…why don’t YOU go around that nasty conservatives who won’t give ’em any more money and hand over the funds Greece wants YOURSELF! Skip the “plutocrats” (you know, those who actually CONTRIBUTE to society!) and allow the Greeks to confidently depend on the succour individuals such as YOURSELF will provide. Problem solved!
[place a big “smile” here. “Gimme, gimme”ism always gives me a chuckle. An ironic chuckle, “yes”…but still a chuckle]
LikeLike
Because Ken, Greece bailed out Germany in the past and forgave their debt. Because banksters don’t need more millions while the poor and elderly starve and die due to poverty caused by those same banksters. Because it has clearly been proven that Greece’s austerity makes it impossible for their economy to recover and their people will suffer more and more to maintain the banks. Because the payments are not going to the Greek people, as conservative liars like to claim, but to the banksters themselves — they are merely shifting the money from one of their accounts to another.
Greece needs to exit the European Union and let the banksters eat their risk, which is what the vaunted free market is supposed to require, right? Why should the elderly, the children, and the poor of Greece pay for their gambling losses? Tough luck, free marketeers!
LikeLike
America’s best friend, or forever lasting pet, “Japan” is following the similar conservative trend driven by a right wing PM Shinzo Abe and his ruling LDP party. The government raised consumption tax to 8% this April(the same month Abe made a speech at the US Congress), and made a push for revision of national constitution and TPP.
Many households are tightening their wallets since last year, due to increasing taxes and lowering wages, while many national lawmakers and government ministry bureaus receive more salary. And the government is trying to close out Scott Walker-like labor deal that would grant greedy, male chauvinistic corporate employers to domesticate and abuse temporary workers with no job security.
All I can say about right-wing swing of state and trickle-down economic reform policy–except if you follow the myth of national soil providing special ingredients to make bumper crop every year (!)– plain silly and dumb.
Hearing the prime minister saying “this revised labor dispatch bill will promise workers for job promotion and security” just makes people scoff at him for tying up his mental knot for perpetuation of revolving door labor which is buried under the myth of ‘beautiful nation’ hallucination.
LikeLike
This is a good piece on how people who complain about the “skills gap” never mention how politicians and business, in concert and working together, destroyed a pipeline for skilled labor, which was labor unions:
http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/wonkblog/wp/2015/06/29/corporate-america-beat-back-the-best-job-trainers-and-now-its-paying-a-price/
The next time they’re holding a round table in DC on where the skilled workforce went, someone could ask them about this. They killed apprenticeships, in their usual short-sighted and clueless fashion.
LikeLike
And now …
http://www.alternet.org/economy/numbers-are-staggering-us-world-leader-child-poverty
LikeLike
Billionaires such as Eli Broad, the Walton family, the Koch Brothers, etc. are funding this court case. This is simply their latest effort to eradicate every teacher’s union in the U.S.
The plaintiffs in the case are claiming that their first amendment free speech rights are somehow being violated by collective bargaining. Union efforts to limit class size or improve working conditions seem to intrude on their ideas for educational policy, But why is it that they have no objections to management exercising free speech freedoms by advocating for larger classes, longer school days, lengthier years and lower salaries?
LikeLike
Here is what I know from NY; the UFT was a MUCH more effective union when it didn’t receive dues automatically. The union under Shanker was very aggressive with teachers willingly joining and paying their dues. Since the amendment to the Taylor law in 1977 establishing the Agency fee (non-member dues) the union has all but abandoned working for it’s members, preferring instead to do the bidding of the political leaders while trying to give the appearance of fighting for its members. The automatic dues deduction for members and non-members guarantees the union’s survival so naturally the union leaders with their hefty salaries are beholden to the guarantors. When an entity’s survival is guaranteed it has no incentive to fight for its members that might upset the politicians. For a union to be effective it must have members that want to join. Remember the Yugo? The Soviet automobile designed in the 20’s or 30’s. It was the same design when the Soviet Union dissolved in 1991. Its survival was guaranteed until the collapse of the Soviet Union.
The loss of automatic dues payment may result in stronger unions that fight for their members gladly paying their dues in return.
LikeLike
Good point, Michael
LikeLike
Indeed. There are lots of opportunities for unions to fight for workers. However, I am mindful of the role the NEA and AFT played in the Common Core/Accountability fiasco. Their blind allegiance to the Democrats has cost teachers much.
If I could keep my dues local, I would seriously consider paying dues, but I am NOT sending my money to these national tools.
LikeLike
That was a really interesting post, Michael. Thanks for giving me something more to think about!
LikeLike
Diane and Readers, t
The big idea in bad times and good times, in pure times and in corrupt times, is that it is always better – if not superior – to have unions and elective bargaining rights, hands down! If ANYTHING, we need to expand and grow unions in the United States.
But having been a union member for a very long time, I can tell you from first hand experience that as a result of dancing, eating dinner with, sleeping with, and compromising with the devil, the unions are no longer guests at the round table – which was always outnumbered by reformers anyway.
Now the unions are clearly on the menu and about to be gobbled up by the diners.
You and readers might want to consider understanding that after 4 years of NCLB, which was a blatant failure, the unions should have stepped in and offered militancy and political aggression. They did not need another term of Bush and almost two terms of Obama to find out that test-based reform should not be tolerated to any extent.
Instated, they have cooperated with the reformers, taken money from Bill Gates, schmoozed with Eli Broad. . . . . . And unions did this to keep the unions in business and eventually on life support, but not to serve their constituents. Resultantly, union members feel alienated and disenfranchised, but still continue to pay dues. Reformers were licking their chops having smelled this discontent, and are now capitalizing upon it, much to their brilliant, strategic, and completely evil credit.
This is what happens when unions don’t behave like unions and don’t strike. I’m afraid the whole labor rights movement will have to implode and disintegrate, with a renaissance, resurgent labor movement to be born in the next 20 years, hopefully less. And most of that rebirth is us: members reinventing ourselves and our unions.
Randi Weingarten and others exemplify this sort of politicking, and it serves to bite them, like the jaws of a great white shark, in the behind . . . . or at the neck in this SCOTUS case . . . . Lily is not terribly strong either, even though she has a very agreeable persona.
It’s too bad the vast majority of us will lose out. Still, it is, like I said, an opportunity for us to reinvent our unions big time and in the long run, ensure that someone like Weingarten never gets in or stays in office again . . . . She was good, and she turned weak and corrupt.
In the meantime, hold your nose, be vigilant, vote, be vocal, and stick with Bernie Sanders . . . . Even if SCOTUS rules against unions, the fight is not at all over; it will have just begun.
– Robert Rendo
artwork88@aol.com
LikeLike
Robert, much of what you say I agree with. The union brass are in no danger.
The AFT has wisely branched out to other constituencies which will keep it going for a good while yet, what with nurses, home health care workers, college faculties, etc. They will be smaller and poorer but still active.
The NEA has a history of golden parachute landings for the upper echelon leadership with high-paying jobs in Education International.
The 6-figure salaries and massive payouts they receive while in office ensure that none will be working as a greeter at Walmart and applying for government assistance as many former teacher must do.
We definitely need to clean house and rethink how our unions are organized and how we run them. I’m all for a new, 21st century reconnection and resurrection of labor in the USA.
LikeLike
Michael, I agree with you. IFT has co-opted their members at every turn. I think it’s human nature to value something more when you have to work for it – and that applies to unions as well.
LikeLike
I do not trust This Court not to try.
https://stephenpruis.wordpress.com/2015/06/30/union-thuggery-exposed-uh-not/
LikeLike
My prediction is that the liberal Supreme Court will rule against the union.
LikeLike
What liberal Supreme Court would that be?
LikeLike
They are liberal because they legalized gay marriage everywhere but manage to issue rulings like citizens United. They seem more conservative to me.
LikeLike
They are not liberal in all areas and they are perverse in plain English. Collectivism when it comes to economics is demonized while other issues get exalted. Not that those issues should not be exalted. But there is still at least 90% to 92% of the population that needs economic justice.
LikeLike
I work as a teacher in NJ-one of the few states that is NOT “right to work.” Unions have their faults but this is no time to abandon them. We must strengthen them. Chris, and of course, Diane, are the people I agree with. My biggest fear in this country is the widening income gap between the very wealthy and the rest of us. Destroying unions, while they are already on life support, is insane. It seems that many people need a history lesson about how unions fought for better wages, better working conditions, and other benefits that we enjoy today.
LikeLike
NJ Teacher: I don’t know that Hillary would be sympathetic to unions. What I do know is that Hillary during her 2008 campaign for the nomination stated that if elected she would end NCLB.
LikeLike
This case presents Justice Scalia with a rather serious personal/political conundrum. Scalia claims to be a devout Catholic, and the longstanding position of the Catholic Church is not only pro union, but that union busting is a mortal sin. I wonder if Scalia (and any other Catholics on the SCOTUS) will in this case treat the doctrines of the church as a shopping list rather than moral and ethical guidance and rule against unions since that would be the politically conservative, right wing position, or if instead Scalia will follow the guidance of the church. For more info, visit http://www.catholicscholarsforworkerjustice.org They, as theologians, are hardly a bunch of left wingers or “hippies”, rather, the doctrinal basis for their positions is quite conservative. There seems to be literally zero wiggle room on this issue from the churches point of view, one which a priori directly addresses the key aspects of the case. What will Scalia do? I pity him not.
LikeLike
Unions are not perfect … but thank goodness they are active here in Connecticut. I served as a steward in my building for three years and saw firsthand how having a say made a difference on many issues that promoted the well-being of our students, families, and teachers. Yes, we advocated for decent pay. We also fought hard for limits on class size, environmental safety, and improved facilities. Our union also organized a food drive and a winter clothing drive. Union scholarships are awarded every year. The label “right to work” should be understood for what it really means: the desire of the far right to cut wages, eliminate due process, and hire/fire based on favoritism, political beliefs, or other arbitrary basis.
LikeLike
Buut this case does not deal with banning public employee unions, does it? It is just about agency fees, isn’t it?
LikeLike
Reblogged this on David R. Taylor-Thoughts on Texas Education.
LikeLike
NH *allows* collective bargaining for agency fees, but only about 3% of locals in the state have this in their CBAs. This reality has not prevented NEA-NH from being effective. A ruling against CTA in this case would have a miniscule impact, as far as I can see. How about states where public employees aren’t allowed to bargain AT ALL!? I think we have bigger fish to fry than this one.
LikeLike
And still no apology to Diane from Ken Meyer despite being proven wrong about Germany. You said you would apologize, Ken. Do it!
LikeLike
Sorry – different topic:
I can NOT get access to Anthony Cody’s article on
Common Core Teacher Day in California, Brought to you by the Gates Foundation.
It says 401 error. Can someone let him know to fix it? Thank you.
LikeLike