If no contract agreement is reached by negotiators this evening, teachers in the Peninsula School District have voted to begin an illegal strike on Thursday.
This is wrong. It harms students and the community. The teachers' union shouldn't get away with this kind of strong-arming.
The Evergreen Freedom Foundation is exploring the possibility of going to court to request an injunction against the strike on behalf of parents and taxpayers. If you are a parent or taxpayer in the Peninsula District and you would like to be part of this action, please contact Mike Reitz by noon tomorrow at mreitz@effwa.org.
Posted by Marsha Michaelis at August 30, 2005 04:33 PM | Email ThisI say we go on a patronage strike. We keep all our kids home and teach them ourselves. I bet that we get a better than 8% success rate for our money then.
Posted by: ERNurse on August 30, 2005 06:42 PMThese are public schools. As in, OUR schools. That makes the teachers and the school board OUR employees.
If they walk, let's just put locks on the doors and tell them to keep walking until they leave Washington. I have had enough of this state's miserable excuse for an education system anyway. This could be the perfect opportunity for us taxpayers to show those corrupt WEA pukes the way out.
Sounds good to me.
Posted by: ERNurse on August 30, 2005 06:53 PMWalk off the job, and it's perminate, never work in this state as a state employee again.
Posted by: JCM on August 30, 2005 07:16 PMI've only been to Gig Harbor once (passing through), but I'm going to assume it's not the most expensive part of the state to live in. I'm sorry, but if a pair of teachers can't make it there on nearly $100K a year plus benefits (for 9-10 months worth of work), they need to learn to budget their money a whole lot better.
Posted by: Mike H on August 30, 2005 08:27 PMIt's in Gig Harbor
Posted by: Mike H on August 30, 2005 08:55 PMIf a teacher strikes, how much in pay and benefits do they lose over the length of the strike?
Answer: None. Zippo.
Pay is deferred, but not lost since the school year is still X number of days, and typically will run into the summer to make up for the days of teaching lost due to the strike.
Can anyone correct this assumption?
Posted by: Shaun on August 30, 2005 08:57 PMI mean , really--if the job is so incredibly horrible that they have to take the 'drastic' step of going on strike, then they should just quit, instead. I think they know what a great deal they have, considering all the time off, and are just trying to play the system for as much as possible, knowing it won't cost them a single thing to do so.
But there should be consequences for doing it. Like being fired. So they should just be sincere and quit, if things are really so awful.
But they won't. Because they don't have to.
"A beginning teacher would receive $37,595 under the new package this year; a teacher who had a master's degree and 13 or more years of experience could earn $71,645.
Most of a teacher's salary in Washington comes from the state. The rest is negotiated with the local school district. This year, Marysville's local portion will range from $4,504 for a beginning teacher to $10,015 for the most experienced teachers with master's degrees.
By the second year of the contract, that local share would range from $5,085 to $11,275 depending on education and experience."
Kids come first. Work out your issues in the background - that is the professional way. Stop using the kids as negotiation hostages!
Posted by: SouthernRoots on August 30, 2005 10:03 PMI'm with you, I have been on a public school strike for many years now and homeschool my children while I work full time at my own business. I know where my kids are, I know what kind of influences my children are being exposed to, and I don't have to worry about the whining teachers. It isn't hard at all to homeschool and well worth the extra time. I just wish I could get a portion of the teachers' salaries. To give starting teachers fresh out of college over $37,000... I think that is pretty decent pay for a new college grad. More than I ever made with an accounting background.
Posted by: Miriam on August 30, 2005 10:49 PMThere was a quite contentious strike a couple of years ago. In fact, the teachers broke the law when they struck.
The fact that their strike resulted in these high pay raises augments and 'jacksup' the potential 'alleged' lawbreakers in Peninsula.
And don't forget, it is the size of the administrative staff that is killing the schools. And their salaries.
Now, tell me why a newborn principle should be making nearly twice as much as a teacher!!
Posted by: swatter on August 31, 2005 07:56 AMThere have never been as long as I can remember consequences to a teachers strike. The school year starts late, and goes late so they teach for the mandated number of days. As a result there is no pay loss for teacher regardless of the length of the strike.
There is no downside for the teachers to strike. Worst case they get the old contract.
Parents pay in disrupted schedules, seniors pay for delayed end of school and disruption for college entrance.
My opinion is the NEA, WEA and locals need to be broken and tossed aside. They are the biggest impediment to the education of our children.
Posted by: JCM on August 31, 2005 07:59 AMMaybe this is the time to make the plug for www.lbloom.net which tracks school district, as well as government employees, salaries.
Posted by: swatter on August 31, 2005 08:39 AMPublic school teachers are just that - public employees. They are paid by taxes from the state and local entities (as the article pointed out - the majority comes from the state). The law does not permit them to strike, but they do any way. They always say it is for the kids, but then hold those kids hostage until their demands are met.
We constantly speak of our society as being governed by the rule of law, yet the people responsible for teaching our impressionable youth flaunt the law in the face of those students - what type of lesson is that?
Posted by: SouthernRoots on August 31, 2005 09:33 AMLet's see... 183 day work year... 7 hour days...
Starting pay of $37,595?
That means they earn $205 per day for each day they actually work.
And THAT means they earn $29.34 per hour TO START.
Do police and fire make that much? How about a PFC in Baghdad?
Screw these people. I'm sick of their prima donna BS.
Posted by: Who.... me? on August 31, 2005 09:53 AMThe unions put up their own board members and changed the board makeup. Disgusting actions by this district is way too mild to characterize this group of WEA people.
Posted by: swatter on August 31, 2005 09:58 AMI looked at the Penninsula district and here is a boiled down version of that data:
607 people ( I didn't examine their job codes)
67 (11%) make less than 30k
103 (17%) make between 30k and 40k
121 (20%) make between 40k and 50k
284 (47%) make between 50k and 60k
32 (5%) make more than 60k
72% make more than 40k. Surely seems like a pretty darn good reason to strike....
Kids held hostage.
Posted by: SouthernRoots on August 31, 2005 10:00 AMIf you go to www.effwa.org you can find a report (pdf format) titled "Facts About Washington's K-12 Public Schools" that contains some very telling stats, especially regarding the 2004 WASL scores.
What do you consider "Fair", Ray?
Posted by: GMT on August 31, 2005 10:38 AMRun that idea past a "professional" teachers' union and see how far "fair" gets you.
Posted by: mikela on August 31, 2005 10:48 AMI'll let the teacher unions run the school with the right to strike. If you'll agree to a voucher program that lets all the federal, state and local funding follow a student to the school of a students choice.
Let the public school compete in the market place. Let see what happens.
Nice link on your tag line. Most of us have the spine to post a real link.
Posted by: JCM on August 31, 2005 10:58 AMAs for what fair pay is to teachers - I think our state values the education of its children (for many pragmatic as well as alturistic reasons) and teacher pay should reflect that. Having quality teachers should be one of our state's highest priorities. Paying teachers higher salaries would encourage more well-qualified people to teach. So, as to what's fair, I don't have a specific number in mind, but from a values standpoint, teacher pay should be as high as we can afford.
PS- thanks for the link to the EFF website. I couldn't find specific information about 2004 WASL scores you referenced, do you have a specific link?
Posted by: Ray on August 31, 2005 11:16 AMI'll agree to your voucher program if you'll agree that no voucher money can go to any school affliated with any religious organization. What makes you think that, if public education is completely privitized, teachers in those private schools will not organize or will not ask to be paid more money. Moreover, what makes you think that turning schools into businesses will improve the quality of education for all students? It seems to me that your beef about teachers asking for more money has nothing to do about educating children and more to do with being opposed to unions. I think we're better off supporting our public schools and the teachers in those schools and properly funding education in America.
Posted by: Ray on August 31, 2005 11:28 AMhttp://www.effwa.org/pdfs/K12Facts2005.pdf
Posted by: GMT on August 31, 2005 12:01 PMYou said: "...It seems to me that your beef about teachers asking for more money has nothing to do about educating children and more to do with being opposed to unions."
Let's try another version of that: It seems to me that your beef about religious affiliation has nothing to do about educating children and more to do with being opposed to religion."
Just a little something to ponder.
Posted by: GMT on August 31, 2005 12:08 PMYes—Marysville (WA) contract approved with no whimper. No 40+ day strike as last time. All is well. Or is it?
New union-dominated school board will not likely disapprove ANY contract from here on. District parents and taxpayers voted the new board in, perhaps justifiably, out of strike anger and inconvenience to their lives. But—anger does not bode well for rational thought. Short-term fix with long-term consequences.
Now, they are all happy. However, as they reach back for their wallets, their wallets are gone. Good luck. Hope someone is watching in that district for RESULTS of the new Board and schools. You certainly pre-paid for it!
Will anyone now watch & hold them to their academic achievement promises? Or will it be “we need more money” in a few years? I’ll give them benefit of the doubt but will watch closely, even if it’s not my district. I suggest we all do likewise.
however, corporal punishment (like I endured in private midwest religious schools) is probably not advised today; how about calling it the "Swatter Magical Rainbow Convincing Rod of Diverse Opinions?"
That way, you get it approved by the school board with the 'diversity' tag (and a nice inflated contract) and all's well--no one suspects it's a rightist, sensible disicplinary Trojan Horse.
Posted by: Jimmie-howya-doin on August 31, 2005 03:00 PM
Bringing that up is a non-sequitur. It display an anti-religious bias.
The first issue is a strike is illegal. Again what part of illegal do the teachers not understand. If they wish to strike they should read MLK's Letter from a Birmingham Jail, and accept the consequences of civil disobedience.
I am not anti union. I am pro-education. When was the last time the WEA / NEA promoted an educational issue? It is always compensation for the teachers. I'll remind you the teacher with "we qualify for WIC" sign was in the the top 10% of wage earners.
Look at the NEA agenda for syllabi and you see a communist / socialist agenda. That is for poly-sci not K-12. With the current drop out rate, rates of functional illiteracy rates, etc.. the schools need reform. Reform which the unions consistently block.
The time tested proven method of getting the highest performance with the greatest efficiency is the free market.
Funding is not the answer. Funding does not equate to performance. Look at the data from S.D and D.C.
Posted by: JCM on August 31, 2005 03:57 PMRay, the PI falls short on the credibility scale with their story. And I don't mean fall short as in "miss the mark." I mean fall short as in, "plant one's face into the concrete with a sickening crunch, leaving a trail of teeth, skin, blood, and bone."
No description of the demographic is provided by this illustrious cage liner. What schools? What socioeconomic background? Were any schools conveniently omitted? (Hell- they do it with unfavorable votes all the time around here...)
Note also that no standard deviation is included. What was each student's SAT Score? What was the median score per school? Per district? Per county? I mean, if the Pee-Eye is going to crow about how great our "mush factories" really are, they could at least provide some reference to the survey to back themselves up.
And Bergeson? Really... You'd think a trooper just told her that she only blew .07. Woo-hoo! High-fives all around!
The bottom line here is that this report is worthless. No reference to or provision of data = no credibility- which, considering the source, should come as no big surprise.
Show me your data, baby. In the raw.
Posted by: ERNurse on August 31, 2005 04:35 PM1) While the scores themselves are impressive, test-takers who attended independent schools blew public school-educated test-takers out of the water (College Board, 2005, p.19).
2) These scores do not reflect the quality of the schools, but rather the aptitude of the individual student.
3) The College Board takes great pains to emphasize that the report covers only those students who took the test (College Board, 2005, p. 2). What is not shown here is how many students from each school's senior class actually took the test.
(Therefore, the school system has no justification for taking credit for the individual student's good performance. The student deserves all of the credit because he or she is the one who actually studied to prepare for the test.)
Now, in answer to your defense of the high caliber of Washington State's public schools, I say au contraire.
The Washington State Superintendent of Public Schools submitted a report earlier this year that stated 55% of graduating seniors who attended community colleges had to take remedial courses in math (Superintendent, 2004, p.1). Public schools did not prepare these kids for college.
I don't know what you'd call that, but I call it failure.
If that wasn't bad enough, the Fordham Foundation ranked Washington State public education among the worst in the nation for Math and English, giving particular attention to the WASL for being the most ridiculously pathetic excuse for an achievement test in the known universe (Fordam, 2005, pp. 69-70).
Ray, two separate reports- one by our own Superintendent of Public Instruction- agree that Washington State Public Education sucks!
Oh, by the way: those funny things I tacked on to my statements? Those are called citations. They lead the reader to a source of information used in a factual statement. Writers use them to establish their credibility on a particular issue. You aren't likely to see them anytime soon in the Pee-Eye.
And just to make sure you know I am not making this stuff up (as the Pee-Eye has been known to), below are my references. Judge for yourself.
Sorry for the long post, everyone. But the position that Washington's Public Education system is the paragon of excellence is simply indefensible.
References
Thomas Fordham Foundation, February 2005. Report on State English and Math Standards [Washington section]. Retrieved August 31, 2005, from http://www.edexcellence.net/doc/Washington.pdf
State Board for Community & Technical Colleges, Superintendent of Public Instruction, and Higher Education Coordinating Board, December 2004. Pre-college (Remedial) Course-Taking in Washington Postsecondary Education: Causes and Solutions. Retrieved August 31, 2005, from http://www.effwa.org/pdfs/Remediation2004.pdf
The College Board, 2005. College-Bound Seniors State Profile Report: Washington. Retrieved August 31, 2005 from http://www.collegeboard.com/prod_downloads/about/news_info/cbsenior/yr2005/Washington-2005.pdf
Posted by: ERNurse on August 31, 2005 07:45 PMLook.... the rest of us work around 270 days per year. Teachers: 182.
The rest of us work 8 or 9 hour days, or, if, like myself, I own my own business, 12 or more hours a day. Teachers: 7.
Considering that teaching is a part time job,I think these clowns are overpaid big time.
Let's see... 183 day work year... 7 hour days...
Starting pay of $37,595?
That means they earn $205 per day for each day they actually work.
And THAT means they earn $29.34 per hour TO START.
Do police and fire make that much? How about a PFC in Baghdad?
Screw these people. I'm sick of their prima donna BS.
Here's a clue to all you teachers out there.
Were you not aware of the pay scale before you made this noble sacrifice of "teaching?"
If you were, you have absolutely NO complaint coming.
If you were NOT, then you're incompetent idiots who shouldn't be allowed to teach in a dog obedience school.
If you don't like the outrageous amount of money we're paying you, then quit. Go pump gas for a living.
But stop complaining... because, in the end, you SHOULD have known better.
And for God's sake, STOP LYING ABOUT YOUR PAY, like those teacher scum here: http://www.soundpolitics.com/archives/004995.html
Posted by: Who... Me? on September 1, 2005 02:11 PM