deziloooooo
Senior Associate
Joined: Dec 20, 2010 16:22:04 GMT -5
Posts: 10,723
|
Post by deziloooooo on Feb 20, 2011 13:50:41 GMT -5
I don't get why we should distinquish between public and private unions. They are both input costs to everything we purchase. Private unions add to the cost of production of a product or service, public unions add to the taxes that are paid on the company's profit or at the register in a sales tax. Everything we do that costs money, costs more because of union control. If life costs you $20k per year, then a piece of that goes to funding strong unions. I was not trying to switch opinion for those that are pro, simi-pro, or anti union. I was just curious how much value you place on union particpation. GG you are willing to pay more, if you find union products. How much more? As the owner of the company, except for the problem of keeping a good working environment so you keep your employees and are able to hire new ones if needed, your prime obligation is maximizing profits for the company, {You} , stockholders, {probably you too} and if you can do it, by taking $ from your employees, and still keeping them and being able to get new ones, you probably, [not probably but will } do so. A union will help protect the workers to get a fairer piece of the profits. If a good union, will work together as a team to protect workers as well as the company they work for to keep competitive and viable and able to continue to keep the workers employed. If a bad union, bad leadership, as with a bad employer, bad management, then the opposite happens, both sides have numerouse examples of both I am afraid.
|
|
jkapp
Junior Associate
Joined: Dec 23, 2010 12:05:08 GMT -5
Posts: 5,416
|
Post by jkapp on Feb 20, 2011 13:55:57 GMT -5
Not quite...Unions improve the lives of union members - at the cost of everyone else. And Public unions are worse because they forcibly TAKE people's money whereas a private company with a union would need to find ways to EARN the money needed for the contracts. Someone who is retired, or on a fixed income, or who didn't get an annual raise did not get their life improved by having another $100+ taken from them via their property taxes now did they??? This is why I feel so many pro-public-union types are so ignorant on the subject - they don't seem to be able to comprehend WHERE that money comes from to pay those increasing public union contracts. Um, I DO know where the money comes from and I'm not ignorant. Unions improve the lives of union members - at the cost of everyone else.I take particular exception to this statement. The 5 day workweek? It's the norm - not only for union members. An 8 hr workday? Again, the norm. Lots of companies NOW offer 401Ks, although my union had to bargain that one for me. As union membership declines, so does the middle class, but a lot of folks are too ignorant to recognize it. Henry Ford was offring all of those things (except 401k as it did not exist) to kepp employees OUT of unions. It was unions who actually stole his ideas...
|
|
jkapp
Junior Associate
Joined: Dec 23, 2010 12:05:08 GMT -5
Posts: 5,416
|
Post by jkapp on Feb 20, 2011 13:59:44 GMT -5
MINE, MINE, MINE, FUCK YOU, MINE, MINE, MINE. I know where it comes from and I am okay with it. Why not? For some reason, it is OK for others to want to earn more money, have money to raise their families, send their kids to college, etc. For TEACHERS that is BAD. They are supposed to take a vow of poverty, be missionairies and fall on their sword. Except teachers end up forcibly TAKING the money from taxpayers as opposed to a private enterprise that would need to find a way to EARN the money from customers. So regardless of the quality of education and the performance of the education system the taxpayers are FORCED to pay more...whether they can afford to or not. If a private company raises it's prices, I can choose not to buy from them...if public unions riase my taxes I do not have that choice. Again - ignorance of the realities...and total disregard to the harm this can cause those on limited/fixed incomes.
|
|
billisonboard
Community Leader
Joined: Dec 20, 2010 22:45:44 GMT -5
Posts: 37,457
Member is Online
|
Post by billisonboard on Feb 20, 2011 14:00:58 GMT -5
Henry Ford was offring all of those things (except 401k as it did not exist) to kepp employees OUT of unions. ... So the fact that there were unions for his employees to join created the situation in which Ford had to offer reasonable working conditions.
|
|
Deleted
Joined: Apr 26, 2024 11:53:34 GMT -5
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 20, 2011 14:05:10 GMT -5
People can still make a choice... they can move. They can choose the district they live in... i know many who do.
|
|
Deleted
Joined: Apr 26, 2024 11:53:34 GMT -5
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 20, 2011 14:05:52 GMT -5
They can also vote in their representatives, who negotiate with the teachers and make hiring decisions.. or even run for those positions... they have a say...
|
|
billisonboard
Community Leader
Joined: Dec 20, 2010 22:45:44 GMT -5
Posts: 37,457
Member is Online
|
Post by billisonboard on Feb 20, 2011 14:07:00 GMT -5
Why not? For some reason, it is OK for others to want to earn more money, have money to raise their families, send their kids to college, etc. For TEACHERS that is BAD. They are supposed to take a vow of poverty, be missionairies and fall on their sword. Except teachers end up forcibly TAKING the money from taxpayers .... Gee, where I live we elect a school board that negotiates with teachers to pay them out of monies raised by taxes approved either directly be vote of citizens or indirectly by our elected representatives. I am glad I don't live in a place with marauding teachers roaming the streets stealing people's wallets and purses.
|
|
Phoenix84
Senior Associate
Joined: Feb 17, 2011 21:42:35 GMT -5
Posts: 10,056
|
Post by Phoenix84 on Feb 20, 2011 14:12:11 GMT -5
I am divided on the union issue.
I disagree with some of the practicies and tactics that unions employ, and I think that some have become corrupt. I also believe some of them get greedy and unreasonable in their demands and can damage a business. In addition, I disagree with the idea of forcing someone to join a union and pay union dues. I always side on the side of personal choice and liberty.
On the other hand, I do agree with the principle of employees getting together to negotiate terms of employment. As someone who's been jerked around by management, I know that executives and management can and will abuse employees if they think they can get away with it. For them, it's all about saving money and profit, not what's best for workers. In the same line of thought as personal liberty, I believe if enough workers want to ban together to colletively bargain, they should. They have the right to assemble under the constitution and should not have those rights taken away. Even non union workers have a lot to thank unions for, like the 40 hour workweek and helping to end child labor.
In short, everyone is greedy and out for themselves, management and unions, and having both helps one from running roughshod over the other.
|
|
Deleted
Joined: Apr 26, 2024 11:53:34 GMT -5
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 20, 2011 14:21:18 GMT -5
Federal employees are not required to join the union or pay union dues. However, they are still protected by the union even if they are not members. It is against the law for federal employees to strike.
|
|
deziloooooo
Senior Associate
Joined: Dec 20, 2010 16:22:04 GMT -5
Posts: 10,723
|
Post by deziloooooo on Feb 20, 2011 14:49:50 GMT -5
I am divided on the union issue. I disagree with some of the practicies and tactics that unions employ, and I think that some have become corrupt. I also believe some of them get greedy and unreasonable in their demands and can damage a business. In addition, I disagree with the idea of forcing someone to join a union and pay union dues. I always side on the side of personal choice and liberty. On the other hand, I do agree with the principle of employees getting together to negotiate terms of employment. As someone who's been jerked around by management, I know that executives and management can and will abuse employees if they think they can get away with it. For them, it's all about saving money and profit, not what's best for workers. In the same line of thought as personal liberty, I believe if enough workers want to ban together to collectively bargain, they should. They have the right to assemble under the constitution and should not have those rights taken away. Even non union workers have a lot to thank unions for, like the 40 hour workweek and helping to end child labor. In short, everyone is greedy and out for themselves, management and unions, and having both helps one from running roughshod over the other. A lot of the corruption talk comes from back in the day, for all I know , still some today possible, the Jimmy Hoffa days with the teamsters. I think today, populace/memberships, are well informed, government very active in rooting out the corruption. I am not saying there is none of that today, a realist , but when you consider white collar crime by the suits, businesses, businessman, CEO's, , ponzi schemes , elected officials , Governors, Mayors, elected Representatives in Jail, {see Connecticut, major high income educated State as a example} to just call out the corrupt unions, wipe ones hands with it and give a blanket paint brush that all unions are corrupt , not really fair in my mind, and more importantly not true. All this talk today, on these boards, people are worried, scared and if they can reach out and put a blame on a group, especially if the group is employed, over all doing well, basically low middle class, some jealousy in that too. But being scared and the States hurting, many times their own fault from practices of the past administrations or the times, a scapegoat is needed. Since when has that been something the populace hasn't been manipulated toward by leaders and I think in this case , the Governor, to shift the blame for the tax cuts given to businesses for example, in this case $135 million worth, what he wants fron the unions, for what ever reasons he has given, was clever and a bit devious. Typical elected official, "Hey gang , to his cohorts and backers, lets put it on the unions" " hell yes boss , that will work you clever so and so " was the response, and away we go. His scape goat, Unions, and , it is working. The scape goat has some warts true, who doesn't , but the giving away for ever , rights to bargain in good faith?? Come on now unless you all, who are so against socialistic, communistic ways of governance as indicated with all the such accusations that are brought up here on your arguments when it is so accused of, feel in these times, possible the way to go? Bif change in thinking then. "Let the State dictate for the betterment of all, one big melting pot so to speak", this is the new mantra now.? Todays bogeyman...the Unions, tomorrow, minimum wage, then we go for the high tariffs, that done, now all those illegals, and thenn all those Japanese Americans...we, say what? Oh right, [oops} we did that one..ok forget that one but how about..........
|
|
Phoenix84
Senior Associate
Joined: Feb 17, 2011 21:42:35 GMT -5
Posts: 10,056
|
Post by Phoenix84 on Feb 20, 2011 15:24:21 GMT -5
"I am not saying there is none of that today, a realist , but when you consider white collar crime by the suits, businesses, businessman, CEO's, , ponzi schemes , elected officials , Governors, Mayors, elected Representatives in Jail, {see Connecticut, major high income educated State as a example} to just call out the corrupt unions, wipe ones hands with it and give a blanket paint brush that all unions are corrupt , not really fair in my mind, and more importantly not true."
You are right, with all the high income white collar crime that's gone on, it can be a bit fair to single out unions as the only devil in the room. As I stated, ultimately everyone is serving their self interest, and having a balance of power with checks and balances is important.
"All this talk today, on these boards, people are worried, scared and if they can reach out and put a blame on a group, especially if the group is employed, over all doing well, basically low middle class, some jealousy in that too."
I've noticed this too. As a federal employee, I often feel like the backlash we get from the general public isn't based on logic and rational thought, but on fear and jealousy. When times are good people don't clamor to give public employees more money or better benefits, they make fun of you for working for the government and wonder why you don't come work for the private sector. When the good times come to an end everyone wants to cut public employees "bloated" salaries, pensions, and job security.
|
|
Deleted
Joined: Apr 26, 2024 11:53:34 GMT -5
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 20, 2011 15:47:20 GMT -5
When the good times come to an end everyone wants to cut public employees "bloated" salaries, pensions, and job security.
Yes, in other words when there is no more money and obviously for the gov. no more tolerance for so called bargaining. You know in a lot of ways it's like your diet "anything in moderation" We have completely lost the moderation and it didn't happen overnight. If there are any states out there that arn't at this tipping point I highly reccomend that you get involved before you are.
|
|
deziloooooo
Senior Associate
Joined: Dec 20, 2010 16:22:04 GMT -5
Posts: 10,723
|
Post by deziloooooo on Feb 20, 2011 15:51:35 GMT -5
"I am not saying there is none of that today, a realist , but when you consider white collar crime by the suits, businesses, businessman, CEO's, , ponzi schemes , elected officials , Governors, Mayors, elected Representatives in Jail, {see Connecticut, major high income educated State as a example} to just call out the corrupt unions, wipe ones hands with it and give a blanket paint brush that all unions are corrupt , not really fair in my mind, and more importantly not true." You are right, with all the high income white collar crime that's gone on, it can be a bit fair to single out unions as the only devil in the room. As I stated, ultimately everyone is serving their self interest, and having a balance of power with checks and balances is important. "All this talk today, on these boards, people are worried, scared and if they can reach out and put a blame on a group, especially if the group is employed, over all doing well, basically low middle class, some jealousy in that too." I've noticed this too. As a federal employee, I often feel like the backlash we get from the general public isn't based on logic and rational thought, but on fear and jealousy. When times are good people don't clamor to give public employees more money or better benefits, they make fun of you for working for the government and wonder why you don't come work for the private sector. When the good times come to an end everyone wants to cut public employees "bloated" salaries, pensions, and job security. First things first, let me say hello and welcome to the forum, I see your new here ...suggest if you haven't already, check out moons "welcoming " spot at the beginning of the forum, it kind of tells who we are and why...answers some questions to if you have them. Can I ask how you found your way here? Some of us have been putting out little posts of welcome and links to here, and any help in how you found us is helpful since we are new and looking to grow, new people. Your post is right on. Right now to be a Federal employee it's all good for many , but the thing was , while the benefits were good the salary's were lower in many cases if one was a success in the private section. I know when I first got out of school I took the Federal test, passed it but never followed up and a Aunt of mine was impressed I passed it right out of the shoot, she worked for the State in the Welfare Department{that's what they called it those days , have no idea today what it's called } and had to take it a few times. My uncle and she had great pensions , he was post office , back in the day, never took one sick day , 30 some on years there after WW2, from the old Depression days, almost three years away, Philippines and other Islands, the "greatest generation " folks. I know people knock government employees. I have no complaints. The big department I run into every day, postal..mail always on hand , never lost, John my mail man , very good , looks out for his customers, cooperative, helpful, friendly, we are a senior community , so mail important. Still amazes me how it gets from A to B. Any time I have called on government employees, always found them knowledgeable and helpful, even though you hear bitching all the time. Again, welcome, have fun.
|
|
|
Post by frankq on Feb 20, 2011 16:03:12 GMT -5
Private employee union members are subject to the economic ebbs and tides of the economy. When times are good, everyone is working. When times are not so good, many are laid off. Not so with gov workers, teachers, etc. They have grown accustomed to tenure and guaranteed jobs. They have grown accustomed to having taxpayers foot the total bill for their benefits, regardless of investment performance. That needs to end. If Wisconson's public employee unions, or any other state's for that matter, want to survive, they better wake up and take a little bite out of the shit sandwich like everybody else has for the most part. Take a little personal responsibility for your benefits and save your collective bargaining status boys and girls.
|
|
Gardening Grandma
Senior Associate
Joined: Dec 20, 2010 13:39:46 GMT -5
Posts: 17,962
|
Post by Gardening Grandma on Feb 20, 2011 16:12:42 GMT -5
When times are good people don't clamor to give public employees more money or better benefits, they make fun of you for working for the government and wonder why you don't come work for the private sector. When the good times come to an end everyone wants to cut public employees "bloated" salaries, pensions, and job security.
<<<karma>>> for that. And welcome
|
|
Deleted
Joined: Apr 26, 2024 11:53:34 GMT -5
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 20, 2011 16:18:21 GMT -5
Most public unions are making concessions at this time... as Wisconson has signaled their willingness to do... they are willing to pay into pension/health care... they are NOT willing to give up collective bargaining rights... From what i've read, this budget 'repair' bill is a set up for the work Walker wants done going forward... Did you know that Madison graduates 94 percent of its high school students (compared to a national average of around 70 percent). Just three years ago Forbes named Madison the second best city in all of America in which to educate a child. Wisconsin Education Association Council, Wisconsin's largest teacher's union—the one that Walker insists will not negotiate—just two weeks ago announced that it supports both merit-based pay reform and measures that would streamline the firing of under-performers. www.theawl.com/2011/02/burning-down-wisconsin-the-hidden-budget-bill-item-even-worse-than-union-busting
|
|
Deleted
Joined: Apr 26, 2024 11:53:34 GMT -5
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 20, 2011 16:19:39 GMT -5
Karma from me too pheonix!
|
|
deziloooooo
Senior Associate
Joined: Dec 20, 2010 16:22:04 GMT -5
Posts: 10,723
|
Post by deziloooooo on Feb 20, 2011 16:38:52 GMT -5
ok , why not ...me too, the karma...wow not bad for a newbee
|
|
safeharbor37
Well-Known Member
Joined: Dec 20, 2010 23:18:19 GMT -5
Posts: 1,290
|
Post by safeharbor37 on Feb 20, 2011 16:41:08 GMT -5
When times are good, governments spend like drunken sailors and hire more employers, start new projects ~ anything but pay down debts [bonds and such]. When times aren't good they demand that the tax rates go up to compensate for the lost revenue so that they can continue to fund stuff that, before the "good times" they didn't have and didn't particularly need. I saw the local government spend every dime of my property tax as it quadrupled during the "housing boom." Now that it's depreciated more than a third, they just increase the tax rate so that they can continue to fund the new employees, increased salaries and benefits that they implemented during the "good times." Too many public employees expect to be immune to economic downturns and continue to prosper while their source of income [non-public workers] are dealing with the economic turbulence. Public employees fund politicians who promise them increased benefits and the public employees [and unions] use "public funds" derived from taxes to promote politicians who'll increase their benefits. Does anyone not see that as a problem?
|
|
Deleted
Joined: Apr 26, 2024 11:53:34 GMT -5
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 20, 2011 18:25:29 GMT -5
"Right-to-work states do not have higher scores than states with strong unions. Actually, the states with the highest performance on national tests are Massachusetts, Connecticut, New Jersey, Vermont, and New Hampshire, where teachers belong to unions that bargain collectively for their members." www.cnn.com/2011/OPINION/02/20/ravitch.teachers.blamed/index.html#
|
|
workpublic
Junior Associate
Catch and release please
Joined: Dec 30, 2010 14:01:48 GMT -5
Posts: 5,551
Favorite Drink: Heineken
|
Post by workpublic on Feb 20, 2011 19:19:24 GMT -5
and the populace is more refined ;-)
|
|
|
Post by frankq on Feb 20, 2011 19:32:24 GMT -5
Just one question:
During the 15 years of unprecedented housing and commercial construction and the ensuing skyrocketing price appreciation, and by extension, the spiking tax revenue, what happenned to the money? With annual double digit home values over many years, how is it that there is no surplus?
Maybe safeharbor answered this question in a previous post. If you are a public employee, you might want to get with the program. It appears to me that another economic class has been created between the middle and upper classes, the public employee class with their "untouchable" entitlements.
|
|
handyman2
Senior Member
Joined: Dec 29, 2010 23:56:33 GMT -5
Posts: 3,087
|
Post by handyman2 on Feb 20, 2011 19:32:38 GMT -5
I am in a sense both for non-union and pro-union. This is based on what the job is. Having worked for a union shop in my younger days as a grunt and after training provided by the union as a licensed journeyman electrician I can say they gave me the opportunity to advance in life. I have worked on union and non-union commercial jobs and I must say the quality of work done by union tradesmen were superior to the non-union work. For me I would prefer to see all commercial construction done by union craftsmen. The problems is not the industry at the local level for the most part but unrealistic demands by those at the top. But this is what keeps the top bosses in power. Many times the local is happy with what they have but the top says no we want more. I agree that many jobs really are best served to be non-union. But not all. The civil servants unions I know little about but it seems they need some adjustment to deal with real life. I guess we can look back at old Henry Ford and blame him for starting it all. The main focus is that for all parties to function togather we do need to be willing to agree on a realistic set of ground rules as to how we deal with each other. Shouting and parading gains nothing.
|
|
|
Post by frankq on Feb 20, 2011 19:46:32 GMT -5
"Most public unions are making concessions at this time... as Wisconson has signaled their willingness to do... they are willing to pay into pension/health care... they are NOT willing to give up collective bargaining rights..."
Nor should they give up those rights. These union "officers" would be well advised to consider the state of affairs that exists today, taxpayer sentiment, and future prospects before engaging in the rhetoric of many of their predececors and be realistic in advising their members. As a union member, officer, and former negotiating team member for our local, I can tell you that there is a time to hold 'em and a time to fold 'em. Guaranteed benefits are only guaranteed when the beneficiaries of those benefits get actively engaged. Our local enjoys 100% funding levels because we, as members, have at times forgone "on the check" money and instead put the money to our benefit plans when investment performance wasn't as expected. Public employees need to do the same thing. As taxpayers, we are at our limit.
|
|
|
Post by frankq on Feb 20, 2011 19:58:28 GMT -5
I am anti-union. I don't buy union company stocks. I try not to purchase union company goods. I would allow my company to disintegrate, before allowing a union to control it. That ... being ... disclosed. What is the limit to pro-union support. Would you support solving the immigration issue, and giving the union lobby most of its demands if: It raised your taxes $500 per year, and raised the cost of general living goods by 3%. What if: It raised your taxes $20k per year and the cost of goods by 25%. I am just curious. Again, fully disclosed, I think people have no idea the cost of union activity to their daily life, today. I, personally, suspect that ridding the country of unions could save the general consumer 50% of their costs of living in product prices and (passed through) taxes, but I am curious what the level of support actually is. I would like to see some sources to back your contention that unions cost you 50% more for your cost of living. Considering the vast percentage of imported products purchased, especially from China, I'd have to say you have no clue as to what you speak of. Consider your food, clothing, fuel and tell me how unions cost you more? I don't know of any union farmers or migrant workers, I don't see unionized gas station clerks, I don't see really any American manufactured clothing anymore to speak of, most grocers are non union, especially Wal-Mart. There is a 50/50 chance that you drive an imported vehicle and an even better chance it was produced off-Detroit by non-union labor. Your home has an 90% + chance that it was built by non-union workers. The materials for that house made or harvested non-union. I don't know where you come up with your initial 50% statement, but it certainly isn't derived from facts. Since you bring it up, what kind of business do you run? What are your employees' duties, hours, pay rates, benefits, etc ? How is it that you think unionized employees "control" a company?
|
|
|
Post by frankq on Feb 20, 2011 20:07:23 GMT -5
|
|
deziloooooo
Senior Associate
Joined: Dec 20, 2010 16:22:04 GMT -5
Posts: 10,723
|
Post by deziloooooo on Feb 20, 2011 20:25:02 GMT -5
"Right-to-work states do not have higher scores than states with strong unions. Actually, the states with the highest performance on national tests are Massachusetts, Connecticut, New Jersey, Vermont, and New Hampshire, where teachers belong to unions that bargain collectively for their members." www.cnn.com/2011/OPINION/02/20/ravitch.teachers.blamed/index.html#Not sure about New Hampshire, but they are right near Massachusetts, those States all have, Connecticut is the highest, some of the higher average salaries in the country for teachers wages. Is there a corrallery here. I jknow, it use to be , a long time ago and would doubt it has been changed, in Connecticut a teacher HAD to have their Masters, so many credits toward, over a certain years time teaching or they didn't teach.
|
|
Deleted
Joined: Apr 26, 2024 11:53:34 GMT -5
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 20, 2011 20:36:55 GMT -5
I wouldn't go suggesting causal factors, but the idea that unions somehow minimize educational effectiveness would have to be dismissed.
|
|
bean29
Junior Associate
Joined: Dec 19, 2010 22:26:57 GMT -5
Posts: 9,925
|
Post by bean29 on Feb 20, 2011 21:00:09 GMT -5
My Dad is a retired construction worker. I think for Construction jobs, the union has been effective in managing a high quality competent workforce.
My BIL is a Union Rep for one of the Larger WI Unions. He was telling me about a good size contract that nearly went to a non-union contractor. He knew the person in the decision making position and discussed the effect of living wages vs. what the non-union contractor pays. He said the non-union bid was 5,000 less than the Union Bid. He said the Non-Union contractor has lawsuits against him for failure to pay workers and not maintaining Workers Comp. I don't know about you, but I don't want to have workers working on my property that don't have workers comp insurance. He also said the guy hires illegal workers.
So anyways the building owner decided to hire the 2nd low bidder- the Union Contractor. BIL called the sales person and the Union contractor took the $5000 difference and gave $2500 back.
BIL says the problem is walker wants to make WI a Right to Work state. Where you only have to pay Union dues voluntarily. He admits his union will not be able to function on voluntary dues.
As I said, and as someone else said, there is a big diff between the Construction Unions and Unions for Gov't employees.
|
|
deziloooooo
Senior Associate
Joined: Dec 20, 2010 16:22:04 GMT -5
Posts: 10,723
|
Post by deziloooooo on Feb 20, 2011 21:00:13 GMT -5
[Connecticutoped board=politics thread=3640 post=142241 time=1298252215]I wouldn't go suggesting causal factors, but the idea that unions somehow minimize educational effectiveness would have to be dismissed. [/quote]
In looking for the answer on Connecticut having to have a masters, didn't find it, but found this.. -------------------------------------------------------------------------- There was no date , but even if a few years old...surprising. -------------------------------------------------------------------- Almost everyone is surprised to learn that Connecticut is home to the single largest achievement gap in the nation. Unfortunately, this gap is not the result of remarkable performance among our state’s high achievers, but the result of heartbreakingly low performance among our poor and minority students. While 60 percent of Connecticut’s white and affluent students in the tenth grade demonstrate the skills and knowledge expected at their grade level, the same is true of just 13 percent of our low-income students; 12 percent of our Latino students; and nine percent of our African American students. The consequences of Connecticut’s achievement gap are severe and unjust: we spend three times more as a state on correctional facilities than we do on higher education. Yet, Teach For America corps members and alumni are part of a larger education reform movement in Connecticut that has the potential to dramatically change the life prospects of our state’s low-income students within a matter of years, not decades. The tangibility of seeing this state move from having the largest achievement gap in the nation to true educational equity fuels a growing movement of education reform and drives the work of a corps committed to being a part of that change. ----------------------------------------------------------------
Except a few years ago I picked up a blurb, I go to the Ct newspaper to keep up on Huskies and whats happening in the State and there was a article about my /kids former town..they grew up in. It was a border town, to Hartford, mixed community and had been for some years classified as a "All American City " meaning mixed, good schools, facilities, well kept town, a success in that regard. Truth is, many families moved, as happens, private schools, and that years , one the article was referring to, the test scores for the kids in the high school, they were atrocious. The % of students who passed their boards, state mandated testing was in the teens...Have no idea what has happened since, lots of things planned .. but after reading the above...scary, and here it's not about salary's.
I remember they interviewed a few kids who did just fine, going on to school, good schools and their answer was so few of their friends interested in school , boys , fashion, nu sic, things like that, that was the interest..as she said she/other Freons worked for their grades.
------------------------------------------------------
I don't want to start another post ..regard to skweets post , unions add on costs 50 % to cost of goods...less then 13 % of the US work force belongs to Unions...cops , teachers, municipal, fire , governmental, usually are Union in most areas of the country, so what is left..that comment is just a off the top of the had comment with no facts to back up..just some one to say some thing to say something.
|
|