Thursday, March 08, 2007
Union Educator Logic on Display
In commenting on proposed legislation to end teacher strikes, a union official said, “We do not support this effort. The vast majority of teacher organizations have not abused the authority to strike.”
What an insight. Since strikes are used sparingly, they cannot be that bad. They are just a tool that is sometimes needed to ensure fairness.
There are two very large logical holes in the union leader’s argument. First, this is equivalent to saying that because a parent only rarely uses stern disciplinary measures to affect a child’s behavior; the child can go ahead and behave as if the threat of stern discipline did not exist. Obviously, the ability to inflict harm does not have to be used frequently to have an impact. Its very threat can be just as effective.
Second, the School District has no comparable bargaining chip. In the private sector, when an impasse in negotiations occurs, the firm has the option to lock the union out of its facilities until such time as agreement is reached. School Boards by law must keep the schools open and get in the 180 days of education. And even if they did a lockout, the teachers lose nothing, because the 180 days must be provided and they will incur no loss of pay.
Teacher strikes create inconvenience for parents and students and produce animosities and discord in the communities where they occur. As a result, school boards are very loath to have to endure them, giving the union a strengthened bargaining position and a better settlement than they could otherwise get.
It is time to put an end to them. No binding arbitration or a judge choosing one side’s final offer. Just end them. And then give voters the right to vote on school budgets and tax increases. That’s where the power needs to reside. After all it is their money and their children. Teacher strikes against publicly funded schools are the hallmark of unionism run amok.
What an insight. Since strikes are used sparingly, they cannot be that bad. They are just a tool that is sometimes needed to ensure fairness.
There are two very large logical holes in the union leader’s argument. First, this is equivalent to saying that because a parent only rarely uses stern disciplinary measures to affect a child’s behavior; the child can go ahead and behave as if the threat of stern discipline did not exist. Obviously, the ability to inflict harm does not have to be used frequently to have an impact. Its very threat can be just as effective.
Second, the School District has no comparable bargaining chip. In the private sector, when an impasse in negotiations occurs, the firm has the option to lock the union out of its facilities until such time as agreement is reached. School Boards by law must keep the schools open and get in the 180 days of education. And even if they did a lockout, the teachers lose nothing, because the 180 days must be provided and they will incur no loss of pay.
Teacher strikes create inconvenience for parents and students and produce animosities and discord in the communities where they occur. As a result, school boards are very loath to have to endure them, giving the union a strengthened bargaining position and a better settlement than they could otherwise get.
It is time to put an end to them. No binding arbitration or a judge choosing one side’s final offer. Just end them. And then give voters the right to vote on school budgets and tax increases. That’s where the power needs to reside. After all it is their money and their children. Teacher strikes against publicly funded schools are the hallmark of unionism run amok.
