Tuesday, April 12, 2011

Teachers for Senate Bill 5

In the heated Senate Bill 5 debate, we certainly have heard from a lot of teachers.  Supporters of the law have been accused of "attacking teachers", which is, of course, ludicrous.

Being a dad, I work and communicate on a regular basis with my son's teachers.  My family has been very fortunate to have excellent teachers, who really do care about their kids.  I have enormous respect for them and the job that they do.

But that doesn't mean I believe they should have power over their employers, meaning the community, to dictate the terms of their employment.  Ohio's current collective bargaining laws give teachers and other government employees an upper hand over their employers, which takes control of the government away from the voters, and gives more of it to the union bosses.  That isn't right.

And believing that that isn't right, is not an attack on teachers, or an attack on the middle class.  The "attack" meme is a smokescreen being used by the Democrats and the unions to hide the real issues of this debate.

We should also remember that in most cases in Ohio, a teacher must join the union, because Ohio is not a right-to-work state. There are many teachers in Ohio who would choose not to join the union, if they had the choice.

There is also a professional non-union teacher organization out there. They support Senate Bill 5 and similar legislation in other states, like Wisconsin. These teachers get it.
But not everyone is joining the rally against SB-5. Earlier this week the Association of American Educators (a group of non-union teachers) issued the following statement:

“The fact that Senate Bill 5 will save over $1 billion a year is a testament to the years of out-of-control demands by the unions. This law should be of no surprise to the leadership who have been overreaching for too long. Clearly lawmakers and voters aren’t listening anymore to the overreaching mentality of the unions. If this is really about the children, as the teachers union claims, we need fiscal discipline and more efficient ways of running our schools, not insurmountable debt. Everyone wants to see educators paid fairly without the threat of layoffs. The union's over asking, overreaching model has created this problem, leaving legislators to take the heat when tasked with bailing out the sinking ship that is the state budget.”

AAE appears to be an organization that is actually dedicated to excellence in teaching, instead of being dedicated purely to political power, like the teachers unions are. Good for them. Its too bad most teachers in Ohio don't have the option of choosing AAE over the power-hungry unions.

Bytor on Twitter


  1. After reading up on the background of this "organization", it is apparent that this is without merit.

  2. Because its a teacher's organization that eschews the unions?

    Got it.

    Maybe if they charged as much as the unions do, you'd think they have merit.

  3. "doesn't mean..they should have the power over their employers..to dictate the terms of their employment."

    It's called a collective bargaining agreement. Do I have to define what that means? Labor and management get together, they bargain, they come to an agreement and decide on a contract and abide by its terms. You and others who support SB5 put forth the idea that teachers and public employees are schoolyard bullies who force management to agree to their unreasonable terms. This scheme is a smokescreen being used by Republicans to hide the real issues of this debate, union busting and attempting to weaken the Democratic Party by doing so. Kasich is handing out corporate welfare like Halloween candy, Diebold being the latest recipient. Keep it up, pal, Wall Street Johnny would be proud of you.

  4. Yes, we know what collective bargaining means, JLM. Our collective bargaining laws give public employees a special protected status over their neighbors. That's a fact.

    It means that in the name of labor peace, elected state and local officials are often forced to give unreasonable contracts to labor with the taxpayers money.

    Unlike a private corporation who is dealing with their own money, public employers often have no skin in the game. Its not THEIR money they're agreeing to pay.

    If the unions dont agree, the elected officials have to worry about the possibility of a third party arbitrator imposing mandatory terms on their citizens, that they cannot afford.

    They don't "come to an agreement" on a level playing field.

    For most of the private sector, the market determines wages and employment. It shouldn't be any different for public employees.

  5. So why is it a good idea to let a California teacher's organization influence policy in Ohio?

  6. Your "facts" are more Right Wing talking points. Why don't you bring up "Cadillac Healthcare", "Golden Pensions" and "High Class Wages"? while you're at it. SB5 proponents still paint public workers with a paint brush that portrays them as mob type thugs bullying the state into caving to their unreasonable demands. That ain't reality, pal. It's Right Wing fantasy, of the type that you guys are so adept at spinning.
    Just like your "Kasich saved Diebold from leaving" mirage.

  7. So why is it a good idea to let a California teacher's organization influence policy in Ohio?

    Ah, the plunderbund talking points.

    Who says they are influencing policy? Its an alternative organization for teachers who don't want to be in the union. Thats all.

    I'm sorry that the prospect of someone having the CHOICE to join a group offends you so deeply.

  8. Your "facts" are more Right Wing talking points. Why don't you bring up "Cadillac Healthcare", "Golden Pensions" and "High Class Wages"?

    Thats a good way of avoiding the facts of the issue JLM. See, I don't need to use those metaphors. And I never called any teachers bullies or anything like that. Thanks for the straw-man argument, but it doesn't work here.

    Public employees in Ohio have powers and privileges that their neighbors, who PAY them, don't have. Period.

    The CB laws we have give the unions more control over the size of local government than the voters. Period.

    The unions don't want to lose the power they have, that the regular citizens don't have.

    The fact that you avoid these statements, and choose to put words in my mouth that I never spoke, shows just how weak your argument is.

    Run along now scamp, and go tell on me to your union boss!! Hurry!!


No profanity, keep it clean.

Note: Only a member of this blog may post a comment.