News-Record.com

I wonder why Mr. York thinks unions are the only answer to teacher shortage/pay issues.

Unions are typically ineffecient as they suck up $$ for administrative costs, political advocacy, extensive healthcare, the list goes on. Union members worry less about the product they are making, whether cars or educated children, and spend more time worrying about an incessant quest for even more pay, benefits, and "rights".

If you don't believe me look at the difference between GM and Japanese automakers who set up shop in the US.

Here is a piece on GM's healthcare predicament thanks to the UAW. $1500 in costs per vehicle sold go solely to healthcare, primarily for people who no longer work at GM.

http://www.boston.com/news/globe/editorial_opinion/oped/articles/2005/06/16/gms_healthcare_dilemma/

If the unions are that inefficient within a corporation, just imagine the inefficiences within a massive government institution !!

I have no problem with raising teacher pay as appropriate, but that alone (union or not) will not abate the problem. What about better working conditions, i.e. discipline enforcement in the classrooms (read: tossing out problem students or placing them in appropriate classes separate from those who want to learn).

What about eliminating political correctness from the classroom? My favorite example was Deena Hayes mandatory training (cost around $45K) from a black "reverend" who forced GCS teachers to listen to his tirades...er, lectures about institutional racism and how all whites are inherently racist.

Any current/former teachers like to chime in? You out there Carol?

Just got back from a week at the beach, Dan. Beautiful weather...heard it rained here. Hope you have a Happy New Year!

Don't see that unions would be helpful. The salaries are not what has caused teacher shortages, imo. Out of control students, moronic workshops as you mentioned, unrealistic expectations and absolutely no say in the goals and running of the schools are just a few issues that I and other teachers had to deal with.

Good comments from both of you.

As far as the old fear that children will languish while teachers strike. That fear ain't so old. Wasn't just this past September that Detroit school teachers went on strike for over two weeks? Did kids not languish?

Happy new year to you as well Carol. Glad you enjoyed your vacation. Also glad you agree with me, as a former teacher you ought to know.

If this shows up twice, I apologize...something about the wireless portion of my router...

Anyway. Believe me. You don't want a Teacher's Union. We have them here in California and the best thing they do is hold school systems and school children hostage. It's not only about salaries [and, yes, teachers are grossly underpaid] but about political things, lobbying, sympathy strikes, etc. For example, if other unions go on strike [i.e. cafeteria workers, cleaning crews - even ones that are contractors] teachers unions will not cross picket lines. In our state when grocery workers went on strike there were television ads from the head of the teachers union telling people to not shop at Safeway or Albertsons. You don't want a teachers union. Just pay them a fair wage and they will be happy.

Carol, you are so very right! Until teachers are able to do what they are hired to do, the good teachers will leave. Teachers have far too many responsibilities put upon them, and it's time the parents of those children who cause the trouble be forced to take responsibility for their child's actions. A teacher can NOT be expected to discipline a child who can't be disciplined by his/her own parent! Personally, I'd like to see money be spent to construct "boot camp" type schools in which those who disrupt the classroom are placed until they EARN their way out. No doubt, certain members of our school board would object to this though.

Secondly, class sizes in every school could be reduced by elilminating the ESL teachers. Here in Greensboro, we had a magnet school that taught Spanish through language immersion. If it's such a great idea, can this it not be applied in reverse?

One thing gives me hope: the vast amounts of money the lottery will bring to our schools. *sarcasm off*

The NC Educators Association (www.ncea.com), is an independent union, which means that it is not affiliated with the National organizations the large umbrella of all Unions (AFL-CIO).

Unions are made up of both Dems and Reps, and are there to help the American working class, and create a real middle class (as opposed to mostly upper and lower class, that we have today).

A small percentage of union members abuse unions to their advantage, but the majority are there to get paid a honest wage for an honest days work.

Labor abuse goes both ways, kinda like outsourcing of jobs of greedy corporations.

Unions were created by the working class to level the playing field for blue collar v/s white collar workers, and also are there when the government does not enforce ethical behavior practices of companies to their employees.

If you look at the the small amount of manufacturing plants left in NC, you will find that most are unionized, and most of the ones that left were not unionized.

Unions are THE reason we have: Paid Vacation, Holidays, Sick Leave, Wage Increases, Pension Plans, safety requirements, overtime pay for more than 40 hours, and social security.

Reagan did a great job at breaking up unions, but the worker must now decide who they trust: Government, The Employer, or the their co-workers.

I struggle to reach the same conclusion as the LTTE. Mr. York does not adequately explain how the addition of unions (and subsequent pay increase required to support them) would solve a teacher shortage. For many of the reasons Dan mentions, I struggle to see how the state would benefit. I agree with Carol that the state needs to address the environment within which our teachers are working, but I'm not convinced a union is the answer.

See, Dan, I don't always read from my Nancy Pelosi/Howard dean handbook. :)

Happy New Year!

Guilford, I agree that unions were founded on the noble ideal of protecting the working man/woman, providing good wages, etc. But what they are now is entirely different. They are interested in getting more for themselves and damn the company or it's customers.

My link above and Anthony's example are but two.

Here is a personal one: I went to Chicago as an exhibitor at a trade show. After I assembled my booth display in what took 10 minutes, I was greeted by a shop steward who explained to me that only union labor could be used to set up my display. I was forced to take it down. They put it back up and charged me two hours labor!!

Here is the kicker: the display had a bar in which you screwed in 3 light bulbs, hung the bar across the top, and plugged it in. When I asked the steward why they didn't put the light fixture up, he told me the electrical union had to do that!!!! I was charged another 1/2 hour labor for something that takes on minute!! True story.

BTW, I would like to see your statistics of the small number of plants we have left being unionized. I don't buy it.

We primarily lost textile/furniture manufacturing due to global competition. Would you suggest unionizing a US textile mill would make it more competitive with China or Honduras?

Look at Goodyear workers finally going back to work after a three month strike. The company approved a paltry BILLION dollars in health care for retirees when the union requested two billion. How greedy of Goodyear.

On Thread? Heck no!
Truth? Who knows.
Fiction? Who knows.
Interesting theory? You decide!

http://marketplace.publicradio.org/shows/2007/01/02/PM200701026.html

Dan,
The mfg plants that come to mind are Miller Brewing in Eden, and a few farm workers in the east. Here is a link to what is going on at the hog farms right now.
http://www.usatoday.com/money/industries/manufacturing/2006-11-17-smithfield-protest_x.htm

All textile mills were moved overseas, due to deregulation, and the RJR bargained with their employees to take a short term incentive, instead of unionizing.

The avergage pay for Union employees in 2006 was less than 30,000(money hungry workers).
http://data.bls.gov/PDQ/servlet/SurveyOutputServlet?&series_id=ENUUS000505813930

Most plants that are non-unionized are ones that are made of a less than 10% full times workers, and the rest are temp workers or contract workers (no health care or any other benefits, so your taxes may pay for them, since they most are under the the poverty level). And many are illegals.

Some of the unions that are non-mfg, that are keeping some of their jobs from being contracted out are: postal workers, state employees, phone companies, a small percentage of flight attendants, steel workers, and truck drivers.

Heck, even the Republican Party outsourced their campaign call center to India to raise political money.
http://www.etalkinghead.com/news/archives/bush-campaign-ran-from-india-call-centre-2004-05-15.html

A small percentage of union workers give them a bad name, by abusing the system. If you see one, call the company they work for. If the company contacts their union representative, the employee will have their membership taken away.

Guilford, Smithfield Tarheel plant is not a hog farm, it is a hog processing plant. I have been to that plant many times since it opened, most recently two weeks ago. They have a full time clinic across the street that cares for the workers and their families, called Smithfield Family Medical Center. I wish I could visit the doctor without having to pay for it.

Textile mills - deregulation. NAFTA...signed by who?

You didn't answer my question, is unionizing a US textile plant going to make it competitive with China or Honduras? I'm waiting..........

I'd like some stats that less than 10% of plant workers are full time employees. I work in plants all the time and haven't noticed this. I'm waiting..........

Here is one last tidbit until your next reply:

12.5% of wage and salary workers are unionized in 2005, down from 20.1% in 1983. I lived in socialist France and saw almost daily the havoc that unions wreak, strikes, strikes, strikes, bitchin and then some bitchin. If unions were the panecea to all the ills in the workplace, then why are their numbers shrinking yearly?

http://www.bls.gov/news.release/union2.nr0.htm

Like I said, unions were created with a noble cause, today they are anathema to efficiency and competition. They are a dinosaur.

NAFTA was built in 1989, and signed by Bush I in 1992. When Clinton took office, the final bill narrowly passed through congress, and Clinton didn't use his veto power.
http://encarta.msn.com/encyclopedia_761579853/North_American_Free_Trade_Agreement.html

Over the past two-decades, we are now in a position where our stock market is owned by Asian investors, and we cannot tariff what they bring into the US, due to a threat of them collapsing our economy. (although China tariffs us up to 400% of what we bring in there)
http://www.china-embassy.org/eng/gyzg/t196514.htm

Currently, there is no plan of action to compete with Asia, India, and South America.

Regards plants you visit, ask the supervisor what the percentage of 'full-time employees' they have on-site.

Sounds like you want to 'go with the flow', and say 'that's just the way it's gonna be'.

Most of America sees an issue with outsourcing, and one that we can't just sit back.

With all issues America faces, we can talk about them only, or we can elect people to office who understand them, and have a PLAN of action. Not a bunch of folks who live off their parents until they are 30, read a book on politics, and then run for office somewhere.

Kinda like Steve Arnold pushing lawn mowers during his early years, then using his dad's political power to gain office, and live off the system.

We need real people.

Guilford Native: "Reagan did a great job at breaking up unions, but the worker must now decide who they trust: Government, The Employer, or the their co-workers."

You're damned right he did, and not just a great job, but a super-great job. That why they named the airport for him. Even dead, he would do a better job as president than the last three.

Good Discussion by all.

I may agree with Brian444 - Reagan was good president - but that's hind-sight, being furious at the time about two-sided comments, "We won't trade arms for hostages, however we may trade arms for hostages." At least he ultimately confessed his sins.

He only broke the ATC's 'cause they did something illegal. Did he break other unions?

Although I opposed it at the time, NAFTA ended up a dud - but only because the Mexican Goverement screwed it up - we'd have been MUCH better off having those textile mills in Mexico than letting them go to China. Best of allwould be have them remain down the street - but we might only have 5 pair of jeans in the closet vs. the 20 we each own. Personally, I only wear one pair at at time.

Applying for a car loan, I had a new thought about EEEEVVVIILLLLLL Corporations ..

Consider the difference between Credit Unions and Banks:

http://www.allegacyfcu.org/membershipcudiff.html

Substitute "EEEEVVVIILLLLLL Corporations" for the "Bank" column, and Substitute "How it Could Be" for the "Credit Union" column ... you'll find not "Socialism", not "Communism", not even "Income Redistribution" .. just fair treatment of everyone.

btw, "credit unions [being] exempt from paying federal income tax" is probably the single biggest reason they are such a good deal ... but isn't keeping the g'men out a fundemental conservative principle?

Since NC is a right-to-work state, I'm not sure unions would have much power.

"Sounds like you want to 'go with the flow', and say 'that's just the way it's gonna be'."

To the contrary, I believe those who support unions want to go with the flow, read: status quo. Dinosaurs.

I agree there is no plan to compete economically with Asian countries, but promoting more US unionization will take us back even further, especially when it comes to educating the skulls full of mush that represent American children.

Our kids are worrying about how to get to the next level on their X-box or PS3 while Asian kids are kicking their butts academically.

"Most of America sees an issue with outsourcing, and one that we can't just sit back."

Is increasing unionization going to lessen outsourcing? I have some swamp land for sale :)

The main point I am making is that businesses need to take responsibility for ensuring that employees are satisfied with their job and benefits.

If a business shows that it is irresponsible, who should be authorized to step in to make things right?

Personally, I have worked for two companies, and I would not have joined a union if they had one, because the company had a proven track record of treating their employees with decent benefits, and wage increases (without government involvement).

Many companies are not that for generous.

Good Discussion.

I was watching Wake giving the game away last night, and had to blow off some steam.

"The main point I am making is that businesses need to take responsibility for ensuring that employees are satisfied with their job and benefits."

Whoa baby, did I get a laugh out of that one!!

Businesses are in business to provide products/services that people want to buy and to make a profit.

They are not in business to make sure all their employees are happy and get free doctor visits and two month vacations.

"If a business shows that it is irresponsible, who should be authorized to step in to make things right?"

Uhhh, that would be the govt. if the business is violating any of the myriad of laws that businesses have to follow. To name a few: EEOC, OSHA, EPA, DOT, IRS.

Businesses do have an obligation to provide a minimum wage, safe workplace and abide by existing laws but they do not have an obligation to make sure each and every one of their employees satisfied with their jobs!! How the hell does an employer do that?

I'm not saying it's not in a business best interest to have satisfied employees, that hopefully will increase productivity and decrease turnover. It will also fend off unions!! But it sure isn't up to the govt. if that is what you are advocating. The market should decide.

Witness France last year. The govt. wanted a law to allow employers to fire non-productive employees ONLY in their first two years of employment. Objective: businesses would have incentive to hire more young people. Result: massive demonstrations by the populace and the proposal was recinded. Next result: businesses do not want to hire young people, adding to the double digit unemployment rate that has existed for decades.

I'll continue to promote the Credit Union Model.

Methinks Dan prefers the South African Apartheid Model, which was Legal - i.e. in compliance with the equivalent myriad EEOC, OSHA, EPA, DOT, & IRS laws, which defined their obligation for minimum wage and safety.

Hey - it was Fair-in-the-eye-of-the-Powerholder, and not their fault each and every one of their employees was not satisfied with their jobs. How the hell was the employer do that?

http://www-cs-students.stanford.edu/~cale/cs201/apartheid.hist.html

==

I always wondered who that guy was in town that had the Confereate flag in their front yard beside the kiddie pool, a white tank-top with a tobacco stain, and a truck with the sticker in their back window of Dale Sr. pissing on Jeff Gordon's #24 car.

Was that you Dan?

just kidding, but had to say it.

NUMBER OF FEDERAL TORT TRIALS FELL BY ALMOST 80 PERCENT FROM 1985 THROUGH 2003

http://www.ojp.usdoj.gov/bjs/pub/press/fttv03pr.htm

Sorry, not me, I don't do NASCAR, just college/pro football & college basketball. Never tried chewing tobacco either.

I do own a pickup truck as a third vehicle for hauling mulch, furniture, etc. It's also fun to drive to the airport when I fly my airplane. Just got back from there, watched the full moon rise and the sun set at the same time from 4000 ft. up.

I do know how to spell confederate however ;-)

If you think it's an employer's obligation to ensure the happiness of their employees, hey to each his own. I was very happy with my employer until the company was bought. Then I went out and started my own company and now I have the best employer ever. Ain't America wonderful?

For some it is, Dan. You are very fortunate, as am I. That should not stop our caring for others less fortunate. Until we can walk in others shoes, we should not condemn. We should not be proud and boastful. BTW, I saw the beautiful moon in the west and the sun come up in the east from my own yard. Beautiful sight.

Guilford Native:

"I always wondered who that guy was in town that had the Confereate flag in their front yard beside the kiddie pool, a white tank-top with a tobacco stain, and a truck with the sticker in their back window of Dale Sr. pissing on Jeff Gordon's #24 car.

Was that you, Dan"

Nope, that was your next door neighbor. You really should come introduce yourself. We don't bite. Well, the pit bull does but he's chained.

And that's not a tobacco stain.

Carol, I do consider myself very fortunate, I just don't think it is the responsibility of employers or the govt. to ensure an individual's satisfaction in their job or life in general. That is where Guilford and I disagree.

If one doesn't like their job, then go work somewhere else!! I've done it twice.

Guilford stated it was in jest, but it's interesting how conservatives are portrayed as a bunch of hayseed, tobacco chewing, NASCAR loving, pickup driving bumpkins who just fell off the turnip wagon.

JDR, don't get your connection to apartheid. That was a system of racial segregation. How is that relevant to US employers ensuring their employees are satisfied with their jobs?

Dan,
You are just not the kind of person I would ever choose to associate with in the first place. Your attitude toward anyone who cannot do as you have done, is very revealing.
Hope you had a Happy New Year!

I'll consider that a compliment DD.

The attitude that employers are responsible for the job satisfaction of their employees is very revealing as well.

Sorry about your Deacs, I was pulling for them.

Dan,

For starters, I'd like free lattes, back massages, pedicures, an HDTV with sports on all the time, a personal assistant, at least 6 figures a week, a private bathroom with sauna, a queen size bed with fluffy pillows, and a 2-hour workweek.

That would help me along way towards my 'job satisfaction'.

Dan - you're prob' no longer following this thread .. but here's what I meant:

Apartheid was a system of racial segregation - it was also LEGAL and it was CORPORATE PRACTICE, therefore apartheid clearly met the "myriad of laws that businesses have to follow".

When GOD intended one to be an employer, He born that one with white skin. But GOD didn't bake them all that way: dark-skinned folks were deemed - at birth and by GOD - to be employees. Those were not satisfied with their jobs could still go elsewhere - after all, the dark-skinned employees were not slaves. The next mine - the next job - being 200 miles across the desert was not the fault of the employer, it was clearly GOD's hand that placed the countries resources.

{;-/

Point 1a: Legal does not always mean right.
Point 1b: Illegal does not always mean wrong.
Point 2: Religion & GOD can be used to justify anything.