Teachers Strike in Arizona

[Thermos aquaticus]

Oh sure, workers can band together and strike as a tactic to increase their pay/benefits. However, the workers always have to keep in mind that they are not irreplaceable. If their demands become too much for management to accept, they can be replaced by others that will accept what they are rejecting.

Absolutely agree. Like I said in my previous, there needs to be a balance. Given the fact that Arizona is paying teachers much less than other states it does put Arizona in a less than ideal bargaining position. If they lose the teachers that are already in the state, will teachers from other states take a pay cut to move to Arizona?

 

[metis]

They all agree that teachers should earn more, but some don't believe a strike is the way to go about it.

I really liked and agree with most of your post, but not so much the above. The reason is what other options do the teachers really have at their disposal?

Secondly, the teachers are not just striking on their behalf but also the student's behalf as well. Thirdly, all time lost will not likely be lost in the long run but probably made up. I was on two such strikes back in the 70's & 80's, with one of them being 3 weeks long, and every single minute was made up.

But I do agree that the timing is poor as such conditions, including striking if necessary, could be done in the fall, which also allows make-up time easier since it can be spread out over a longer period of time.

The rest of your post I thought was excellent and spot-on.

 

[metis]

Whatever the company culture, it is up to the employee as to whether or not they will remain there.

Why just the employee? What makes the owners/CEO's so supposedly sacrosanct that they can run rough-shod over the employees?

And "fair" is not a useful attribute. Life is not fair. Nor can anyone agree on what fairness means.

Then you must be all for slavery since fairness is not that important, right? Why not legalize everything and just let American society become a anarchist free-for-all society since fairness seemingly doesn't count?

Your post above seems very much in opposition to Torah, which demands fairness, and in many different areas. As far as we know, eretz Israel were the first society in history to place limitations, written into Law, on kings and government in general. It also spelled out obligations for that which government must do-- and much of it, maybe all of it, relates to the issue of "fairness", directly or indirectly, such as Hillel's rather famous comment when asked by a student on what the main purpose of Torah is.

I hate to sound snarky, but I can see why you support Trump because he's not much into "fair" either.

 

[metis]

Absolutely agree. Like I said in my previous, there needs to be a balance.

But there simply is no "balance" if the teachers have no say as to any conditions for their employment, and all that they are doing is simply saying that they will not work if there isn't some "balance" that's struck.

"Balance" involves give & take, not just take.

 

[Thermos aquaticus]

But there simply is no "balance" if the teachers have no say as to any conditions for their employment, and all that they are doing is simply saying that they will not work if there isn't some "balance" that's struck.

They are using a strike as leverage so they can have a say in the matter, both in negotiations and in the realm of public opinion.

 

[metis]

They are using a strike as leverage so they can have a say in the matter, both in negotiations and in the realm of public opinion.

Yes, and I certainly don't have a problem with that and I don't think the kids affected do either.

 

[Thermos aquaticus]

Yes, and I certainly don't have a problem with that and I don't think the kids affected do either.

A practical lesson in civics and democratic expression might do them good.

 

[Stevicus]

The teachers say it isn't about the raise...


Arizona teacher walkout: how 3 decades of tax cuts suffocated public schools

Yes, I know.

 

[Saint Frankenstein]

Sorry, can't afford to fund our schools! We have to give that money to the war machine and corporations! They're going broke, after all, even though we give them over half a trillion $ a year! If God wanted those kids to have a good education, he would've had them born into a family that can afford private school! It's God's work! Praise Jesus!

 

[Stevicus]

I really liked and agree with most of your post, but not so much the above. The reason is what other options do the teachers really have at their disposal?

Well, you're right. There are few options available, especially when dealing with some of the more stubborn politicians in this state. But I was just pointing out that even among the teachers, there was some disagreement.

Secondly, the teachers are not just striking on their behalf but also the student's behalf as well. Thirdly, all time lost will not likely be lost in the long run but probably made up. I was on two such strikes back in the 70's & 80's, with one of them being 3 weeks long, and every single minute was made up.

But I do agree that the timing is poor as such conditions, including striking if necessary, could be done in the fall, which also allows make-up time easier since it can be spread out over a longer period of time.

The rest of your post I thought was excellent and spot-on.

Yes, the conditions of the schools, the poor equipment, outdated textbooks - these are all issues in the strike as well. But the issue of pay is also significant, not just because the teachers want more money for themselves, but also to attract higher quality individuals to improve the system overall.

 

[Stevicus]

The latest I heard was the Governor Ducey is twitting about a "deal" that they've supposedly reached, but a lot of people aren't buying, especially since it hasn't been approved by the legislature.

2 arrested in brutal Arizona ATM attack in which man's ear partially bitten off

 

[TheBannerofHomuraAkemi]

Sorry, can't afford to fund our schools! We have to give that money to the war machine and corporations! They're going broke, after all, even though we give them over half a trillion $ a year! If God wanted those kids to have a good education, he would've had them born into a family that can afford private school! It's God's work! Praise Jesus!

Of Course Killing more brown people is what all our money should be spent for. I mean the only time were suppose to care about kids is when they're in their mothers womb otherwise ****em right?

 

[Akivah]

Why just the employee? What makes the owners/CEO's so supposedly sacrosanct that they can run rough-shod over the employees?

If the job is that bad, then they wouldn't be able to retain any employees. The point I'm making is that government shouldn't compel any employer regarding the pay that they offer employees. That should be determined by the market. For some reason, you seem to believe that an employee will accept mal-treatment by their employers unless Big Brother government steps in.

Then you must be all for slavery since fairness is not that important, right?

That's quite a Superman-sized leap, to go from a hazy meaning of fairness to slavery. Once you give a rational comment, I will respond.

Why not legalize everything and just let American society become a anarchist free-for-all society since fairness seemingly doesn't count?

Fairness doesn't appear as an attribute in any law that I know of. Most laws are based on ethical considerations of a working society.

It also spelled out obligations for that which government must do-- and much of it, maybe all of it, relates to the issue of "fairness", directly or indirectly, such as Hillel's rather famous comment when asked by a student on what the main purpose of Torah is.

This is just how you are defining things in your own mind. Fairness isn't used as an attribute in laws. And Hillel's quote is 'forbear doing to your neighbor that which is hateful to you'. The word 'fair' isn't there.

I can see why you support Trump because he's not much into "fair" either.

I easily see why you are a Democrat. You think an individual is unable to take care of their own business, but must instead rely on a Big Brother controlling government to do it for them.

 

[metis]

The point I'm making is that government shouldn't compel any employer regarding the pay that they offer employees. That should be determined by the market. For some reason, you seem to believe that an employee will accept mal-treatment by their employers unless Big Brother government steps in.

I did not say nor imply "Big Brother government" should step in, but what I am saying is that the teachers should have a right to have a say in their own employment. So, why did you create this strawman?

That's quite a Superman-sized leap, to go from a hazy meaning of fairness to slavery. Once you give a rational comment, I will respond.

You're the one who claimed that fairness doesn't count when dealing with the laws, not I. If that were to be the case, the logical result would be that any law is all fine and dandy and that the moral teachings found within Torah don't amount to a hill of beans because they should never be applied.

Fairness doesn't appear as an attribute in any law that I know of. Most laws are based on ethical considerations of a working society.

Laws tend to reflect, at least most of the time, what any given society thinks is fair or unfair. Where else do you think societies actually derive their laws from? flipping coins? ouija boards?

This is just how you are defining things in your own mind. Fairness isn't used as an attribute in laws. And Hillel's quote is 'forbear doing to your neighbor that which is hateful to you'. The word 'fair' isn't there.

It is implied, and I can't believe you can't see that.

And where is Hillel's statement coming from? Torah, right? What is Torah about? Let me suggest that it's fairness (justice) as given by haShem through Torah. And it is this fairness that established Jewish Law for eretz Israel, and it's unbelievable that you seemingly can't make that very simple connection.

I easily see why you are a Democrat. You think an individual is unable to take care of their own business, but must instead rely on a Big Brother controlling government to do it for them.

Now you are just being utterly dishonest as as I never made such a statement nor did I imply it. No wonder you now support Trump so much-- a president who actually defies so much as what is found in Torah.

Politically, I am what is called a "left libertarian", and I have been as such for decades now. A close match on tests I've taken on this is Gandhi, whom I've long considered being my #1 "mentor" even though there are a couple of areas whereas I don't agree with him on.

The "Libertarian" approach, for your information, does not want a "Big Brother" to dominate and, as a matter of fact, my wish would be the promotion of more cottage industries matched with much greater emphasis on local jurisdictions. Does that sound like me supporting "Big Brother" to you?

Unfortunately, it seems that between Torah and Trump, you seem to relate much more to the latter. In law, whether that be civil law or Jewish Law, fairness that relates to how we may treat others is extremely important, whether you accept that or not. Over and over again, Trump has shown that empathy based on Torah and basic Christian teachings really aren't that important to him. So, it's either Torah or Trump, and it's clear that you've chosen the latter, and that's truly unfortunate.

 

[Stevicus]

The strike continues today.

Day 3 of teacher walkout; many schools remain closed

On Monday morning, teachers and educators will have a "walk-in," at the State Capitol. For a list of district closures, click here.

So, they're marching to the Capitol and hoping to pressure the legislature. Governor Ducey has made his proposal and will meet with legislative officials this week to try to get it passed. However, the teachers are saying there's still no deal.

Teachers voted to walkout after rejecting Gov. Ducey's original 20 by 2020 plan, that would increase teacher pay by 20% by 2020. While it would solve one problem, they say it wouldn't have fixed the other problems the education system faces. Among them, outdated textbooks and resources, and a lack of funding for support staff.

On Friday, Gov. Ducey announced he is proposing a plan that would increase teacher pay 20% by 2020, while also adding $100 million for improvements and support staff, that would increase to $371 million over 5 years, all while not increasing taxes. He plans to meet with lawmakers this week to try and pass it.

Joe Thomas, President of the Arizona Education Association and Noah Karvelis, Arizona Educators United organizer, responded with this statement: “We have a press release and a tweet from the governor. We have no bill. We have no deal. The devil is in the details."

Without raising taxes, it's hard to imagine where all the money is going to come from. Ducey is counting on getting extra revenue from expected economic growth. Although, some believe that it would end up gutting other state programs which are also needed, such as programs for the elderly, disabled, homeless, etc. The teachers don't want to take "blood money," so it's still a problematic deal no matter how you slice it.

 

[Akivah]

I did not say nor imply "Big Brother government" should step in, but what I am saying is that the teachers should have a right to have a say in their own employment. So, why did you create this strawman?

As I've already said that employees can make their own decision where they want to be employed, you're agreeing with me. The strawman is yours. You're trying to argue where we don't seem to have an argument.

You're the one who claimed that fairness doesn't count when dealing with the laws,

No, I said that fairness is not an explicit attribute of the law. You're the one trying to insert it. Why not put in 'justice' or 'mercy'? Those attributes are at least explicity mentioned in the laws.

And where is Hillel's statement coming from? Torah, right? What is Torah about? Let me suggest that it's fairness (justice) as given by haShem through Torah. And it is this fairness that established Jewish Law for eretz Israel, and it's unbelievable that you seemingly can't make that very simple connection.

Please provide a Tanakh quote that backs up your claim for 'fairness'. Otherwise I will just conclude that you are inserting it all on your own.

Now you are just being utterly dishonest as as I never made such a statement nor did I imply it.

You follow leftist dogma to a T, i.e. anyone that disagrees with you must be dishonest, racist, and any other derogatory statements that you can fling. Your post is 100% implications about things that you purport, but when I do the same back you can't take it. Try sticking to what I actually say, instead of making stuff up.

my wish would be the promotion of more cottage industries matched with much greater emphasis on local jurisdictions.

Finally stating an actual position instead of spouting dogma...it's a nice change from you. I don't have any issue with your wish. Cottage industries are generally more creative than factory industry, but aren't as good on efficiency and economies of scale.

Unfortunately, it seems that between Torah and Trump, you seem to relate much more to the latter.

I disagree. You seem to have missed that I voted for Hillary in the last election, I made my vote public on RF. I'd say that neither Clinton nor Trump relates well to Torah.

In law, whether that be civil law or Jewish Law, fairness that relates to how we may treat others is extremely important, whether you accept that or not.

Obviously our laws have such little meaning to you, that you want to change them. I believe that our law is eternal and can't neither be changed, added, or deleted. I do not accept your additions from implications.

I do wish that you are able to converse without insults, flaming, or strawmen. Also we weren't talking federal politics at the start, so let's get focused back on the AZ teacher strike.

 

[metis]

No, I said that fairness is not an explicit attribute of the law. You're the one trying to insert it. Why not put in 'justice' or 'mercy'? Those attributes are at least explicity mentioned in the laws.

"Justice" and "mercy" relate to the issue of "fairness", and it is unbelievable that you can't see that very simple connection.

Please provide a Tanakh quote that backs up your claim for 'fairness'. Otherwise I will just conclude that you are inserting it all on your own.

Let me remind you that these issues can be found here: Judaism 101: A List of the 613 Mitzvot (Commandments), and this issue of "fairness" permeates Torah through the use of other words, such as with "mercy" and "justice". What do you think "fairness" relates to? Gotta dictionary? If you'd like, we can take this part of the conversation over to Judaism DIR.

You follow leftist dogma to a T, i.e. anyone that disagrees with you must be dishonest, racist, and any other derogatory statements that you can fling. Your post is 100% implications about things that you purport, but when I do the same back you can't take it.

What a pathetic bold-faced lie coming from you based on stereotyping me and also "leftists". "Stereotyping" is a form of lie, and we teach children not to do this, and yet here you are as an adult doing as such. In my last post, what I rather clearly showed you is that such a label cannot be used for me in that political/economic context. By doing as such, you actually have violated Torah through "bearing false witness".

On top of that, you stereotype "leftists" as if they're all the same. They're not.

Finally stating an actual position instead of spouting dogma...it's a nice change from you.

The 613 Commandments are also "dogma", and it seems that you are pretty much treating them much like you're treating some of the things I've been posting. If you can't see the issue of "fairness" permeating much of Torah, you gotta problem.

I disagree. You seem to have missed that I voted for Hillary in the last election, I made my vote public on RF. I'd say that neither Clinton nor Trump relates well to Torah.

Yes, but you have posted many time since that you think Trump is doing a wonderful job.

Obviously our laws have such little meaning to you, that you want to change them

Another dishonest slam as I have proposed nothing of the sort. Again, we can take this over to Judaism DIR, Akivah-- just say the word.

Also we weren't talking federal politics at the start, so let's get focused back on the AZ teacher strike.

That I agree with, so this part of our "conversation" at least is now over.

 

[Shad]

Secondly, the teachers are not just striking on their behalf but also the student's behalf as well.

Claiming acting on the behalf of the students seems more like platitudes and emotional blackmail. Is there anything binding on the teachers in any proposed agreement in which a pay raise for teacher will result in better students or better school results? Are there repercussions if results do not improve?

 

[metis]

Claiming acting on the behalf of the students seems more like platitudes and emotional blackmail.

I don't believe so, at least in most cases. If one went into teaching mainly for money, they're probably not the sharpest tack in the drawer. Even if the best paying states, teachers work long hours with relatively low pay for the degrees they hold.

Is there anything binding on the teachers in any proposed agreement in which a pay raise for teacher will result in better students or better school results?

You'll likely keep better qualified teachers, plus there's much to be said about being respected, including financially. Teachers and students often form close bonds together, and it was one of my former teachers that so impressed me that his influence led me into a career in education that I have never regretted getting into. Trust me, I could have earned much more in the private sector and, as a matter of fact, I had an offer to work for Monsanto that literally was double the pay I got, plus levels of advancement and pay there were much quicker to attain.

Are there repercussions if results do not improve?

That's for school boards to decide.

 

[Shad]

I don't believe so, at least in most cases. If one went into teaching mainly for money, they're probably not the sharpest tack in the drawer. Even if the best paying states, teachers work long hours with relatively low pay for the degrees they hold.

I wasn't talking about the rationale for becoming a teacher but the use of students "welfare" as a bargaining point or for support. Hence the clause and repercussion references. It is one thing to claim X. It is another thing to be bound by the results, or lack of.

You'll likely keep better qualified teachers, plus there's much to be said about being respected, including financially. Teachers and students often form close bonds together, and it was one of my former teachers that so impressed me that his influence led me into a career in education that I have never regretted getting into. Trust me, I could have earned much more in the private sector and, as a matter of fact, I had an offer to work for Monsanto that literally was double the pay I got, plus levels of advancement and pay there were much quicker to attain.

This is not a response to my point. See above

That's for school boards to decide.

It shouldn't be since it is the teachers arguing on the behalf of students as per the claim earlier. If they are claiming something they should be the ones to put forward what the results are aimed at. If the results do not meet the projections the teachers should be held responsible. Otherwise as I said the claim is fluff.