[quote=CA renter][quote=EconProf]I agree, Paramount, especially about voting yes on Prop. 32.
Its main result would be to end compulsory public employee union donations, which fund political advertisements the union members may not agree with. The fact is that many teachers and other union members do not agree with the political stand of their unions, yet are forced to pay for candidates and views they personally oppose.[/quote]
Those who prefer to work in a union-free environment are free to do so all day long. They can work at private schools if they don’t want to pay union dues. What’s funny is that they don’t go there. Nope, they gravitate toward the superior jobs that are (surprise!) made better because of unions.
More “something for nothing” mentality where the deadbeats want something (pay, benefits, working conditions, etc.) that somebody else is paying for (via union dues).
As for getting union money out of politics…I’m all for it, but only if ALL money (and bribes of all kinds) is taken out of politics. No money from “associations” (no different from unions)…no AMA, no NAR, no corporate lobbyists of any kind, no environmental lobbyists, no immigrant lobbyists…nothing. NO money in politics — and no promises of jobs or other positions of power in the private sector.
If capital gets a seat at the table, labor will have a seat at the table. Otherwise, no deal.[/quote]
No, actually, good teachers much prefer the private school/voucher/non-unionized teaching environment. In fact, private schools generally pay far less than the unionized public schools, and have vastly higher productivity. Of course, the weak teachers and time-servers prefer the unionized public schools with tenure protections because it is practically impossible for them to be fired.
Can any teachers–public or private–weigh in here with what they’ve experienced?
