Senate Bill 5

[Bryan Schwegler]

Could the "tea party" pull that off?

Just to clarify a point, I think you'd be make a HUGE mistake to assume only the Tea Party has a problem with the current way our education system is being run and that all parties, including the union, need some fundamental changes to move us forward in any meaningful way.

In this thread alone we've seen a ton of different opinions on it. For example, Gary thinks the unions are perfect and necessary, Roy thinks they're the spawn of Satan. Personally, I think the reality is somewhere in the middle.

I do think though, that despite everyone's major difference of opinions on this thread, it does show that everyone has a strong desire to ensure our education system is the best.

[Roy Pitchford]

Roy thinks they're the spawn of Satan.

That may go a little far in describing my feelings.
They do have a valid purpose, but there are significant reforms needed, particularly in the realm of public unions.

[Gary Rice]

(Chuckle)

While I certainly cannot speak for Roy here, I'm not sure that either of us would quite agree with your characterizations, Bryan.

What I do feel to be very important however, is that there appears to be a fundamental dynamic in play here, that needs to be fully understood.

Just as concerned people in this country have the right to form groups like "Republicans", "Democrats", "Tea Parties", and for that matter, fraternal groups like the Knights of Columbus, Elks, Lions, Freemasons, and others- so too, do teachers, and other public and private workers have the right to form groups with other like-minded individuals.

Virtually every group of human beings whom I've met up with has policies that I might agree or disagree with from time to time. Virtually all groups support each member of that group, and in so doing, support the actions and goals of their respective collective memberships.

The right of free association is just about as constitutional as anything I can think of, and something that I would think would be as fundamental an American right as there would be.

One might not approve of, nor even support the goals and aspirations of a group having beliefs different from your own, but by golly, so long as they work within the legal framework of our society, one might wonder WHY there are some that would like to see the end of some of these groups?

(Of course, we KNOW the answer to that, do we not? Especially when political or economic power is involved)

It seems to me that we're living in such intolerant times. It all remind me so much like what I've read about the early 1930's, when the fascists in several countries went after the trade unions and other private organizations, so that industry and government would be able to better "work together" for the "common good of all".

It can get VERY efficient when a work force is reduced to slave labor...but...

Just remember that, like that famous quote that was attributed to Martin Niemoller, if "they" can come for one group, "they" can come for YOURS later.

All just my opinion, and I may be wrong, but I don't THINK so...

(and by the way, DO NOT FOR A MOMENT think that I am attributing "fascism" here to ANY ONE SIDE of this debate. The seeds and methodologies of fascism can be attractive to virtually ANY side of a political or economic struggle. As Americans, we always need to remember that freedom is not free. Like that great expression, sometimes attributed in origin to poet James Whitcomb Riley....If it looks like a duck...)

Back to the (union-made) banjo...

[Bryan Schwegler]

So Gary, you say you feel that my characterization of your position on the Teacher's Union is not accurate. I'm curious then if you would spell out what you feel are things that are wrong with the current union structure, the current contract, or other work-related items specifically as it relates to the teacher or the contract/union?

From all the posts you've ever made that I've seen on this topic over the years, I've never read anything where you may feel the union could possibly improve anything or currently be doing anything suboptimally. The complete lack of anything critical towards the union is what drives my perception of your position. Definitely interested if that's not the case.

I'm not against unions, I think they're a good thing. I don't like SB5. However, I do feel the teachers union is a big part of the current problem (or at the very least are a roadblock to improvement) with today's education system. There are other problems for sure, but I don't feel I'm a fascist or a Nazi or whatever for acknowledging what needs to be acknowledged.

[Gary Rice]

Well, I obviously DO NOT believe that public employee unions are either a "roadblock to improvement" or a "big part of the current problem".

Those are flat-out unacceptable premises to me. Whatever unions have been able to accomplish for their membership, in order to better their lot in life, has been achieved through negotiated agreements, and not by anyone's dictate. If the current deal is not working for one side or the other, there's always the bargaining table next time.

Now, as far as anyone particularly being a fascist or Nazi might be concerned?

I NEVER said that about anyone.

Ducks maybe? But then again, I've never seen a fascist duck.

As I did opine however, as a general observation, the seeds of intolerance in the course of the pursuit of political or economic agendas can sprout up just about anywhere, and come from just about any side of a discussion.

Let's face it, there are those who would like to see certain groups, whether they be public employee unions, Freemasons, other groups, or fill in your own blank here___________flat-out altered or abolished.

Or, more related to the present point, see them controlled, regulated, or limited to the extent that any such groups would be rendered virtually marginalized. The problem here as I see it is that some members of governmental groups in a number of states are attempting a legislative end-run around the negotiations process with their public employee unions, and that's what does not sit well with me.

As to whatever unions may do that I might disapprove of? Sometimes union PACs (political action committees) can develop platform positions on a myriad of topics, many of which I would personally disagree with. (and by the way, a PAC and the union itself are NOT exactly the same thing. A union member generally may or may not contribute to a PAC, by the way.) While we're on that subject, there are non-union teachers in every public school district that I am aware of. Joining a teachers' union, as far as I am aware, is a voluntary choice for the individual; and in my opinion, a very wise one to make.

Regarding my thoughts about current contracts and other work-related items? Those can vary from district to district and state to state. I retired in 2005, and even though I do volunteer in the Lakewood schools, I have not been interested in their own contracts or work issues. Back when I was involved in another district, those issues were indeed a part of the negotiations process, as would I suspect, that they probably are in Lakewood. Contracts come due every few years and are negotiated, and then put to a vote; needing approval by both a majority of teachers, and by a school board, in order to be ratified. Both sides must agree, or there would be no contract. If there is impasse, there are legal remedies that can be employed by the courts in order to arrive at agreements, including binding arbitration.

There have actually been comparatively few teacher strikes in Ohio over the last good number of years, due in large part I believe, to the collective bargaining process. Take that away, and its back to the wild west....

All just my opinion and I may be wrong, however doubtful that may be....

I do want to thank all involved here for helping to inspire my next column!

Back to the (union-made) banjo...

[Charlie Page]

From reading the PD summary of what SB5 will do, it doesn’t appear to be asking for too much. Does it? Employers will pay no more than 80% of health care premiums. Restrict collective bargaining to wages. Employers can no longer pay the employees share of retirement contributions. Raises are based on merit, not on longevity. No automatic step raises. Other than taking away a legislated right, what is so awful about SB5 that has created such outrage? You’d think the world is coming to an end!

Let’s face reality here. There is an 8 billion dollar hole in the budget in Ohio. Ohio relied on stimulus money to plug the hole last year instead of dealing with it then (probably because it was an election year). Cities and school districts across the state are in a financial hole as well. And there’s no one silver bullet to fix it. Serious cuts need to be made everywhere to bring expenditures in line with revenues because no one is going to raise taxes in this environment. The cuts to be made are more than the effect SB5 will have but every little bit helps. Everyone has to give. Even our president has said everyone has to tighten their belt in these tough economic times. Why should government employees be the exception?

FWIW, I think our teachers are awesome and I don’t think anyone is disparaging them. I’m sorry they are caught up in this mess as well as everyone out there looking for a job. But somethings gotta give and it shouldn’t be taxpayers. There’s a lot of pain yet to be felt as Ohio gets its finances in order. A lot more pain when the Fed decides to get serious and trim costs.

[Gary Rice]

Hummmmm......

Well,

I think that all of this illustrates a couple of points here very well....

First of all, as far as I can tell, and I'm no lawyer, but SB5 is not going to "ask".

It's going to "tell".

It IS a proposed LAW, after all, and not a suggestion...

It would appear to attempt to replace and circumvent an established labor practice with top-down dictates and limitations...

...so yes, there will be a problem, I do believe.

Secondly,

I think all of this... is EXACTLY why we have unions, I guess.

If no one else is going to stick up for you, you're just going to have to do it yourself.

Just my teeny-tiny opinions here, but I WILL make them heard, and I am NOT alone.

When you support unions, you are certainly NOT alone.

Back to that UNION MADE banjo...

[Sean Wheeler]

The longer this thread goes, the more I keep want to referring back to my first few posts on the first page.

Let's be real clear about this. There is NO plan for a merit pay system. Any quick-fix merit pay system will have to rely on standardized tests. This will cause a whole heap of issues, but mainly it will promote "teaching to the test". This kind of teaching will lead us further away from the work that we are currently doing in regards to the impact of the digital and communication shifts that have changed the way that we work and do business. The use of standardized tests to determine "merit" will also lead teachers to avoid teaching students in our special education and ESL programs because they traditionally do not do as well on the tests. For the record, I am low on seniority and do very well on the "value-added" numbers that a long-term merit pay system will eventually include. However, I am against pushing through a bill like this without any forethought as to the actual system that will be put in place to determine "merit". It's a case of putting the cart before the horse.

More to come over the weekend. I'll be at the Beck Cafe tonight, but right now I've gotta sign-off to watch the Governor's budget show.

[Sean Wheeler]

"The longer this thread goes, the more I keep want to referring back to my first few posts on the first page."

Boy did I mangle that one. I meant, "The longer this thread goes, the more I keep wanting to refer back to my first few posts on the first page."

Oops. Not a proud moment for this English teacher

[Bill Trentel]

FWIW, I think our teachers are awesome and I don’t think anyone is disparaging them. I’m sorry they are caught up in this mess as well as everyone out there looking for a job. But somethings gotta give and it shouldn’t be taxpayers. There’s a lot of pain yet to be felt as Ohio gets its finances in order. A lot more pain when the Fed decides to get serious and trim costs.

You my think they are "awesome" but obviously you don't respect them enough to allow them to have the same rights to organize in the workplace as those in the private sector. They'll be even more "awesome" when they are taking away less of your taxes.

The projected budget problems can be pinned on three issues none of which are related to over paying public workers. 1) Changes made to the business property taxes which resulted in decreased revenue. 2) State Income Tax roll backs passed while times where good and continued as the economy went south. Decreased revenue. Don't we all know we need to save more when times are good so that when they are not so good we can get by? 3) Sky rocketing Medicaid cost driven by unsustainable medical costs escalation.

Why are the middle-class public employees the target? How will further driving down the economic standards of our citizens help our economy?

Bill

[Ellen Cormier]

Wow this thread got busy today! I was going to respond to something about the teaparty but now it seems irrelevant.

So the rest of Kasich's budget maul came out today and there are apparently no bright spots for working folks in it. Hunker down people this is going to be a rough ride.

What's the status of sb5 right now? Has batchelder decided when they're going to vote on it or is he still keeping it a mysterious secret?

@Charlie,

Sb5 isn't just about teachers either. You've got all kinds of workers involved in this. They are all large professions. People should be allowed to bargain collectively. No one wants poor working conditions shoved down their throats while having the rug pulled out from them financially. No one likes it in the private sector either. It's not about wages and benefits specifically. But the ability to bargain for those conditions! They have not been asked to take cuts, which they might agree to, it is the force and the stripping of long held rights. If things are bad enough people will strike and maybe that's what kasich wants to privatize the prisons for so he can throw teachers in jail for striking and his wall street friends can make some more money! You think new teachers could just be pulled out of thin air? Imported from India maybe...but if they get a bad bargain they will strike or leave the profession in droves!

The fight is about rights. Happy teachers, protected teachers, well trained and less stressed are better teachers. It goes for any profession. You pay for quality. Sometimes you can get a bargain but across the board you get what you pay for in the long run.

[Ellen Cormier]

And I do want to say to Charlie also, you make the bill sound somewhat reasonable but I think they wanted to restrict wage increases to cost of living, also as for employer not contributing to retirement, many public employees and hence employers don't pay into social security. The pension/retirement is all they might get. Also did you read the part about going to jail and/or fined $1000 a day for striking? And you know they could just be reasonable at first with there changes, over time, as the older teachers leave and new teachers come aboard, working conditions would get worse and worse because there would be no recourse. They could fire the people who challenge the system or for personality conflicts, etc., or the teachers who are making the most could be fired based on a skewed performance evaluation or something.

[Ellen Cormier]

And sorry if some of my sentances are not as clear as they should be. I've been typing from my phone. It's a little tricky and I keep loosing posts.

[Charlie Page]

You my think they are "awesome" but obviously you don't respect them enough to allow them to have the same rights to organize in the workplace as those in the private sector. They'll be even more "awesome" when they are taking away less of your taxes.

Yes, they are awesome. I’d rather pay teachers more and some City workers less. But I don’t have any control over that. I think teachers start their career getting paid too little. The City of Lakewood had an opening for the position of ‘Cushman Operator’ a couple months ago. The starting wage was about $20/hour which based on an 8 hour day roughly corresponds to $41,000 per year for driving a little golf cart dump truck around picking up our garbage and recyclables. In one of Sean’s posts, he said he made a little more than this. I don’t think the Cushman Operator is required to have a college degree or MBA. It doesn’t take a rocket scientist to come to a conclusion that teachers are under paid. Or is the Cushman Operator over paid, or both? I don’t intend to demean the job of a Cushman Operator, just highlighting the obscene starting wage and educational qualifications needed to obtain the position. Personally, I think our garbage collection people provide a higher value than most of our politicians, excluding our fine local officials of course. If our elected officials don’t pass any bills for a few weeks, no big deal. However if our garbage isn’t collected for a few weeks, then we’ll have some problems.

The projected budget problems can be pinned on three issues none of which are related to over paying public workers. 1) Changes made to the business property taxes which resulted in decreased revenue. 2) State Income Tax roll backs passed while times where good and continued as the economy went south. Decreased revenue. Don't we all know we need to save more when times are good so that when they are not so good we can get by? 3) Sky rocketing Medicaid cost driven by unsustainable medical costs escalation.

I would say some government employees are overpaid (see above).

On 1, I agree with you.

No 2, I agree with you there as well. However, when has a government (outside of local governments) ever had a surplus that has not been squandered away? Government’s appetite for spending seems to be insatiable.

I agree with you on 3 as well. I would add Medicaid fraud and failure of insurance companies to fight frivolous lawsuits drive up costs as well. When it’s cheaper to settle than fight you wind up with more lawsuits. Strangely missing from Obamacare is tort reform.

Why are the middle-class public employees the target? How will further driving down the economic standards of our citizens help our economy?

I would suspect they are a ‘target’ because they make up the vast majority of personnel costs in state, county and local budgets. Benefits are an increasing line item in all budgets due to ever increasing healthcare premiums.

The rich get theirs because of the financial position they created for themselves and help from friendly politicians. The poor get theirs in ever increasing numbers with the help of friendly politicians (45% of the 2011 State spending is for Health and Human Services). The middle class in general has been the government’s bitch for decades because governments know they can get away with it.

[Will Brown]

It is always an oversimplification to discuss pay; almost no one actually knows how much it costs per hour of work. There are too many hidden costs, and too many intangibles, to make comparisons valid. One of my employers went to great lengths to keep secret that amount they paid for our health care secret; we employees knew how much we paid ourselves (it varied with the plan), but without knowing how much the employer was chipping in, I couldn't really say how much it cost to keep me in that office for an hour. Many workers have perks that the unions have negotiated, but would not pay for that perk if they had to pay themselves. And some benefit of a certain job would be worth more to one person than another. Many people have two weeks of vacation a year, teachers have far more. Would a worker give up $2000 in salary for an additional three or four months of vacation? Some would; some wouldn't, so how much is that generous vacation worth? How much is it worth to spend less time in the office, but do some work at home? People would disagree on that, but it is something that would come into play in choosing a job.

I'm pretty open about thinking that public employees should not have a union. If a private company has unions, and the unions squeeze too hard, that company will have higher costs, and someone is likely to start a competing company with lower costs; that helps consumers, and people who are looking for work. But there is no competition for a public entity, so there are no competitive pressures to keep the unions in check.

I think a lot of people are whistling past the graveyard when they laud unions. While there is a lot of media due to the relatively few demonstrators fighting to preserve their sinecures, that is because the media loves demonstrations, not necessarily because the American people still support unions. In other than the public sector, union membership has plunged, perhaps because workers view unions as an expensive impediment to continued employment. I think back to when I was at Lakewood High; the teachers I knew owned homes and cars, and vacationed more luxuriously than many, and certainly appeared to be in the middle class, and all without a union. So at least in that area, they didn't need a union to be middle class.

Pete Seeger may still be alive, but Joe Hill is dead. The sooner we realize this and start building a more cooperative society, the better.