Update: Data on class size and funding added at the bottom...
The illegal strike in Kent continues with a vote today. In case the teachers didn't believe that their strike was illegal Judge Andrea Darva told them so and last week ordered them to return to work tomorrow. Classes were scheduled to start last Monday August 31.
They say the issue is class size, but that's just a time-tested theme the public buys. Fewer than half of school employees are in the classroom. Their district could bring class sizes down by reducing counseling and activities coordinators. But the teachers don't want that. This is a Washington Education Association power play.
After negotiating throughout the weekend with the help of a new mediator, striking teachers in the Kent School District voted Monday night to continue their strike, defying a court order that they report to their classrooms Tuesday morning.There are 26,000 students and 100 parents showed up to support the illegal strike. That's a small number.Though the vote means the district's 26,000 students will not be returning to classes Wednesday as planned, leaving some families to scramble for child care, support for the teachers from parents appeared to be growing.
An estimated 100 parents showed up Monday afternoon outside Green River Community College, where teachers met for the vote. Parents formed lines that flanked the teachers and cheered, waved and high-fived them as they filed inside the gym.
The key issue is class size, with teachers saying that not only are the district's classrooms seriously overcrowded, but many of the students have special needs.
Added:
Class size: Taking out the administrators in 2008-09 there were 16.7 students per certificated staff. Certificated staff are teachers and other positions filled by a college graduate or higher: nurses, librarians, counselors. Class sizes vary: larger for band and PE, smaller for special education. The lower grades are funded for smaller classes; the higher grades put the money into lab equipment, athletic and music facilities instead and have larger class sizes. You can look them up by school and class. Kent School District
Funding: Kent had $9,910 per student. If you were given 30 kids and $297,300 could you educate those kids with such ample funding?
Source: WA State Fiscal Information
Posted by Ron Hebron at September 07, 2009 09:17 PM | Email ThisThere are 26,000 students and 100 parents showed up to support the illegal strike. That's a small number in a district that size.
Posted by: Eyago on September 7, 2009 10:01 PMWith that said, the kent SD should start hiring replacements as soon as possible and handing out pink slips to the teachers on the picket lines.
Posted by: Lysander on September 7, 2009 10:04 PMYes, Government should have the backbone to lay it on the line...They either show up for work or they are FIRED. After all, Ronald Reagan gave an ultimatum to the Air Traffic Controllers and fired the ones who were Dumb enough not to show up at work and guess what? End of the problem of the Tax Payers continuing to be Ripped Off by the Criminal Gang/Union of the Air Traffic Controllers.
The WEA should not be allowed to go beyond a judges ruling.
Start hiring replacements, there are plenty of talented unemployed people who can step into place and start teaching these kids. Period
Posted by: GS on September 7, 2009 11:56 PMThe WEA should not be allowed to go beyond a judges ruling.
Start hiring replacements, there are plenty of talented unemployed people who can step into place and start teaching these kids. Period
Posted by: GS on September 7, 2009 11:57 PMWe should do away with public employee unions altogether, but as long as we have them, they ought to be forced to ride the mostly empty mass transit in the region to work. Might as well make something of our terrible investment in transportation.
Posted by: Jeff B. on September 8, 2009 06:47 AMFiring them will simply allow them to collect unemployment.
Posted by: Rick D. on September 8, 2009 08:09 AMWe need to say enough is enough and fire these people. The law is the law and once again Washington State Labor Unions and the WEA show they have no respect for the law.
The solution is to fine each of the teachers $100 per day that they are away from work. And fine the local union $10,000 per day for every day that they encourage the members to stay away from work. And fine the WEA $100,000 per day for every day that they refuse to order their members back to work. This way the people don't incur costs, the employees and their unions that encourage them to break the law and ignore the judges decree are the ones that suffer. It would also set the precedent for the next teacher's union that wishes to go on strike.
State law forbids a strike by teachers, and it expressly states that the terms and conditions of an expired contract are to remain in place for a period of one year, so the district would not be able to unilaterally impose any changes to the workplace. These folks are breaking the law, an extremely poor example to set for our children, and they need to be taught a lesson themselves!
Posted by: Stretch on September 8, 2009 11:11 AMand enough with paying these people more money...they have simple, easy college degrees, and they don't work even half the year..
remember the quote....democracy is doomed to fail as soon as the people know they can vote themselves in more benefits.....
we've reached that station.....the takers run the joint and the rest of us just have to pay...
Posted by: lee on September 8, 2009 11:14 AMIt is a great example to set. If one thinks a law is unjust they should not follow it. I personally think a law requiring one to work is abhorrent. They should be free to go to work or strike as they desire without the law or courts getting involved.
With that said, if they get fired they only have themselves to blame.
Posted by: Lysander on September 8, 2009 11:54 AMIt is a great example to set. If one thinks a law is unjust they should not follow it. I personally think a law requiring one to work is abhorrent. They should be free to go to work or strike as they desire without the law or courts getting involved.
With that said, if they get fired they only have themselves to blame.
Posted by: Lysander on September 8, 2009 11:55 AMThe union fat cats should be handed over to the prosecutor for investigation of conspiracy, to break the relivant law preventing the strike. (they knew this would happen) and perhaps fraud for attempting to rob the public purse this way.
I once believed in unions, but I've seen them comit so many more wrongs than the employers I'm just sick of the whole idea. Its nothing but organized crime. Now that WEA owns the legislature in kind of a Taminy Hall setup is just intolerible.
Posted by: M167A1 on September 8, 2009 04:23 PMIf they are not being forced to work than what did the judge say in ruling? If they have effectively quit their job, then why would the SD take them to court?
Posted by: Lysander on September 8, 2009 06:36 PMMy still open questions are:
1. Why should we punish the people that chose not to go to work? They do not want to work so hire someone else and let them be in peace.
2. What was the judges ruling if it was not that they had to work?
Posted by: Lysander on September 8, 2009 08:49 PMBottom Line: To further make the point. How, would you like the Police and Fire Fighters to go on Strike? Not a pretty picture.
If it is a simple as a person with no prior signed contract or obligation/promise to show up for work then, the only punishment would be to be Fired. Even at that, it is a courtesy to give at least a two week notice of quiting.
The judges ruling was that they are not to abide by the Strike and are to carry out their teaching duties. As you know, I would have also, outlawed the Union...PERIOD! End of conflict.
I would love if the police went on strike honestly. Those are people that exert power over us every day. But again... how is taking away the first amendment rights an improvement?
I agree that teachers should have given two weeks notice prior to quitting. They did not. I do not think either of us are argueing that they are good workers. The debate is whether they should be punished beyond just losing their job. You think they should be punished because they decided to exercise their first amendment right. I do not. Please make the case for why they should be punished for exercising first amendment rights.
Posted by: Lysander on September 8, 2009 10:37 PMWhile school is closed, they don't have to pay for janitors, cafeteria staff, bus drivers, electricity, water, gasoline/diesel, security, etc. Heck, the school district might come out ahead on this strike.
If anyone is hurt by the strike, it's probably the people that can least afford it, like the janitorial staff and bus drivers.
Posted by: Thomas B. on September 8, 2009 11:49 PMPay the teachers based on class size and see how their position changes.
Posted by: Tazmotto on September 9, 2009 07:27 AMThe teachers formed their own Union? Get Real! The Union was put together by a bunch of street hustlers to con the teachers into allowing them to represent them. It's a Game-play to not only extort money from the teachers but, from the Tax Payers as well. Wake Up! Naah...You're a Liberal!
You would Love if the Police went on Strike? You would want the vital Protection of the Rule of Law removed from Society that the Police provides? Vital services that are being paid by the Tax Payer and yet, will not be rendered? Allowing Society to be exposed to runaway Crime Spree? What a Fool! But then...You're a Liberal.
The teachers are not exercising their First Amendment Rights. They are refusing to work, violating the expectations of the Tax Payers who are paying the bills for the service. You don't see anything wrong with that? Of course, you don't...You're a Liberal!
Any further exchanges with you, will continue to be a Waste of Time and will not be pursued. After all...You're a Liberal!
Posted by: Daniel on September 9, 2009 07:29 AMThe right to associate is a first amendment right. A union is an association of teachers. It is a first amendment right, even if you do not like the association. Just as the nazis speech is a first amendment right even if you do not like the speech.
If you feel I am a liberal and therefore not worth talking to, then you are wrong on two accounts. But along with the right to association and speech that you do not think is important is the right not to associate with me or speak to me and I respect that. Have a nice day.
Posted by: Lysander on September 9, 2009 10:56 AMThe right to associate is a first amendment right. A union is an association of teachers. It is a first amendment right, even if you do not like the association. Just as the nazis speech is a first amendment right even if you do not like the speech.
If you feel I am a liberal and therefore not worth talking to, then you are wrong on two accounts. But along with the right to association and speech that you do not think is important is the right not to associate with me or speak to me and I respect that. Have a nice day.
Posted by: Lysander on September 9, 2009 10:57 AMThe right to associate is a first amendment right. A union is an association of teachers. It is a first amendment right, even if you do not like the association. Just as the nazis speech is a first amendment right even if you do not like the speech.
If you feel I am a liberal and therefore not worth talking to, then you are wrong on two accounts. But along with the right to association and speech that you do not think is important is the right not to associate with me or speak to me and I respect that. Have a nice day.
Posted by: Lysander on September 9, 2009 10:58 AMThe right to associate is a first amendment right. A union is an association of teachers. It is a first amendment right, even if you do not like the association. Just as the nazis speech is a first amendment right even if you do not like the speech.
If you feel I am a liberal and therefore not worth talking to, then you are wrong on two accounts. But along with the right to association and speech that you do not think is important is the right not to associate with me or speak to me and I respect that. Have a nice day.
Posted by: Lysander on September 9, 2009 10:59 AMThe right to associate is a first amendment right. A union is an association of teachers. It is a first amendment right, even if you do not like the association. Just as the nazis speech is a first amendment right even if you do not like the speech.
If you feel I am a liberal and therefore not worth talking to, then you are wrong on two accounts. But along with the right to association and speech that you do not think is important is the right not to associate with me or speak to me and I respect that. Have a nice day.
Posted by: Lysander on September 9, 2009 11:00 AMAnd, no, I am not equating the teachers unions with the Hells Angels or the Mafia. I am just making a point about the right to associate. However, the teachers union and the other two groups do have it in common that they break the law when it suits them.
Posted by: Huey on September 9, 2009 03:21 PMYou are right that the people suffering will be the 9 month classified staff who are missing out on September hours. Several hundred are now rightly claiming unemployment, plus the district has agreed to move up some commitment payments from November to September to help these folks make ends meet. That will also cost money. The teachers will get paid for 181 days no matter what, so they are not missing anything on strike. Meanwhile they are causing the district to draw down on the fund balance, thus shooting themselves in the foot.
Posted by: Kent Auburn on September 9, 2009 04:23 PMSo the strike is hurting everyone, except the teachers and the union. Magnificent.
Posted by: Thomas B on September 9, 2009 05:06 PMYou only think that the freedom of association only MIGHT be a right? Wow. Anyways yes appearantly they broke the law. My point however is that what they have done should not be illegal. All they have done is not go to work. While that may be detrimental to your career, it should not be illegal. I commend them for doing what they feel is right rather than what the law and judge say they should do. The law is wrong.
Posted by: Lysander on September 9, 2009 07:47 PMJust because you think that what they did SHOULDN'T be illegal, doesn't mean that therefore they should be excused. They broke the law and have taught their students that breaking the law may be an enriching thing (to the tune of a 10% raise).
The law is very clear and the citizens of this state should be up in arms after seeing so many teachers' unions striking in order to extort higher pay from property tax owners, when the only bargaining should be done through the state legislature which has put into place the statewide salary schedule as a means to support this state's constitution.
The best thing that could happen for the taxpayers of this state is for Kent SD to fire all the teachers for breaking the law. The WEA is supposed to get their pay raises from the state legislature yet they continue to have different locals extort pay raises from local sources. This is unconstitutional as it pertains to education in this state. The state legislature has made it illegal in the past by institution the state wide salary schedule and they need to fix the laws to make sure the districts and the unions are complying with it.
Posted by: Doug on September 9, 2009 08:28 PMKent could seek a waiver from OSPI to only go 160 days, it's quite possible that some of the schools are well over the minimum hour requirement and they could be granted some form of waiver which would allow them to pay the teachers less.
Additionally, if the administration is on top of the ball, they could deal with the classified union to pay them some now for future work so that the classified workers don't have a financial burden during this time.
Posted by: Doug on September 9, 2009 08:34 PMThe citizens should be up in arms that we have an unjust law that violates the first amendment. The teachers while making a poor decision to strike are setting an example to their students that one should do what they feel is right regardless of the law which i think is a good thing.
So far no one has made a case for why the law is the way it is. If they do not want to work, why should that be illegal?
Posted by: Lysander on September 9, 2009 08:46 PMThe Bottom Line is this...Unions should be disallowed to represent public employees. The reason that such, Unions are allowed and therefore, continue to extort and disrupt services is because, of the donations the Unions give to certain dishonest politicians to keep their Unions from being outlawed. This is called Corruption in Politics and is illegal as well. So, because of Corruption, the problem continues to raise its ugly head. Does any of this make any sense to you, Lysander?
More importantly, government should not be providing us education.
Posted by: Lysander on September 10, 2009 03:33 AMAmen.
Everybody knows about Reagan and the air traffic controllers. But my favorite example, actually, is Rudy Giuliani and the legal aid strike. They staged an illegal strike and refused to do the legal work they were hired for, which in and of its self is against the law unless a Judge allows for it.
Rudy just said, "OK, in two days, I'll find that you broke your contract, and you'll all be fired. We'll find other lawyers to do the work. And in the future, the city will not do business with any company that hires any of the lawyers who walked out on their duties."
Needless to say, they went back to work two days later.
Rudy didn't f*&k around. And they knew it.
Posted by: Cliff on September 11, 2009 08:10 AMThe teachers and the Union are trying to hold the Tax Payers as hostages in the efforts to extort more money from the Tax Payer, plain and simple. This is an outrages Criminal Act upon the Tax Payers. Yes, the teachers should be punished for their egregious conduct but, most of all...The Union should be outlawed and their leaders incarcerated and fined...Big Time!