August 02, 2013
Should your tax dollars directly support WEA union activities?
You can always count on the Washington Education Association (WEA) to oppose anything that smacks of innovation, competition, or a challenge to their control in our state's K-12 system. When the WEA filed a lawsuit against Washington's voter-approved charter schools law last month (the announcement of which they timed so the news would run in newspapers in little-read 4th of July editions) they stated that allowing a limited number of charter schools "unconstitutionally diverts public funds that are restricted to use for public common schools."
That charter schools are public schools doesn't matter. That the law allows a mere 40 total charter schools in a system of over 2,200 public schools also doesn't matter. The WEA perceives charter schools as a threat, so they must go.
While the WEA objects to spending a district's funds on charter schools, they aren't against diverting public money to directly fund their own activities. Liv Finne at the Washington Policy Center has the crucial report:
New research by Washington Policy Center shows public education funds are being diverted from school budgets to pay the salaries and benefits of executives at private labor unions. Each year school districts pay full salaries and benefits of public employees who leave school classrooms for a time to work full-time for private labor unions. While working as union executives the employees perform no teaching or other educational duties for the school district. [emphasis added]
Finne's report also notes, "In 2012-13, Washington school districts report they paid salaries and benefits to private outside labor organizations for the equivalent of 60 full-time positions, enough to provide full teaching staff for two elementary schools." Click here to see the full list of union representatives who are paid with taxpayers dollars not to teach.
We already knew that the WEA was more than happy to spend non-members' dues for political activities to which those teachers objected. But the payments Finne highlighted are direct payments of taxpayer dollars to fund salaries of union officials. Is that the best use of your education dollars?
Posted by Adam Faber at August 02, 2013
02:56 PM | Email This
1. You can disagree with WEA's tactics, but please get your facts right. WEA pays its members for their participation in all union activities. Tax pay dollars do not pay for union staffing.
2. fvktiqatwk wxllesoy pbyeaxtcc nultsr Sound Politics: Should your tax dollars directly support WEA union activities? mqdyaeb hzmzebmnhfc szxfgehh syvzzmbrd maghakput mpdnse
And this is why I keep responding to Liv: she says something dumb, and credulous conservatives repeat it like gospel truth.
Just as conservatives are correct to oppose Common Core standards because Common Core standards undermine and eliminate local control over taxpayer-supported public schools, so are they incorrect for continuing to support charter schools, which do exactly the same thing.
Charters are NOT public schools -- that is the big lie. You have NO control over what they do. Get over your hate for the teachers' unions and quit paying attention to liars for hire like Liv Finne. The fat cats who stand to make big bucks off charters are bankrolling her. And they do not give a rip about your local control.
5. Of course it's not okay; unions forcing taxpayers to pay for Union "tactics" (to use #1's phrasing) that have nothing to do with teaching children is merely an example of the corruption going on in public education. The fact that WEA doesn't like Charters simply is more about the fact that if WEA can't control it (as they do everything else), then they don't want it. Because for WEA it's not about whether the kids are learning anything; it's about WHO'S teaching them. If the teachers aren't in the WEA then the kids may actually get a better education (though the WEA will not make $$ on those teacher's lost dues, of course--oh, you didn't know that was the real issue?). It was never about the kids for WEA (which is why WEA stifles needed education reforms), it's all about WEA. Just like in Detroit---which it becomes clear wasn't being run for the benefit of the citizens; it was being run for the benefit of pols and the people who worked for the city, sadly---the WEA will run public education for their benefit and theirs only. You don't matter. You're just expected to pay for it.
6. #4: Charter Schools function spefically to EDUCATE KIDS. WEA functions to enrich themselves at the kids'(and taxpayers) expense and to stifle any necessary reform attempts to improve the education of the kids.
Dee @ 5,6:
I'm sorry that you are so gullible. Charter schools exist to enrich their owner/operators at taxpayer expense, with as little local control over their activities as they can get away with. If that is what you consider acceptable, then by all means you should support them. Just don't whine when you find out that your local control over these schools is gone with the wind.
8. Dee, I strongly suggest you read the link @3. Adam and his source are accusing the WEA of crimes, without explaining why then-Attorney General McKenna did not prosecute. That there has been no prosecution -- or even talk of it -- should be a rather large clue as to the validity of this post.
9. Unions = extortion racket for the incompetent.
10. Good grief, doesn't this site use any filters that could keep the spam from taking over every post?
11. @10 I've never seen a blog get spammed in their comments like this one does. What's not clear is whether or not anybody at SP is even trying to do something about it. It'd be nice to know that they are at least trying to address the problem.
12. Try as they might Doctor Steve, your comments still keep showing up.
13. @12 Sorry to have to be the one to tell you this, Loserboy, but if you hope to ever effectively insult anybody to your left you'll have to somehow find a way to grow a brain first.