Little known FACTS that union workers burned down ships being built for the World War II efforts and staged a walkout. The union boss was mad that Lucky Grazzianno was going to go or was in jail. So the union bosses met with President Roosevelt and agreed that Lucky would be set free if the the unions would work three shifts to build all the boats needed for the war efforts. The deal was struck. Look it up. When Kennedy made his 'push' against the unions - well he was killed by a sniper, wasn't he? But I digress.
So who are the unions working for? The unions, that's who !!! They take union dues to "fund" congress people for their election campaigns. When these congresspersons are elected, they are pressured by the unions to vote for union favorable bills. (A step in the process of an act becoming a law).
And who pays for these benefits that become law voted on by these "purchased" congress persons??? OPM For those who do not know what OPM means. OTHER PEOPLE'S MONEY. That is what our taxes go for.
Look at your real estate tax bill. Add up all the items that go towards your schools. I'll bet that total ranges from 60% to 85% of your total real estate tax bill. Thank you Mr Union. Thank you for raising the teacher's pay and benefits while forgetting to put a clause in there to help the student become smarter. Oh No! You do not want to help the students. The teachers want smaller classes. WHY??? Because smaller classes mean more classrooms and more classrooms mean more teachers. And more teachers mean more union dues. AAHHHH !!! That's the reason for smaller classrooms - MORE UNION DUES. You see the congress persons need more money to get elected and the union lobbyists need more money to treat the congress persons to vacations and under the table "purchases."
I vote 'no' when the teacher's pay raise comes up. They always say it's about helping the students. BUT that's not true. It's about more classrooms, more teachers, more union dues, more under the table "purchases' and damn the students. Who cares if they do not learn. Who cares if they drop out. Who cares if they can not read. WHO CARES ABOUT THE STUDENTS ???
AND THAT'S THE WAY I SEE IT...
Straight Talk With Jay Clifford
Monday, February 28, 2011
Sunday, February 27, 2011
Why Unions
Simply put unions started when companies took advantage of their workers much like the kings did of the people that lived in the king's territory. They working conditions were not considered. Heck, the working process was not even thought out. The owners knew they could make a profit if they did 'this and that' And the rule of "do not fix it if it's not broken" was in play. Only through major incidents like fires that killed over a hundred women and children did the people in general begin to think of organizing into a union. And that is true of most of today's major changes; something terrible has to happen to force change.
But where did the concept of union come from? Mostly from the people who provided protection to store owners. And they were of low moral reputation. Even today, it's the concept of taking union worker's money (call dues or protection) and using it for the benefit of the union (and in many cases the union's bosses.)
Sure the protectors get higher wages and benefits for their members. But they constantly reach for higher wages and more benefits; plus enforcing the "do not fire under almost any circumstances" rule. And soon the higher wages and benefits are not enough. What is missing in this scenario is the affect these higher wages and pensions have on the tax payers or corporations.
Let's look at a blaring example. Teacher's pay has almost tripled in the last thirty years from 1981 to 2011. Yet, students are poorer readers, poorer at math, are unable to write. are unable to understand how the USA government works than the 1981 students. So the amount of money paid to teachers and the huge pensions they get after only 20 to 30 years is out of balance with the teacher's ability to provide a better product - i.e. a student who can read, write, do math, knows about civics and has some understanding of basis science. We are producing a graduating class of more ignorant students as evident by the world ranking of student's. The USA placed 23rd this year behind every major industrial nation in student knowledge. But the unions want more money for these students' teachers. Can anyone see the conflict here. The teacher want more money while doing a poorer job.
MOST of these teachers would be fired IF they worked in a corporate world for their lack of productivity. That is the way it works in the corporate world. You work without a contract of job protection. And that seems to work well for the business world as evidenced by the profits and productivity of USA business. Compare that to the protectionist world of teachers with low student productivity and you begin to see a large gap between teacher's pay in general and student knowledge.
Then there are the benefits of teacher. They work 8 or 9 months a year and get paid for a full year. Out of those 8 or 9 months they get off about 22 days over and above weekends for "holidays" and "class breaks." And they can retire after 20 to 30 years at a large percentage of their last few year's salary. WOW! And they want more. Plus when they reach social security age, they will want that money as well.
Now who pays for all these salaries and benefits and pensions? The taxpayer - that's who!!! Are the taxpayers getting their money's worth? I do not think so. Not when one-third to one-half of all students graduating high school can not read at more than a third grade level. And that does not include the 20% up to 50% drop out rate.
In a corporate world, most teachers would be fired and their pensions would be absolved. They would have to work 50 weeks a year to get 2 weeks vacation. Unlike their current work year of only 32 weeks a year and on vacation 20 weeks a year. Wouldn't you Mr or MS taxpayer like that work schedule.???
There are other stories that I will bring to you. You intelligent comments backed by facts are encourage. Rants and ravings can best be served when you are on the picket lines.
And that's the way I see it...
Straight Talk With Jay Clifford
But where did the concept of union come from? Mostly from the people who provided protection to store owners. And they were of low moral reputation. Even today, it's the concept of taking union worker's money (call dues or protection) and using it for the benefit of the union (and in many cases the union's bosses.)
Sure the protectors get higher wages and benefits for their members. But they constantly reach for higher wages and more benefits; plus enforcing the "do not fire under almost any circumstances" rule. And soon the higher wages and benefits are not enough. What is missing in this scenario is the affect these higher wages and pensions have on the tax payers or corporations.
Let's look at a blaring example. Teacher's pay has almost tripled in the last thirty years from 1981 to 2011. Yet, students are poorer readers, poorer at math, are unable to write. are unable to understand how the USA government works than the 1981 students. So the amount of money paid to teachers and the huge pensions they get after only 20 to 30 years is out of balance with the teacher's ability to provide a better product - i.e. a student who can read, write, do math, knows about civics and has some understanding of basis science. We are producing a graduating class of more ignorant students as evident by the world ranking of student's. The USA placed 23rd this year behind every major industrial nation in student knowledge. But the unions want more money for these students' teachers. Can anyone see the conflict here. The teacher want more money while doing a poorer job.
MOST of these teachers would be fired IF they worked in a corporate world for their lack of productivity. That is the way it works in the corporate world. You work without a contract of job protection. And that seems to work well for the business world as evidenced by the profits and productivity of USA business. Compare that to the protectionist world of teachers with low student productivity and you begin to see a large gap between teacher's pay in general and student knowledge.
Then there are the benefits of teacher. They work 8 or 9 months a year and get paid for a full year. Out of those 8 or 9 months they get off about 22 days over and above weekends for "holidays" and "class breaks." And they can retire after 20 to 30 years at a large percentage of their last few year's salary. WOW! And they want more. Plus when they reach social security age, they will want that money as well.
Now who pays for all these salaries and benefits and pensions? The taxpayer - that's who!!! Are the taxpayers getting their money's worth? I do not think so. Not when one-third to one-half of all students graduating high school can not read at more than a third grade level. And that does not include the 20% up to 50% drop out rate.
In a corporate world, most teachers would be fired and their pensions would be absolved. They would have to work 50 weeks a year to get 2 weeks vacation. Unlike their current work year of only 32 weeks a year and on vacation 20 weeks a year. Wouldn't you Mr or MS taxpayer like that work schedule.???
There are other stories that I will bring to you. You intelligent comments backed by facts are encourage. Rants and ravings can best be served when you are on the picket lines.
And that's the way I see it...
Straight Talk With Jay Clifford
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)