That's because right now a cop or a teacher has to practically break the law before they can get fired...

 

Which isn't much different than any of the private-sector corporations I have worked for.

 

If teachers pulled some of the crap I have consistently seen private-sector employees pull, I can guarantee you they'd be fired.  I'm not just talking bad performance, but blatant insubordination, working 5 hour days, taking off after lunch without telling anyone, consistently coming to work 2 hours late, surfing the web 95% of the day, etc.

 

Actually, I have only seen a handful of people actually fired (not laid off), and nearly every one of them has been for "inappropriate computer use" (ie. porn at work).

You think other districts would jump at the chance to hire a 55 yr old teacher who has a termination on his/her record?  I don't know about that.  I do know that if you are fired as a cop, you probably want to start looking for a new profession because no other dept is going to touch you with a 10 foot pole.

 

And as long as the private sector keeps inceasing the price of goods and services, your taxes will continue to go up.  The private sector, where the public sector has to shop, is outpacing inflation.  Cities need concrete, they need steel, they need salt, they need cars.  Amazing how people thinks this doesn't cost $

 

 

If terminations are based largely on "performance", then no - I would not expect anyone to hire that 55 year old teacher because she would have been fired for being a poor performer. This is the real world, and we cant afford to pay people who cannot do their job well. And we definitely cant afford to keep these teachers over their productive counterparts, just because they may have trouble finding teaching work. Its simple - do you job well, and you wont be the one going.

 

People get fired and laid off everyday for various reasons. You have to think whats best for the children and education system. Not whats best for that 55 year old teacher who fell to the back of the pack at her school or district.

 

I'm not saying seniority shouldnt play 'any' part, experience counts, but it certainly shouldnt be the seniority systems that unions are using today.

 

You are talking about a 55 year old teacher who was fired 'for cause'.  I am talking about a 55 year old teacher who was fired 'without cause'.  Two VERY different subjects.

 

You think other districts would jump at the chance to hire a 55 yr old teacher who has a termination on his/her record?  I don't know about that.  I do know that if you are fired as a cop, you probably want to start looking for a new profession because no other dept is going to touch you with a 10 foot pole.

 

That's because right now a cop or a teacher has to practically break the law before they can get fired...

 

Absolutely not true.  Not even close.

I am in no way a supporter of scaling back collective bargaining for public sector employees, but I would have to agree (based on first hand experience) that it is very difficult to fire a police officer or firefighter (would not know if this is true in regards to teachers).  If fact the statement that they almost have to commit a crime to get fired is really not that far from the truth.  In addition, firefighters and police officers regularly file lawsuits (most times with the support of their unions but not always) if they are indeed terminated (even after losing in arbitration...many are 1983 civil rights actions) and these must wear the political subdivisions down to the point where they really are hesitant to terminate for cause.

I feel that teachers in suburban districts have a whole different experience then teachers in urban districts. I think a lot of teachers in suburban districts do have a more laid back, less stressful jobs, with less extra hours. If only there could be some sort of incentive for teachers to teach in urban school districts because I do acknowledge the challenges and stress that comes with an urban teaching job.

And I know of cops that have become huge and can barely move. They are definitely not fit for the job but somehow able to maintain it and not get fired. I think, as a cop, that you should have to maintain a certain level of physical fitness. You have to be able to move in a lot of situations. And from what I have heard(not sure if its true) but the same things applies for teachers in regards of being difficult to fire. Not with the physical fitness part but with the ability/desire to perform their job.

 

If only there could be some sort of incentive for teachers to teach in urban school districts because I do acknowledge the challenges and stress that comes with an urban teaching job.

 

There was, who knows with the new budget, federal money for student loan forgiveness for teaching in urban or Appalachian areas for 5-10 years. 

I would like to weigh in on this debate. 

 

I would like to state clearly that is fairly easy to fire a teacher.  This is because not only do we have our administrators watching our performances in the classroom, we also have our own educator standards board that oversees our morality outside of it.  This group, through ODE, can revoke any license for a lot of different reasons.  This year alone several teachers through out the state have lost their ability to teach because of inappropriate (i.e. drinking) pictures on facebook.  Teachers are not given the same "work place" protections as a private employee.  From a legal stand point, teachers have the least amount of protection in the school.  Students are always placed first (ie freedom of speech for students and not teachers).  In regards to free speech this can encompass a wide spectrum, think anything from swearing to teaching creationalism.  Most teachers are identified in their first year or second year and non-renewed.  These type of firings do not make the news and those mostly go unnoticed in every day life.  Again, this happens A LOT more than people realize.  Generally the worse the state report card, the higher the teacher turn over rate in that group.   

 

What you mostly hear about, and this is where the myth of teachers cannot get fired comes from, are the ones that haven't done anything particularly evil, but just are not doing a good job for whatever reason.  This is almost always a case of administration break down.  What happens is you have 8,10,15 years of glowing teacher classroom observations.  All of a sudden you go from 10's in each category to 2 and 3's.  The only protection that is granted to the teacher not doing their job after a couple of years is due process.  This can take up to a year, which yes, in a lot of cases is waaaay to long, but more often than not the teaching problem, because ultimately that is the problem, can be corrected.  Maybe it was the classes that year, subject matter, group of kids, who knows, but you don't go from being a good or effective teacher to a terrible one for no reason.  The administrators have the power to dismiss any teacher, tenure or not, they just have to follow the process.  Most of the bad teachers not being fired or identified in schools can be directly attributed to bad or understaffed administration. 

 

This argument is a complicated one.  It frustrates me to hear people to try and compare private and public sectors.  1 produces something, the other is an investment.   

I am in no way a supporter of scaling back collective bargaining for public sector employees, but I would have to agree (based on first hand experience) that it is very difficult to fire a police officer or firefighter (would not know if this is true in regards to teachers).  If fact the statement that they almost have to commit a crime to get fired is really not that far from the truth. 

 

Anybody remember this gem?  Anyone want to wager if this fireman kept his job?  http://detnews.com/article/20100301/METRO/3010380/Detroit-firefighter-ripped-for-parking-on-tracks-after-train-hits-fire-truck

Understaffed administration?  If anything, there's WAY too much administration overhead in schools. 

Understaffed administration?  If anything, there's WAY too much administration overhead in schools. 

 

What is your definition of administration?

 

Mine is principals and vice-principals.  It is a teachers responsibility to teach, it is a principals job to take care of behavior.  It is also their job to monitor and evaluate the teaching staff and run the school.  This is also the reason why in poor districts they have a higher rate of ineffective teachers, because they don't monitor the teaching in the classroom, not because their lazy, most of their time is spent on discipline.   

 

Now, is reactionary discipline the best use of their time?  No, but in the current system there isn't the support in place to do it any different.  I would be happy to hear any suggestions in those regards.

Anybody remember this gem?  Anyone want to wager if this fireman kept his job?

 

There is always exceptions to the rule.  Is the system perfect? No, but it works the majority of the time...

OK maybe I was off base that teachers almost have to commit a crime to be fired .....

 

But as I understand it, doesn't it take a long time to fire  a teacher given the administrative hassles, etc.?

 

Do  'Rubber Rooms' exist?

Point:

 

Anybody remember this gem?  Anyone want to wager if this fireman kept his job?  http://detnews.com/article/20100301/METRO/3010380/Detroit-firefighter-ripped-for-parking-on-tracks-after-train-hits-fire-truck

 

Counterpoint:

 

http://www.myfoxdetroit.com/dpp/news/local/two-detroit-ems-workers-terminated-20110126-wpms

Understaffed administration?  If anything, there's WAY too much administration overhead in schools. 

 

What is your definition of administration?

 

Principals and vice-principals are fine.  In high schools you usually need a dean of students and a few other people.  That's all good.  It's the superintendents and staff workers at the district office that are the problem.  These are the people who aren't even in a school building, that never interact with students.  Of course, another big issue is busing.  That's incredibly expensive.  Maybe we could pay teachers better and have more amenable working conditions if we didn't have to spend so much money busing kids around for hours every day. 

But as I understand it, doesn't it take a long time to fire  a teacher given the administrative hassles, etc.?

 

Do  'Rubber Rooms' exist?

 

I can only speak to Ohio.  It typically takes a year from start to finish to fire a teacher with tenure, implied or not.  Again, this is mostly to due process.  Generally the system works, teachers are identified and the problems can be corrected.    Sometimes it doesn't and those are the rare cases you hear about. 

 

If there is a "rubber room" in Ohio  it is because of a terrible, terrible, terrible administrator.   

It's the superintendents and staff workers at the district office that are the problem.

 

Ok, this is were this conversation is debatable.  I believe a lot or at least some of these services can be shared or regionalized.  I would like to point out that often the schools are the largest employer in a city and operating on a multi-million dollar budget.  I work in a large suburban district in Cleveland.  We have an annual budget of 25 million dollars (give or take).  We have a 8 total people in our district office running everything.  Most of them are making comparable private sector wages (low to mid 40k a year) and these jobs are almost never unionized.  Most are accountants, shipping and receiving, stuff like that.  I think most people would be shocked to see how efficiently most schools really are run with minimal staff.

 

The wasteful or overstaffed myth comes from another complex issue, which is school funding.  How the state funds schools can at best be described as a shell game.  That is why schools are CONSTANTLY on the levy ballet.  The cruel part of it is that if you're in a wealthy district, it is worse for you. 

 

I will say that most districts (85%) are like this, but there is always exceptions to the rule.

To bring this more on topic, for a lot of the reasons from above is why collective bargaining is so important.  It is more than salary and health care.  CB might not work in every field, but it works in education.  You can not mandate (ie. teachers have to obtain a masters within 7 years of entering into the field) that level of education and mastery of their field and then not give them a say in how it is run.  Teachers know teaching...

 

I assume a lot of other professions could make a lot of the same arguments. 

 

Here is a question to any number uo'ers, I would like to find out the best way to compare tax dollars spent per pupil (say 120K for 13 years of education) vs the amount they will make in a life time and taxes they will pay.  Kind of a return taxpayers see in educating their citizens. 

 

I am in no way a supporter of scaling back collective bargaining for public sector employees, but I would have to agree (based on first hand experience) that it is very difficult to fire a police officer or firefighter (would not know if this is true in regards to teachers).  If fact the statement that they almost have to commit a crime to get fired is really not that far from the truth.  In addition, firefighters and police officers regularly file lawsuits (most times with the support of their unions but not always) if they are indeed terminated (even after losing in arbitration...many are 1983 civil rights actions) and these must wear the political subdivisions down to the point where they really are hesitant to terminate for cause.

 

If needing just cause, as determined by civil service commissions and/or third party neutrals makes it difficult to fire a safety force member, then so be it.  The members of the community that put their lives on the line for the safety of the rest deserve that much.  All that is ever printed is the fluff, like that incident in Detroitn.  I know (from first hand experience) that cops and firefighters get fired for some very stupid, stupid reasons.

 

The Republicans could not get Senate Bill 5 out of committeee for a floor vote.  Too many republican dissenters on that committee.  So..... the senate prez replaced one of the members of that committee with a "yes man" and it looks as if the Senate will vote today...... just one day after issuing an omnibus and very complicated amendment which the Dems abd the unions had no input on.  Does this qualify as something being rammed/jammed/crammed down our throats?  Tea Party demonstrators are expected to show up in CBus today to try and counteract the nurses, cops, teachers, firefighters. EMTs and EMPs that are already down there.

 

Why the rush when everyone knows this is heading for a referendum?  Answer: republicans want to get it done soon enough to make the 2011 ballot.  They do not want this issue on the 2012 ballot.

I find the idea of a ballot referendum on the issue fascinating.  Once it makes it to the ballot, it only takes a simply majority to pass, correct?

Yes.  Same goes for a constitutional amendment the unions are considering proposing which would guarantee collective bargaining rights regardless of what direction the General Assembly wants to take.

Here we go again with the constitutional amendments... 

 

If it passes, SB 5 should really get it's own thread

I wonder if the national GOP is burning the lines to Columbus to make sure this gets passed before April so that the referendum will be on the 2011 ballot rather than 2012 (with the fear that Ohio the swing state will go Dem with the base energized on this issue).  This is all very interesting.

^You betcha!

I wonder if the national GOP is burning the lines to Columbus to make sure this gets passed before April so that the referendum will be on the 2011 ballot rather than 2012

 

I think the republicans would want to push it to 2012.  It will be out of the voters minds by then.  People have a short attention span.  I think they only way it can be repealed if it is on 2011. 

But as I understand it, doesn't it take a long time to fire  a teacher given the administrative hassles, etc.?

 

Do  'Rubber Rooms' exist?

 

I can only speak to Ohio.  It typically takes a year from start to finish to fire a teacher with tenure, implied or not.  Again, this is mostly to due process.  Generally the system works, teachers are identified and the problems can be corrected.    Sometimes it doesn't and those are the rare cases you hear about. 

 

If there is a "rubber room" in Ohio  it is because of a terrible, terrible, terrible administrator.   

 

could be worse, look at Chicago Public Schools

 

http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/opinion/editorials/ct-edit-0230-cps-dismissal-gfx.eps-20110226,0,3378793.graphic

 

What about the hole some teachers fall in in NYC?

 

http://www.nypost.com/p/news/local/union_classic_le_en_jrQKCmKdjWQbMAtzqHASxI

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2009/06/22/new-york-teachers-paid-to_n_219336.html

Just passed 17-16...on to the house...

Looks like as many Republicans as possible took cover.  Keep in mind though that it will only be passed into law.  It will have an effective date that will be put on hold until the voters give it the thumbs up / thumbs down.

 

^^^^The Republicans absolutely do NOT want this on the 2012 ballot.  Not in Ohio, they don't.

What is the recall procedure in Ohio?

What is the recall procedure in Ohio?

As has been mentioned already in this thread, the governor can only be removed if impeached for committing a crime.

Ohio's constitution does not provide for recalls. We'd have to take a two-step process: collect signatures to put an initiative on the ballot to cahnge the constitution to allow recalls, then  go through the process again with the recall itself.

Recall is a satanic stain on American democracy.

Yes.  Same goes for a constitutional amendment the unions are considering proposing which would guarantee collective bargaining rights regardless of what direction the General Assembly wants to take.

 

I'm going to go ahead and weigh in on early voting that the referendum won't pass in 2011 or 2012.  The union/democrat crowd was pretty highly motivated in this past governor's race and they still lost.  Assuming they get the referendum on the ballot, all the "repeal the bill" ads will be the same messages we've already heard: The law is bad for middle class, bad for Ohio, Kasich is an ex Fox news host, Wall Street fatcat, bankrupted Lehman Bros, etc.  That dirty laundry's already been aired & the guy still won.  Think about the commercials that would be coming out in support of the bill and against the unions and how they will play out.  Now those will get ugly...  If the economy continues to gain traction and Kasich can take credit for any of the progress, it'll play to his favor even more.

SB5 is just a start. Ohio needs to be a Right to Work state.

The union/democrat crowd was pretty highly motivated in this past governor's race and they still lost.

 

Speaking from the teacher union stand point, we had pretty low member turn out, and also were 60/40 for Strickland.  I wouldn't say that is heavy.  Want to take a guess why most teachers were against Strickland? 

 

So you think a referendum will fail, which I agree with.  What do you think about a constitutional amendment guaranteeing Ohioans the right to bargaining collectively?

The union/democrat crowd was pretty highly motivated in this past governor's race and they still lost.

 

Not really.  You ain't seen nothin' yet.  Motivation was somewhat there (although it seemed no louder than the "train cult").  Solidarity was lacking.  It won't be on any referendum on this bill. 

 

I'm going to go ahead and weigh in on early voting that the referendum won't pass in 2011 or 2012.  The union/democrat crowd was pretty highly motivated in this past governor's race and they still lost.  Assuming they get the referendum on the ballot, all the "repeal the bill" ads will be the same messages we've already heard: The law is bad for middle class, bad for Ohio, Kasich is an ex Fox news host, Wall Street fatcat, bankrupted Lehman Bros, etc.  That dirty laundry's already been aired & the guy still won.  Think about the commercials that would be coming out in support of the bill and against the unions and how they will play out.  Now those will get ugly...  If the economy continues to gain traction and Kasich can take credit for any of the progress, it'll play to his favor even more.

 

But a lot of the union crowd are police and firefighters who tend to lean Republican -- and they will be motivated to vote on a referendum. And a lot of the independents who were key to Kasich getting his whopping 49 percent victory are not happy with the direction Ohio's Republicans are going.

No discussion about the slimy way this bill was passed?  Republicans replaced one of their own members on the committee because he disagreed with some of the language in the bill and they inserted a "yes" man.  Pretty ridiculous if you ask me.  And to answer Hts121's question, yes I would consider this ramming, jamming, slamming something down our throats.

 

With that said, I think I still support the bill based on what I've seen thus far and would probably vote for it.  But that doesn't mean I agree with the way they passed it...

But a lot of the union crowd are police and firefighters who tend to lean Republican -- and they will be motivated to vote on a referendum. And a lot of the independents who were key to Kasich getting his whopping 49 percent victory are not happy with the direction Ohio's Republicans are going.

 

I know a lot of hardcore Republicans who absolutely hate Kasich and SB5.

No discussion about the slimy way this bill was passed? 

 

Are you new to America?  This is how politics works.  Don't you remember Pelosi's classic line "we have to pass it to see what's in it!"  How about Rahm Emmanuel's "Never let a crisis go to waste" quote when the stimulus bill was rolling out.  Better yet, how about Cleveland's own Dennis Kucinich being a vocal opponent of the early HCR bill, but quickly changing his mind after a ride on Air Force One?  I'm actually surprised there as much committee debate and discussion on amendments.  I would have assumed they moved for a vote as soon as they had enough votes.

They did.  But I am glad to know that all the Repbulican hoopla over the health care law debate/procedure was just colored bubbles.

 

I now have had the time to read the bill and have a question.  Under what constitutional authority did the General Assembly pass this bill?  This is heading to court.... and the ballot.

The same constitutional authority that was used to give public workers collective bargaining rights in the first place, I assume.  They didn't start out with such rights in the state of nature, you know.

I deleted my response.  I am not gonna possibly give Kasich a head's up.  Suffice it to say, Gramarye, you should take a closer look at Rocky River IV and the rationale behind that decision.  It doesn't line up.

This whole thing is just astonishing to me. taking rights away from people, cutting pay to the middle class and giving more profits to corporations. When does the estate tax go up in front of the legislature? i can't imagine they'll leave that on the table. I mean, people with $338,333 need to get a break, you can't expect someone to create a lasting upper class if they have to pay taxes.

SB5 is just a start. Ohio needs to be a Right to Work state.

Like the shithole states in the South

^what's your basis for commenting "sh!thole states"...?  Are there some numbers you're using for the basis of that statement?  If the Southern states are "sh!tholes" like you indicate, why are college graduates from the midwest heading there in droves?  Seems to me like the midwest states are the ones becoming the "sh!tholes".... 

 

http://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2010/12/21/us/census-districts.html

 

Like my old calculus professor used to say, "If you keep doing what you've always done, you'll keep getting what you've always gotten"

I am a little late in the game, and just a question.  Does Senate Bill 5 actually cut take home pay from teachers?  Or does it open the door to possibly cutting their pay in the future?

This whole thing is just astonishing to me. taking rights away from people, cutting pay to the middle class and giving more profits to corporations. When does the estate tax go up in front of the legislature? i can't imagine they'll leave that on the table. I mean, people with $338,333 need to get a break, you can't expect someone to create a lasting upper class if they have to pay taxes.

 

What you can expect is for wealthy old people to move to Florida to escape the bite of the state estate tax.

 

The institutions most hurt by that are cultural nonprofits, as wealthy retirees are some of the largest contributors to museums, libraries, performing arts endowments, and similar institutions.  However, they also take their more normal, everyday, for-profit business with them when they leave, too.

 

^what's your basis for commenting "sh!thole states"...?  Are there some numbers you're using for the basis of that statement?  If the Southern states are "sh!tholes" like you indicate, why are college graduates from the midwest heading there in droves?  Seems to me like the midwest states are the ones becoming the "sh!tholes"....

 

Boreas' basis is that they elect Republicans.  In his world, Republican party affiliation is akin to a confession that one enjoys drowning puppies.  It's best to ignore him.

What you can expect is for wealthy old people to move to Florida to escape the bite of the state estate tax.

I've seen several studies quoted that show estate taxes have minimal effect on people's choice of residence.

 

For example: http://ideas.repec.org/p/ecm/nawm04/111.html

 

I would say that weather and the lack of income tax is just as big a reason for wealthy old people to move to Florida. Considering we don't have the weather they do, or the tourism that comes with that weather to support the state allowing us to eliminate the income tax, wealthy old people are going to move to Florida regardless of the estate tax.