Undermining job security, worker rights, for one union makes it easier to do the same for others.

[madfloridian]

That is happening now to teachers. It is happening under a Democratic president and his appointed Secretary of Education.

I have noticed there is little concern about this, even from those who are supportive of other unions, other public workers.

It is not popular to say that, but it is true. When teachers who have been guaranteed rights by union negotiation are fired or laid off by outside groups and their influence.....they are being deprived of their worker rights. Talking about it gets little attention.

It was easy for this to happen. When both parties stand together to destroy teachers' unions and their power.....it is considered disloyal to question it.

Why don't other unions speak out on this? I am quoting from a 2012 article in the Washington Post. The column is that of Valerie Strauss, one of the journalists currently residing under that big bus....however the article was written by someone else. She is hosting his article. Guess there is room under the bus for him as well.

The war on teachers: Why the public is watching it happen

From 2012 but true today.

Mass firings of teachers in so-called failing schools have taken place in municipalities throughout the nation and some states have made a public ritual of humiliating teachers. In Los Angeles and New York, teacher ratings based on student standardized test scores — said by many to be inaccurate — have been published by the press. As a result, great teachers have been labeled as incompetent and some are leaving the profession. A new study showed that teachers’ job satisfaction has plummeted in recent years.

Many say to themselves: “Who do teachers think they are? Why should they live so well on my tax dollars when I can barely keep my head above water? At the very least, they should feel some of the insecurity I feel every day and face the kind of performance assessments workers in the private sector deal with all the time.”

That is the same sentiment that America’s unionized blue collar workers faced in the ‘70’s and ‘80’s and ‘90’s when big corporations started closing factories and slashing wages and benefits. The non-unionized work force in big industrial states refused to rally to the defense of their unionized counterparts, and industrial unions lost battles to maintain their wage and benefit levels that allowed them to live a middle-class life style or prevent plants from relocating.

There is another more insidious consequence of the attack on teaching. Every time you undermine the job security, working conditions, and wages of one group of workers, it makes it easier for employers to undermine them for all workers. This is why, during the Depression, many unemployed people organized in support of workers on strike, even though anybody with a job in that era was relatively privileged. They believed in the concept of solidarity — the idea that working people could only progress if they did so together, and if one group of workers improved their conditions, it would ultimately improve conditions for all.

The Christian Science Monitor called this administration out on taking on teachers' unions right before the 2010 election.

Christian Science Monitor: Why is Obama taking on teachers' unions right before midterms?

The teachers' union vote is reliably Democratic. Yet before Election 2010, widely seen as a difficult one for Democrats, teachers feel that Obama is antagonizing them with his reform agenda.

Why is President Obama pushing so hard against teachers right now, weeks before the election?

..."He also pushed for a longer school year and admitted that his daughters would not get as good an education in the Washington, D.C., public schools as they get at Sidwell Friends, the private school they attend.

“I’ll be blunt with you. The answer is ‘no’ right now,” he said, when asked by a Florida woman whether Sasha and Malia could get the same quality education at a Washington school. He added that “there are some terrific individual schools in the D.C. system” but said that it is “struggling.”

And while Obama emphasized the importance of teachers – and announced plans to recruit 10,000 science, technology, engineering, and math (or STEM) teachers over the next few years – he clearly seemed prepared to ruffle some union feathers.

“You’ve got to have radical change, and radical change is something that’s in the interest of students,” he said. “We’ve got to be able to identify teachers who are doing well ... and ultimately, if some teachers aren’t doing a good job, they’ve got to go.”

What was really upsetting is that early on Jeb Bush acknowledged the attack on teachers' unions...and in this video with the help of Harold Ford, hard core DLC, he effectively made teachers sound ineffective.

This was heard on Morning Joe.

This is from Morning Joe.

He actually states how pleased he is to see this administration confronting one of their core constituencies, the teachers' unions. Harold Ford, who appears to be part of the panel on Morning Joe seems to agree with Jeb. He asked if Jeb approved of the goals which demand that unions "play by a different set of rules."

I would like to say that Jeb is speaking things that are not true. Trouble is, he is right. Duncan already set up confrontations with teachers' unions and states.

Joe says to Jeb that essentially what we were hearing from Jeb in 1995 and 96 we are starting to hear from Democrats. He asks Jeb if his views will be part of the education bill next year. Jeb thinks that is true....he says that this administration's willingness to tweak the NCLB bill shows that.

When you take on one union and do away with teachers' negotiated rights, it is going to happen to others.

[Recursion]

1. And yet AFL-CIO crosses carpenters' picket lines

For that matter the carpenters picketed the new SEIU building construction in DC. Not exactly a shining moment for labor...

When you take on one union and do away with teachers' negotiated rights, it is going to happen to others.

Who's even left after teachers? It's a hard sell to people in the private sector to whom the rights the teachers are fighting for sound completely alien. I don't know. If unions can't change to make them as attractive to actual working people as they once were, I'm not sure how much of a future they have. Maybe we need a completely different model. Though I don't want to relive the 1890's to get there...

[madfloridian]

2. When union leaders sneakily join the "reformers" it makes change hard.

Now teachers are having to fight their union leaders who take millions from the billionaire reformers. No one left to stand for them. Certainly our party leaders are not doing so.

[progressoid]

7. NPR touched on that briefly tonight on a report on Common Core.

http://www.wbur.org/npr/291166780/q-a-a-crash-course-on-common-core

How do teachers unions feel about the Common Core?

That's tricky. Both the National Education Association and American Federation of Teachers support the standards, but their rank-and-file are uncomfortable and increasingly unhappy with the standards' implementation. Seven out of 10 teachers say the transition to a curriculum tied to Common Core isn't working. Two-thirds of teachers say they were not asked for input on how to develop the implementation plan. Teachers also say they need time to make sure they understand the standards and are able to talk to parents about them. In the meantime, the unions are calling for a delay not in implementation of the new standards but in holding teachers accountable for test results. In California, Gov. Jerry Brown has already said teachers there won't be judged this year on student performance as the state transitions from old standards to new.

[madfloridian]

10. Thanks, I missed that. This NYT article lays it all out...the money trail to Gates.

http://www.nytimes.com/2011/05/22/education/22gates.html?pagewanted=all&_r=0

Very long article, just a few paragraphs.

In some cases, Mr. Gates is creating entirely new advocacy groups. The foundation is also paying Harvard-trained data specialists to work inside school districts, not only to crunch numbers but also to change practices. It is bankrolling many of the Washington analysts who interpret education issues for journalists and giving grants to some media organizations.

“We’ve learned that school-level investments aren’t enough to drive systemic changes,” said Allan C. Golston, the president of the foundation’s United States program. “The importance of advocacy has gotten clearer and clearer.”

The foundation spent $373 million on education in 2009, the latest year for which its tax returns are available, and devoted $78 million to advocacy — quadruple the amount spent on advocacy in 2005. Over the next five or six years, Mr. Golston said, the foundation expects to pour $3.5 billion more into education, up to 15 percent of it on advocacy.

Given the scale and scope of the largess, some worry that the foundation’s assertive philanthropy is squelching independent thought, while others express concerns about transparency. Few policy makers, reporters or members of the public who encounter advocates like Teach Plus or pundits like Frederick M. Hess of the American Enterprise Institute realize they are underwritten by the foundation.

It's truly shocking how education is bought and paid for.

[DebJ]

3. The postal workers union is being squashed, too. n/t

[madfloridian]

4. Yes, they are.

Soon they all will be.

[Starry Messenger]

5. k&r

[madfloridian]

6. ....

Thank you much.

[Starry Messenger]

11. My pleasure.

Kick!

[Michigan-Arizona]

8. K&R n/t

[rpannier]

9. K&R (as always thanks for sharing)