OPS school board elections

The Political decisions of Omaha.

Moderators: Coyote, Omaha Cowboy, Brad, nebugeater

bigredmed
Parks & Recreation
Posts: 1905
Joined: Mon Jun 06, 2011 12:45 pm
Location: Omaha Metro Area

OPS school board elections

Postby bigredmed » Sat Mar 16, 2013 6:48 pm

Anyone know a way to find out which candidates gehave received campaign money from the teachers union?

User avatar
Uffda
Planning Board
Posts: 3040
Joined: Sun Jun 12, 2005 9:52 pm
Location: Omaha

Postby Uffda » Sun Mar 17, 2013 10:58 am

Having been in the teaching profession for 34 years I find your question interesting.

As far as I know the OEA is not endorsing any candidate for the primary, so I guess you are on your own.

bigredmed
Parks & Recreation
Posts: 1905
Joined: Mon Jun 06, 2011 12:45 pm
Location: Omaha Metro Area

Postby bigredmed » Sun Mar 17, 2013 2:01 pm

While everyone has a right to support candidates they choose, I oppose any candidate that takes money from a public sector union that they will have to negotiate with.

Strikes me as someone getting to pick their raise.  The union gets to sit on their side of the bargaining table AND decide who approves the deal on the other side as well.

If we are going to have a clean start for OPS, we need to get people on the school board who are not beholden to the union that will have to take some hits in order to get the change needed to make things better for OPS.

So, I plan on asking my district's candidates in public how much money they have taken from the teachers union, and vote for the ones that have not taken any.

Linkin5
County Board
Posts: 3808
Joined: Tue Feb 10, 2004 7:59 pm

Postby Linkin5 » Sun Mar 17, 2013 3:32 pm

bigredmed wrote:While everyone has a right to support candidates they choose, I oppose any candidate that takes money from a public sector union that they will have to negotiate with.

Strikes me as someone getting to pick their raise.  The union gets to sit on their side of the bargaining table AND decide who approves the deal on the other side as well.

If we are going to have a clean start for OPS, we need to get people on the school board who are not beholden to the union that will have to take some hits in order to get the change needed to make things better for OPS.

So, I plan on asking my district's candidates in public how much money they have taken from the teachers union, and vote for the ones that have not taken any.


So....you find out who took money from the teachers union?

User avatar
Uffda
Planning Board
Posts: 3040
Joined: Sun Jun 12, 2005 9:52 pm
Location: Omaha

Postby Uffda » Sun Mar 17, 2013 3:41 pm

bigredmed wrote:While everyone has a right to support candidates they choose, I oppose any candidate that takes money from a public sector union that they will have to negotiate with.

Strikes me as someone getting to pick their raise.  The union gets to sit on their side of the bargaining table AND decide who approves the deal on the other side as well.

If we are going to have a clean start for OPS, we need to get people on the school board who are not beholden to the union that will have to take some hits in order to get the change needed to make things better for OPS.

So, I plan on asking my district's candidates in public how much money they have taken from the teachers union, and vote for the ones that have not taken any.


Although I respect your opinion, I find it narrow minded to single out just the teachers union. What about taking money from other 'special interests'?

I hope you also hold these standards when it comes to voting for mayor, city council, state legislators, fed offices etc. they all take money and they all hope that the person that they give money to gets elected.

So if you are going by who "took" money you are probably going to dismiss some very good qualified people, but again that is your choice.

Also what kind of hits are you seeing that needs to happen?

I am going to change one thing in your statement   - I oppose any candidate that takes money from a public/private sector and then promotes bills that they will favor that group.

User avatar
S33
County Board
Posts: 4551
Joined: Wed May 07, 2008 12:15 pm

Postby S33 » Sun Mar 17, 2013 7:36 pm

Uffda wrote:
bigredmed wrote:While everyone has a right to support candidates they choose, I oppose any candidate that takes money from a public sector union that they will have to negotiate with.

Strikes me as someone getting to pick their raise.  The union gets to sit on their side of the bargaining table AND decide who approves the deal on the other side as well.

If we are going to have a clean start for OPS, we need to get people on the school board who are not beholden to the union that will have to take some hits in order to get the change needed to make things better for OPS.

So, I plan on asking my district's candidates in public how much money they have taken from the teachers union, and vote for the ones that have not taken any.


Although I respect your opinion, I find it narrow minded to single out just the teachers union. What about taking money from other 'special interests'?

I hope you also hold these standards when it comes to voting for mayor, city council, state legislators, fed offices etc. they all take money and they all hope that the person that they give money to gets elected.

So if you are going by who "took" money you are probably going to dismiss some very good qualified people, but again that is your choice.

Also what kind of hits are you seeing that needs to happen?

I am going to change one thing in your statement   - I oppose any candidate that takes money from a public/private sector and then promotes bills that they will favor that group.

Did you know that Vikings never really wore those horns on their helmets?

bigredmed
Parks & Recreation
Posts: 1905
Joined: Mon Jun 06, 2011 12:45 pm
Location: Omaha Metro Area

Postby bigredmed » Sun Mar 17, 2013 8:18 pm

Linkin5 wrote:
bigredmed wrote:While everyone has a right to support candidates they choose, I oppose any candidate that takes money from a public sector union that they will have to negotiate with.

Strikes me as someone getting to pick their raise.  The union gets to sit on their side of the bargaining table AND decide who approves the deal on the other side as well.

If we are going to have a clean start for OPS, we need to get people on the school board who are not beholden to the union that will have to take some hits in order to get the change needed to make things better for OPS.

So, I plan on asking my district's candidates in public how much money they have taken from the teachers union, and vote for the ones that have not taken any.


So....you find out who took money from the teachers union?


No, my district meeting is Saturday.

bigredmed
Parks & Recreation
Posts: 1905
Joined: Mon Jun 06, 2011 12:45 pm
Location: Omaha Metro Area

Postby bigredmed » Sun Mar 17, 2013 8:24 pm

Uffda wrote:
bigredmed wrote:While everyone has a right to support candidates they choose, I oppose any candidate that takes money from a public sector union that they will have to negotiate with.

Strikes me as someone getting to pick their raise.  The union gets to sit on their side of the bargaining table AND decide who approves the deal on the other side as well.

If we are going to have a clean start for OPS, we need to get people on the school board who are not beholden to the union that will have to take some hits in order to get the change needed to make things better for OPS.

So, I plan on asking my district's candidates in public how much money they have taken from the teachers union, and vote for the ones that have not taken any.


Although I respect your opinion, I find it narrow minded to single out just the teachers union. What about taking money from other 'special interests'?

I hope you also hold these standards when it comes to voting for mayor, city council, state legislators, fed offices etc. they all take money and they all hope that the person that they give money to gets elected.

So if you are going by who "took" money you are probably going to dismiss some very good qualified people, but again that is your choice.

Also what kind of hits are you seeing that needs to happen?

I am going to change one thing in your statement   - I oppose any candidate that takes money from a public/private sector and then promotes bills that they will favor that group.


The standard was developed after the last mayoral election.   As for hits, we need to have a mechanism in place to remove bad teachers that works.   Accuse a kid of using marijuana, the cops test him and he is clean, then you do it again, you should not get to do it three times.   Watch a black girl beat up a white girl, and when a white male student tries to break it up, the competent teacher punishes not the white boy.   People who cant figure that out are currently allowed to teach in OPS.   That the needs to stop and quickly.   The teachers union will pitch a big one, but they have to take the hit here.

User avatar
Uffda
Planning Board
Posts: 3040
Joined: Sun Jun 12, 2005 9:52 pm
Location: Omaha

Postby Uffda » Sun Mar 17, 2013 8:26 pm

^^^

User avatar
Uffda
Planning Board
Posts: 3040
Joined: Sun Jun 12, 2005 9:52 pm
Location: Omaha

Postby Uffda » Sun Mar 17, 2013 8:32 pm

bigredmed wrote:
The standard was developed after the last mayoral election.   As for hits, we need to have a mechanism in place to remove bad teachers that works.   Accuse a kid of using marijuana, the cops test him and he is clean, then you do it again, you should not get to do it three times.   Watch a black girl beat up a white girl, and when a white male student tries to break it up, the competent teacher punishes not the white boy.   People who cant figure that out are currently allowed to teach in OPS.   That the needs to stop and quickly.   The teachers union will pitch a big one, but they have to take the hit here.



Huh - I understand your second sentence -- but the rest doesn't  seem to make sense.  You might need to explain a little more.

As to removing 'bad' teachers -- there is a method and I have seen it work and fail AND l have seen admin let a teacher slide through instead of doing what needs to be done to either have the teacher leave or try to improve.  I have also seen good teachers forced out by admin because they didn't 'fit' the principal's mold. The some of these teachers went to other districts and have successful careers.

Linkin5
County Board
Posts: 3808
Joined: Tue Feb 10, 2004 7:59 pm

Postby Linkin5 » Sun Mar 17, 2013 9:06 pm

bigredmed wrote:
Uffda wrote:
bigredmed wrote:While everyone has a right to support candidates they choose, I oppose any candidate that takes money from a public sector union that they will have to negotiate with.

Strikes me as someone getting to pick their raise.  The union gets to sit on their side of the bargaining table AND decide who approves the deal on the other side as well.

If we are going to have a clean start for OPS, we need to get people on the school board who are not beholden to the union that will have to take some hits in order to get the change needed to make things better for OPS.

So, I plan on asking my district's candidates in public how much money they have taken from the teachers union, and vote for the ones that have not taken any.


Although I respect your opinion, I find it narrow minded to single out just the teachers union. What about taking money from other 'special interests'?

I hope you also hold these standards when it comes to voting for mayor, city council, state legislators, fed offices etc. they all take money and they all hope that the person that they give money to gets elected.

So if you are going by who "took" money you are probably going to dismiss some very good qualified people, but again that is your choice.

Also what kind of hits are you seeing that needs to happen?

I am going to change one thing in your statement   - I oppose any candidate that takes money from a public/private sector and then promotes bills that they will favor that group.


The standard was developed after the last mayoral election.   As for hits, we need to have a mechanism in place to remove bad teachers that works.   Accuse a kid of using marijuana, the cops test him and he is clean, then you do it again, you should not get to do it three times.   Watch a black girl beat up a white girl, and when a white male student tries to break it up, the competent teacher punishes not the white boy.   People who cant figure that out are currently allowed to teach in OPS.   That the needs to stop and quickly.   The teachers union will pitch a big one, but they have to take the hit here.


Is this like a specific example that happened to your son or something?  Also, I don't understand why you clarified that one was black and the other white.

bigredmed
Parks & Recreation
Posts: 1905
Joined: Mon Jun 06, 2011 12:45 pm
Location: Omaha Metro Area

Postby bigredmed » Sun Mar 17, 2013 9:46 pm

Linkin5 wrote:
bigredmed wrote:
Uffda wrote:[quote="bigredmed"]While everyone has a right to support candidates they choose, I oppose any candidate that takes money from a public sector union that they will have to negotiate with.

Strikes me as someone getting to pick their raise.  The union gets to sit on their side of the bargaining table AND decide who approves the deal on the other side as well.

If we are going to have a clean start for OPS, we need to get people on the school board who are not beholden to the union that will have to take some hits in order to get the change needed to make things better for OPS.

So, I plan on asking my district's candidates in public how much money they have taken from the teachers union, and vote for the ones that have not taken any.


Although I respect your opinion, I find it narrow minded to single out just the teachers union. What about taking money from other 'special interests'?

I hope you also hold these standards when it comes to voting for mayor, city council, state legislators, fed offices etc. they all take money and they all hope that the person that they give money to gets elected.

So if you are going by who "took" money you are probably going to dismiss some very good qualified people, but again that is your choice.

Also what kind of hits are you seeing that needs to happen?

I am going to change one thing in your statement   - I oppose any candidate that takes money from a public/private sector and then promotes bills that they will favor that group.


The standard was developed after the last mayoral election.   As for hits, we need to have a mechanism in place to remove bad teachers that works.   Accuse a kid of using marijuana, the cops test him and he is clean, then you do it again, you should not get to do it three times.   Watch a black girl beat up a white girl, and when a white male student tries to break it up, the competent teacher punishes not the white boy.   People who cant figure that out are currently allowed to teach in OPS.   That the needs to stop and quickly.   The teachers union will pitch a big one, but they have to take the hit here.


Is this like a specific example that happened to your son or something?  Also, I don't understand why you clarified that one was black and the other white.[/quote]

Specific example from Burke HS.  Thus the racial specificity.

User avatar
Uffda
Planning Board
Posts: 3040
Joined: Sun Jun 12, 2005 9:52 pm
Location: Omaha

Postby Uffda » Sun Mar 17, 2013 11:01 pm

bigredmed wrote:Specific example from Burke HS.  Thus the racial specificity.


I call that 'shoe horn' high school --- over crowded but people still want to send their children there instead of another OPS high school.  Although I know some that pulled their kids out of Burke and put them in Central-Benson- South and they have thrived - but of course none of those are W Omaha.

I not sure why you blame the teachers union for some incident -- the admin of Burke should be handle those things.

The only 'hit' you mentioned is getting rid of 'bad' teachers - whatever that definition is --- anything else?

User avatar
Uffda
Planning Board
Posts: 3040
Joined: Sun Jun 12, 2005 9:52 pm
Location: Omaha

Postby Uffda » Wed Mar 20, 2013 5:50 pm

I thought I would put this out

The OEA president put out to members that some school board candidates were using the OEA 2012 endorsement of them on their 2013 campaign info.  He said the 2012 OEA endorsement is no longer valid and that the OEA would not be endorsing any candidate for the primary

User avatar
Uffda
Planning Board
Posts: 3040
Joined: Sun Jun 12, 2005 9:52 pm
Location: Omaha

Postby Uffda » Wed May 15, 2013 9:33 pm

The teachers union picked the winner in all nine races.

“A lot of new faces, it's a good thing for kids,” said Chris Proulx, head of the teachers union. “Every candidate we picked was very focused on how to improve student achievement.”

And voters elected five of the six candidates who were supported by the chamber: Wayne, Scanlan, Lou Ann Goding, Katie Underwood and Marque Snow. The chamber also backed Woody Bradford in his subdistrict 3 race against Fey.

http://www.omaha.com/article/20130514/N ... -ops-board

Greg S
County Board
Posts: 3593
Joined: Thu Aug 26, 2004 10:46 am

Postby Greg S » Thu May 16, 2013 12:01 pm

Uffda wrote:Having been in the teaching profession for 34 years I find your question interesting.

As far as I know the OEA is not endorsing any candidate for the primary, so I guess you are on your own.


I think it was a fair question.  If you are on the board and taking money from the union, it at least could give the appearance of conflict of interest.

After the pension spiking by the fireman and their union's support of the mayor's that negotiated the deals that allowed it, I am watching who contributes to whom now.

Greg

bigredmed
Parks & Recreation
Posts: 1905
Joined: Mon Jun 06, 2011 12:45 pm
Location: Omaha Metro Area

Postby bigredmed » Thu May 16, 2013 3:19 pm

Greg S wrote:
Uffda wrote:Having been in the teaching profession for 34 years I find your question interesting.

As far as I know the OEA is not endorsing any candidate for the primary, so I guess you are on your own.


I think it was a fair question.  If you are on the board and taking money from the union, it at least could give the appearance of conflict of interest.

After the pension spiking by the fireman and their union's support of the mayor's that negotiated the deals that allowed it, I am watching who contributes to whom now.

Greg


That was what motivated my original question.  We simply don't get effective oversight when the people being overseen can pick the people doing the overseeing.
To wit the $13M we spent on hiring an outside law firm when we could have spent $3M for in house counsel and retainers for a couple of seldom used specialist law firms.

User avatar
Uffda
Planning Board
Posts: 3040
Joined: Sun Jun 12, 2005 9:52 pm
Location: Omaha

Postby Uffda » Thu May 16, 2013 10:59 pm

Greg S wrote:After the pension spiking by the fireman and their union's support of the mayor's that negotiated the deals that allowed it, I am watching who contributes to whom now.

Greg


I wish I had their type of retirement plan. :D

bigredmed wrote:
To wit the $13M we spent on hiring an outside law firm when we could have spent $3M for in house counsel and retainers for a couple of seldom used specialist law firms.


And how was this influenced by the union?  Personally I feel you and lots of others give too much credit to the Teacher's association.

icejammer
County Board
Posts: 3597
Joined: Tue Oct 05, 2004 11:39 am
Location: Council Bluffs

Postby icejammer » Fri May 17, 2013 10:16 am

bigredmed wrote:We simply don't get effective oversight when the people being overseen can pick the people doing the overseeing.


And that differs from Big Business lobbying Congress to reduce/eliminate regulations imposed by Congress, all the while contributing mightily to Congress' reelection/election campaigns because????
"Destiny is not a matter of chance, it is a matter of choice; it is not a thing to be waited for, it is a thing to be achieved."

--William Jennings Bryan

joeglow
Planning Board
Posts: 2729
Joined: Wed Apr 13, 2005 7:04 pm

Postby joeglow » Fri May 17, 2013 10:27 am

icejammer wrote:
bigredmed wrote:We simply don't get effective oversight when the people being overseen can pick the people doing the overseeing.


And that differs from Big Business lobbying Congress to reduce/eliminate regulations imposed by Congress, all the while contributing mightily to Congress' reelection/election campaigns because????


"He did it too" ceased to be a reasonable response when you turned 10.  If you wish to start a thread discussing just this, I will agree you.  However, providing it as if it negates the point brought up here is irrational.

icejammer
County Board
Posts: 3597
Joined: Tue Oct 05, 2004 11:39 am
Location: Council Bluffs

Postby icejammer » Fri May 17, 2013 10:34 am

joeglow wrote:
icejammer wrote:
bigredmed wrote:We simply don't get effective oversight when the people being overseen can pick the people doing the overseeing.


And that differs from Big Business lobbying Congress to reduce/eliminate regulations imposed by Congress, all the while contributing mightily to Congress' reelection/election campaigns because????


"He did it too" ceased to be a reasonable response when you turned 10.  If you wish to start a thread discussing just this, I will agree you.  However, providing it as if it negates the point brought up here is irrational.


It's not a "he did it too" argument (although you can certainly go that route if you wish).  Just pointing out that teachers (or pick your favorite public sector union) have just as much of a free speech right to advocate for thier position as anyone else, so the concern with oversight is just a strawman.
"Destiny is not a matter of chance, it is a matter of choice; it is not a thing to be waited for, it is a thing to be achieved."

--William Jennings Bryan

bigredmed
Parks & Recreation
Posts: 1905
Joined: Mon Jun 06, 2011 12:45 pm
Location: Omaha Metro Area

Postby bigredmed » Fri May 17, 2013 3:28 pm

icejammer wrote:
joeglow wrote:
icejammer wrote:[quote="bigredmed"]We simply don't get effective oversight when the people being overseen can pick the people doing the overseeing.


And that differs from Big Business lobbying Congress to reduce/eliminate regulations imposed by Congress, all the while contributing mightily to Congress' reelection/election campaigns because????


"He did it too" ceased to be a reasonable response when you turned 10.  If you wish to start a thread discussing just this, I will agree you.  However, providing it as if it negates the point brought up here is irrational.


It's not a "he did it too" argument (although you can certainly go that route if you wish).  Just pointing out that teachers (or pick your favorite public sector union) have just as much of a free speech right to advocate for thier position as anyone else, so the concern with oversight is just a strawman.[/quote]

Not a strawman in the sense of a false argument, since we have to buy the straw.  I want to know that if the teachers get a raise, it was because thoughtful, unbeholden, unbribed, and sensible people studied the marketplace and felt that the intelligent move was to give the raises.  If my taxes go up for that, so be it.  It's when they go up because the union-bribed school board votes that way to keep the bribes coming that gets me torqued.

User avatar
Uffda
Planning Board
Posts: 3040
Joined: Sun Jun 12, 2005 9:52 pm
Location: Omaha

Postby Uffda » Sun May 19, 2013 7:57 am

bigredmed wrote:
icejammer wrote:
joeglow wrote:[quote="icejammer"][quote="bigredmed"]We simply don't get effective oversight when the people being overseen can pick the people doing the overseeing.


And that differs from Big Business lobbying Congress to reduce/eliminate regulations imposed by Congress, all the while contributing mightily to Congress' reelection/election campaigns because????


"He did it too" ceased to be a reasonable response when you turned 10.  If you wish to start a thread discussing just this, I will agree you.  However, providing it as if it negates the point brought up here is irrational.


It's not a "he did it too" argument (although you can certainly go that route if you wish).  Just pointing out that teachers (or pick your favorite public sector union) have just as much of a free speech right to advocate for thier position as anyone else, so the concern with oversight is just a strawman.[/quote]

Not a strawman in the sense of a false argument, since we have to buy the straw.  I want to know that if the teachers get a raise, it was because thoughtful, unbeholden, unbribed, and sensible people studied the marketplace and felt that the intelligent move was to give the raises.  If my taxes go up for that, so be it.  It's when they go up because the union-bribed school board votes that way to keep the bribes coming that gets me torqued.[/quote]

One thing to remember is that if your taxes go up because the teachers received a raise, the teachers' taxes went up too as they aren't exempt from taxes.

User avatar
guitarguy
Parks & Recreation
Posts: 1292
Joined: Thu Sep 27, 2007 1:39 am
Location: New York City..Soon To Be Omaha
Contact:

Postby guitarguy » Sun May 19, 2013 9:56 am

I think the main thing that I want to see with teachers is accountability. I see the level of education plummeting compared to when I was in public school, because of the heavy hand of the teachers unions screaming...we need raises because its for the kids! and then strong arming votes out of local city councils. It just reeks of corruption. Do teachers deserve to paid well? of course.. but I want to hold their feet to the fire. None of this teaching to the test so that it looks like they are a master teacher when they could just as well be teaching the material so the students can pass the tests regardless. I'm sick of public unions getting on their high horses and saying its for the kids or but we watch the community or but we put out fires! Then expecting to get whatever raise and boost to their pensions that the unions are negotiating for and expecting to get it every time. Mean while those benefits are to be paid for by our tax dollars. Its sickening I tell you.

-adam

bigredmed
Parks & Recreation
Posts: 1905
Joined: Mon Jun 06, 2011 12:45 pm
Location: Omaha Metro Area

Postby bigredmed » Sun May 19, 2013 2:42 pm

Uffda wrote:
bigredmed wrote:
icejammer wrote:[quote="joeglow"][quote="icejammer"][quote="bigredmed"]We simply don't get effective oversight when the people being overseen can pick the people doing the overseeing.


And that differs from Big Business lobbying Congress to reduce/eliminate regulations imposed by Congress, all the while contributing mightily to Congress' reelection/election campaigns because????


"He did it too" ceased to be a reasonable response when you turned 10.  If you wish to start a thread discussing just this, I will agree you.  However, providing it as if it negates the point brought up here is irrational.


It's not a "he did it too" argument (although you can certainly go that route if you wish).  Just pointing out that teachers (or pick your favorite public sector union) have just as much of a free speech right to advocate for thier position as anyone else, so the concern with oversight is just a strawman.[/quote]

Not a strawman in the sense of a false argument, since we have to buy the straw.  I want to know that if the teachers get a raise, it was because thoughtful, unbeholden, unbribed, and sensible people studied the marketplace and felt that the intelligent move was to give the raises.  If my taxes go up for that, so be it.  It's when they go up because the union-bribed school board votes that way to keep the bribes coming that gets me torqued.[/quote]

One thing to remember is that if your taxes go up because the teachers received a raise, the teachers' taxes went up too as they aren't exempt from taxes.[/quote]


Not my point.  When taxes go up for a needful thing, that's the breaks.  When it goes up because some pol is paying off a union crony, that is not OK.  If teachers do 5% more work and get 5% more, OK.  If they get more just because they bought off the school board,  that is not OK.

User avatar
Uffda
Planning Board
Posts: 3040
Joined: Sun Jun 12, 2005 9:52 pm
Location: Omaha

Postby Uffda » Sun May 19, 2013 6:34 pm

guitarguy wrote: Do teachers deserve to paid well? of course.. but I want to hold their feet to the fire. None of this teaching to the test so that it looks like they are a master teacher when they could just as well be teaching the material so the students can pass the tests regardless.

-adam


Here is the thing with the tests as i see it.  Teachers are only one factor in the taking of the tests.  The students and their parents are the other big part.  We test kids WAY TOO much these days and for what reason?  There is NO ACOUNTABILITY for the students on what they get on the tests. It doesn't count toward their grade, or show up on their record for the future.

I monitored some students taking the NeSA tests this spring.  They had to two two tests a week for three weeks in reading math and some science,  I watched some of the kids just click through the screens as quickly as they could without rely reading anything. My guess is they didn't pass so now the school and the teachers are held responsible for the lack of caring of some students.

Also there are a lot of other tests that the students have to take to prepare them to take the tests.  The teachers or the I ion don't set up the tests those come for state and federal mandates -- from people who probably haven't stepped in a classroom since they were in high school and have no idea how society has changed teaching/education.

As I said before I think some people give teachers unions a lot more power than they actually have.

User avatar
Uffda
Planning Board
Posts: 3040
Joined: Sun Jun 12, 2005 9:52 pm
Location: Omaha

Postby Uffda » Sun May 19, 2013 6:39 pm

bigredmed wrote:Not my point.  When taxes go up for a needful thing, that's the breaks.  When it goes up because some pol is paying off a union crony, that is not OK.  If teachers do 5% more work and get 5% more, OK.  If they get more just because they bought off the school board,  that is not OK.


Maybe not but it comes across that way. I am still trying to see where you see this pay off and how it has worked with local school districts

I think you should look closer at the businesses that support certain candidates and what they reap from it you might even more "political payoffs". But it seems like you are only worried about the unions.

User avatar
guitarguy
Parks & Recreation
Posts: 1292
Joined: Thu Sep 27, 2007 1:39 am
Location: New York City..Soon To Be Omaha
Contact:

Postby guitarguy » Sun May 19, 2013 8:36 pm

Uffda wrote:
guitarguy wrote: Do teachers deserve to paid well? of course.. but I want to hold their feet to the fire. None of this teaching to the test so that it looks like they are a master teacher when they could just as well be teaching the material so the students can pass the tests regardless.

-adam


Here is the thing with the tests as i see it.  Teachers are only one factor in the taking of the tests.  The students and their parents are the other big part.  We test kids WAY TOO much these days and for what reason?  There is NO ACOUNTABILITY for the students on what they get on the tests. It doesn't count toward their grade, or show up on their record for the future.

I monitored some students taking the NeSA tests this spring.  They had to two two tests a week for three weeks in reading math and some science,  I watched some of the kids just click through the screens as quickly as they could without rely reading anything. My guess is they didn't pass so now the school and the teachers are held responsible for the lack of caring of some students.

Also there are a lot of other tests that the students have to take to prepare them to take the tests.  The teachers or the I ion don't set up the tests those come for state and federal mandates -- from people who probably haven't stepped in a classroom since they were in high school and have no idea how society has changed teaching/education.

As I said before I think some people give teachers unions a lot more power than they actually have.


Thats a good point too.. I was in high school when NCLB passed so never saw its effects but as with everything ran by the government you have unqualified bureaucrats meddling in matters they have no business being in. I also believe testing should dialed WAY back...I never experienced test anxiety but so many other kids I went to school seemed like they were panicking before tests and to see how there are so many more now is only leading kids to not care at all. What was intended by the government to help kids is making kids want nothing more than to forget about the value of an education because its not helping them learn. What a shame indeed!

-adam

joeglow
Planning Board
Posts: 2729
Joined: Wed Apr 13, 2005 7:04 pm

Postby joeglow » Mon May 20, 2013 12:41 pm

Uffda wrote:
guitarguy wrote: Do teachers deserve to paid well? of course.. but I want to hold their feet to the fire. None of this teaching to the test so that it looks like they are a master teacher when they could just as well be teaching the material so the students can pass the tests regardless.

-adam


Here is the thing with the tests as i see it.  Teachers are only one factor in the taking of the tests.  The students and their parents are the other big part.  We test kids WAY TOO much these days and for what reason?  There is NO ACOUNTABILITY for the students on what they get on the tests. It doesn't count toward their grade, or show up on their record for the future.

I monitored some students taking the NeSA tests this spring.  They had to two two tests a week for three weeks in reading math and some science,  I watched some of the kids just click through the screens as quickly as they could without rely reading anything. My guess is they didn't pass so now the school and the teachers are held responsible for the lack of caring of some students.

Also there are a lot of other tests that the students have to take to prepare them to take the tests.  The teachers or the I ion don't set up the tests those come for state and federal mandates -- from people who probably haven't stepped in a classroom since they were in high school and have no idea how society has changed teaching/education.

As I said before I think some people give teachers unions a lot more power than they actually have.


What do teachers, doctors, lawyers, accountants and dentists have in common?  They are all licensed by states.  And yet, multiple studies have shown the number of teachers who lose their license is insanely lower than the other 4.  The number of people losing their jobs in the teaching profession is also insanely lower.  There is no doubt that this is due to the strength of the unions.  I agree with you regarding tests.  However, why do so many teachers oppose allowing the principals in their schools to evaluate them?  This process of your supervisor evaluating you works in every other profession in the country.

Second, I agree that teachers play an important role in our society.  However, I also believe in a free market economy.  Clearly, with so few teachers losing their jobs or licenses, we are flush with great teachers.  We also hear how many out of work great teachers there are.  This tells me the supply of teachers greatly outstrips the demand.  The demonstrates that compensation is currently fair enough to attract such large numbers of qualified professionals.

Thus, I fail to see how pay is an issue and find it odd when you see significant bumps in pay.

Linkin5
County Board
Posts: 3808
Joined: Tue Feb 10, 2004 7:59 pm

Postby Linkin5 » Mon May 20, 2013 2:29 pm

I heard the United States got in Asian land wars because of teacher unions.

joeglow
Planning Board
Posts: 2729
Joined: Wed Apr 13, 2005 7:04 pm

Postby joeglow » Mon May 20, 2013 3:08 pm

Linkin5 wrote:I heard the United States got in Asian land wars because of teacher unions.


Example 1 of "great" teachers.

Linkin5
County Board
Posts: 3808
Joined: Tue Feb 10, 2004 7:59 pm

Postby Linkin5 » Mon May 20, 2013 3:18 pm

joeglow wrote:
Linkin5 wrote:I heard the United States got in Asian land wars because of teacher unions.


Example 1 of "great" teachers.


I pray you dont have children, but if so you have to be the biggest a-hole of all time to deal with at parent teacher conferences

joeglow
Planning Board
Posts: 2729
Joined: Wed Apr 13, 2005 7:04 pm

Postby joeglow » Mon May 20, 2013 5:42 pm

Linkin5 wrote:
joeglow wrote:
Linkin5 wrote:I heard the United States got in Asian land wars because of teacher unions.


Example 1 of "great" teachers.


I pray you dont have children, but if so you have to be the biggest a-hole of all time to deal with at parent teacher conferences


I have 3.  But let me follow your logic:

1. I said I respect the job teachers do and recognize their importance
2. I lay out the logic behind why their pay is in line with market expectations
3. I am an a hole at parent teacher conferences

Please elaborate on how you jump from 1 and 2 to 3.

Linkin5
County Board
Posts: 3808
Joined: Tue Feb 10, 2004 7:59 pm

Postby Linkin5 » Mon May 20, 2013 6:13 pm

joeglow wrote:
Linkin5 wrote:
joeglow wrote:[quote="Linkin5"]I heard the United States got in Asian land wars because of teacher unions.


Example 1 of "great" teachers.


I pray you dont have children, but if so you have to be the biggest a-hole of all time to deal with at parent teacher conferences


I have 3.  But let me follow your logic:

1. I said I respect the job teachers do and recognize their importance
2. I lay out the logic behind why their pay is in line with market expectations
3. I am an a hole at parent teacher conferences

Please elaborate on how you jump from 1 and 2 to 3.[/quote]

You can keep feeding me |expletive|, just don't expect me to believe it.  If you respected teachers I really don't understand how you agree with their pay, they are for the most part grossly under compensated.  The reason you have people lining up to be teachers is not because of the compensation, but rather it is something they enjoy and feel fulfilled by.

joeglow
Planning Board
Posts: 2729
Joined: Wed Apr 13, 2005 7:04 pm

Postby joeglow » Mon May 20, 2013 6:21 pm

Linkin5 wrote:
joeglow wrote:
Linkin5 wrote:[quote="joeglow"][quote="Linkin5"]I heard the United States got in Asian land wars because of teacher unions.


Example 1 of "great" teachers.


I pray you dont have children, but if so you have to be the biggest a-hole of all time to deal with at parent teacher conferences


I have 3.  But let me follow your logic:

1. I said I respect the job teachers do and recognize their importance
2. I lay out the logic behind why their pay is in line with market expectations
3. I am an a hole at parent teacher conferences

Please elaborate on how you jump from 1 and 2 to 3.[/quote]

You can keep feeding me |expletive|, just don't expect me to believe it.  If you respected teachers I really don't understand how you agree with their pay, they are for the most part grossly under compensated.  The reason you have people lining up to be teachers is not because of the compensation, but rather it is something they enjoy and feel fulfilled by.[/quote]

Which factors into the overall "reward" for a job.  A trash collector is not a difficult job, but it sucks, no one enjoys it and no one feels fulfilled by it.  Hence, it pays more that then one would think if you were looking solely at difficulty of the job, in order for supply of willing workers to meet demand.  These are not difficult concepts to understand.

User avatar
guitarguy
Parks & Recreation
Posts: 1292
Joined: Thu Sep 27, 2007 1:39 am
Location: New York City..Soon To Be Omaha
Contact:

Postby guitarguy » Mon May 20, 2013 6:28 pm

I do want to point out that much of the frustration I have with Teachers Unions and their pay is mostly found in states that are not right to work union states. I have lived on Long Island for 3 years now and the teachers out here make 80-100k and when they retire receive very near their full salary with free health care benefits for life. In Omaha its not even close to the extreme I have seen out here. Also you would not believe the amount of college students going for teaching mostly because they hear how amazing the compensation is and would rather go into a field where they are heavily protected by a powerful union and get paid to do the bare minimum work with paid summers to hit up the beach...not conducive to creating quality teachers by the way. In NY the unions have such a stranglehold on the public sector that the average property taxes out here are 8000 dollars a year for a very modest home. What I don't want to see in Omaha is this same charade  where the unions negotiate and we get squeezed for more taxes every year just because of what the unions have negotiated.

-adam

Linkin5
County Board
Posts: 3808
Joined: Tue Feb 10, 2004 7:59 pm

Postby Linkin5 » Mon May 20, 2013 7:01 pm

joeglow wrote:
Linkin5 wrote:
joeglow wrote:[quote="Linkin5"][quote="joeglow"][quote="Linkin5"]I heard the United States got in Asian land wars because of teacher unions.


Example 1 of "great" teachers.


I pray you dont have children, but if so you have to be the biggest a-hole of all time to deal with at parent teacher conferences


I have 3.  But let me follow your logic:

1. I said I respect the job teachers do and recognize their importance
2. I lay out the logic behind why their pay is in line with market expectations
3. I am an a hole at parent teacher conferences

Please elaborate on how you jump from 1 and 2 to 3.[/quote]

You can keep feeding me |expletive|, just don't expect me to believe it.  If you respected teachers I really don't understand how you agree with their pay, they are for the most part grossly under compensated.  The reason you have people lining up to be teachers is not because of the compensation, but rather it is something they enjoy and feel fulfilled by.[/quote]

Which factors into the overall "reward" for a job.  A trash collector is not a difficult job, but it sucks, no one enjoys it and no one feels fulfilled by it.  Hence, it pays more that then one would think if you were looking solely at difficulty of the job, in order for supply of willing workers to meet demand.  These are not difficult concepts to understand.[/quote]

So because they enjoy their jobs that justifies paying them less?  That is some solid logic.  

If there is anybody getting paid too much in education it is administrators and others that don't have any conduct with the kids.

joeglow
Planning Board
Posts: 2729
Joined: Wed Apr 13, 2005 7:04 pm

Postby joeglow » Mon May 20, 2013 7:22 pm

Linkin5 wrote:
joeglow wrote:
Linkin5 wrote:[quote="joeglow"][quote="Linkin5"][quote="joeglow"][quote="Linkin5"]I heard the United States got in Asian land wars because of teacher unions.


Example 1 of "great" teachers.


I pray you dont have children, but if so you have to be the biggest a-hole of all time to deal with at parent teacher conferences


I have 3.  But let me follow your logic:

1. I said I respect the job teachers do and recognize their importance
2. I lay out the logic behind why their pay is in line with market expectations
3. I am an a hole at parent teacher conferences

Please elaborate on how you jump from 1 and 2 to 3.[/quote]

You can keep feeding me |expletive|, just don't expect me to believe it.  If you respected teachers I really don't understand how you agree with their pay, they are for the most part grossly under compensated.  The reason you have people lining up to be teachers is not because of the compensation, but rather it is something they enjoy and feel fulfilled by.[/quote]

Which factors into the overall "reward" for a job.  A trash collector is not a difficult job, but it sucks, no one enjoys it and no one feels fulfilled by it.  Hence, it pays more that then one would think if you were looking solely at difficulty of the job, in order for supply of willing workers to meet demand.  These are not difficult concepts to understand.[/quote]

So because they enjoy their jobs that justifies paying them less?  That is some solid logic.  

If there is anybody getting paid too much in education it is administrators and others that don't have any conduct with the kids.[/quote]

Holy Jesus, have you never studied economics?  Yes, intrinsic rewards factor into overall "rewards" for a job.  

However, what dictates pay is fundamental supply and demand.  What amazes me is that you see that as a flawed science.  If I need to hire 5 people and 20 show up willing to work for $20 an hour, I am paying too much for the job.  Just as if I offer $10 and only 2 show up, I am paying too little.  Not rocket science here.  But we should just pour the money to people because we think their profession is noble.

As I stated above, I would be more apt to pay them more if they felt the market of good teachers was small.  However, with so few teachers losing their jobs and/or licenses, teachers clearly feel the profession is flush with great teachers, with many more waiting in the wings, looking for work.

User avatar
Uffda
Planning Board
Posts: 3040
Joined: Sun Jun 12, 2005 9:52 pm
Location: Omaha

Postby Uffda » Mon May 20, 2013 9:56 pm

Let's see

“And yet, multiple studies have shown the number of teachers who lose their license is insanely lower than the other 4.  The number of people losing their jobs in the teaching profession is also insanely lower.”

Do you feel the only way a teacher leaves the profession is through losing their license?
Not sure where you got that info and it might be true but the bigger loss of teachers is the ones who quit within the first 5 years. I have read of percentages close to 50%.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/leonie-ha ... 02900.html

 “However, why do so many teachers oppose allowing the principals in their schools to evaluate them?”

Where did you get that?  I have taught for over 30 years and my principal has always evaluated me.  I haven’t heard of any that are against that although I suppose there are a few.  I have seen teachers evaluated and retained, although I have seen some that should have been let go - I also have seen some very good teachers who were evaluated poorly and finally left the school/district - the reason for the poor evaluation -- they wouldn’t bow to the principal - who suffered - the kids they lost a great teacher. There is a way to remove a poor teacher or assist that teacher in becoming a better teacher, I have seen few principals put it into practice.

“and get paid to do the bare minimum work with paid summers to hit up the beach.”

My guess is that a lot of the college students you know won’t be in teaching in 5 years as they will find out it is different than they think it is.
Oh and I don’t get paid summers, I get a paycheck for work that I have already done that the school district stretches over the summer.  I would take a 9 pay check instead of giving the school district a free loan of money due me. The first school district I taught in I was paid with 10 checks -- the first 9 were equal and the last could be cashed on june 15th and it had to last me until Sept 25th when I would get the first check of the next year.

When I started teaching in Sept 1979, my first check was $832 take home. What is interesting about that is I was working at a meat packing plant in sioux falls during the summer before I left for teaching. I was taking home between $400-450 a week. I knew a few of the people i worked with there that had college degrees in education but were working there to make a living.

I have a 22 year old daughter who just moved into her second job as an admin assistant/PR with a small company -- thank goodness not in education -- she is earning close to $41,000. A beginning teacher makes $32-34,000 but then a teacher only works 9 months a year and has part of the education of your child in his/her hands --- why would you want to pay them more.

User avatar
S33
County Board
Posts: 4551
Joined: Wed May 07, 2008 12:15 pm

Postby S33 » Mon May 20, 2013 10:04 pm

Joe's givin' me a no-homo boner two times in a week. Linkin, he's right. If they're underpaid, school systems would need to work harder to fill the positions. If you feel the quality of education is lacking, then you really can't support the present teachers union, as the teachers are under-qualified.

Sure, pay them more, but the product will not change.
Socialism is a philosophy of failure, the creed of ignorance, and the gospel of envy, its inherent virtue is the equal sharing of misery. - Winston Churchill


Return to “Omaha Metro Area Government”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest