Was it worth the cost? The Kent teachers caused a huge disruption for the families of the 26,000 students. And there is more to come. The two weeks of lost school now have to be made up by some combination of reducing scheduled holidays and extending the school year to late June.
And now the teachers have to explain to their students how it is important for the students to obey the law, but it's OK for the teachers they respect to conduct an illegal strike.
And what did they get? It was all about class size? The new contract caps the number of students in grades K-3 at 29, and grades 4-6 at 32. In the contract that had expired, the caps were 31 and 34 respectively. But there is no cap for grades 7 and higher. Seattle Times
And they have fewer meetings
In our view, Sept. 16: Unions Worried - Vancouver Columbian
Posted by Ron Hebron at September 17, 2009 06:18 AM | Email ThisAs to what they gained? Simply a repeated demonstration of the strength of the Union...and quite frankly I think that's all they were after. It was Kent's turn!
Posted by: Duffman on September 17, 2009 06:36 AMI would like to know what the teachers get in exchange for an oversize class. Some districts pay the teacher for each child over the maximum. A few teachers will admit that class size is more about compensation ($$$) than anything else.
They don't care. It's about power not education. Education (a pitiful as it is) is collateral to the power of the unions.
How pathetic that so many sheep are so unsure of their own worth that they prefer 'collective' fights to prove their 'worth' rather than stand up for the value their individual ability. How many wonder if they've sold themselves short at the cost of rewarding the worthless?
Posted by: Ragnar Danneskjold on September 17, 2009 09:40 AMYou should follow the law when the law exists to protect peoples rights. You should disregard unjust laws that punish people that have not violated anyones rights.
The teachers as dumb as they were to strike did not violate anyones rights and should not have to break the law to not go to work. Fired... sure, break the law... no.
Posted by: Lysander on September 17, 2009 11:39 AMYou should follow the law when the law exists to protect peoples rights. You should disregard unjust laws that punish people that have not violated anyones rights.
The teachers as dumb as they were to strike did not violate anyones rights and should not have to break the law to not go to work. Fired... sure, break the law... no.
Posted by: Lysander on September 17, 2009 11:40 AMThe problem is that (a) the union had a contract where they promised not to strike, and (b) the union is a government monopoly.
Because of (a), the people have a right to damages for violating their contract, just like anybody would.
Because of (b), there is no free-market competition for the teacher's jobs. They have power over the people, because if they choose not to teach, teaching will not get done.
Posted by: Jonathan Gardner on September 17, 2009 12:48 PMThere is no good explanation that the teachers can give their students for violating the law. This is not of case of horrible working conditions or employee abuse where all other legal remedies have failed. It was "let's go on strike because we can". Fortunately Judge Darvas ruled according to law, not what a "wise" female would do.
Posted by: Burdabee on September 17, 2009 01:52 PMIn Washington state, by constitution, teacher strikes violate my son's right to an education. That makes him a victim of another's actions and that makes the law preventing WA teacher strikes just, even by your definition.
Now that the school districts are finally realizing they just need to pop a lawyer into court for a day, we'll see a lot fewer, much shorter strikes. (Have you noticed, the teacher unions never let the ruling get to the WA supreme court?)
My final thing: If teachers want to strike, change the law. But just like everyone else that strikes, they should lose a day's pay for every day they don't work. Right now, there are no finanical costs. All that happens is they shift the schedule. Good for the judge to impose fines.
Posted by: mykela on September 17, 2009 02:00 PMMykala:
We are not a nation of laws, we are nation with far too many laws. It is impossible to live without breaking multiple laws every day. You can try to obey them all. I and others chose to ignore them and live our lives by following a more simple rule the zero initiation of force rule.
"Investing in kids" has a different meaning to a private-school parent than when uttered by a teachers union hack; high time for vouchers & competition---now!
@ Jonathan Gardner (#8): By the time the teachers were striking, that contract had expired. The only thing they had was a letter of intent, and that didn't prohibit them from striking.
You can always put your kids in one of King County's private schools, of which there are 77 for Grades 9-12 and 246 for Grades PK-8 (http://tinyurl.com/nej6qn). I believe those schools are...oh...yes...competing against the public schools. Almost as if they constitute some sort of "free-market competition".
@ Burdabee (#9): That's neato, especially since people who were in the room said that at no point in time were the union officials worried about the fines actually being imposed, but that Vargas was worried about a no-confidence vote and Berrios was worried about this impacting his run for mayor.
Posted by: Bronson on September 18, 2009 10:01 AMLets return to a free market.
Posted by: Lysander on September 18, 2009 11:17 AMLets return to a free market.
Posted by: Lysander on September 18, 2009 11:18 AMLets return to a free market.
Posted by: Lysander on September 18, 2009 11:19 AMBy your reasoning, there is no free market in lending (government takeover of Fannie Mae/Freddie Mac), transportation (Amtrak, gov't airline subsidies - http://tinyurl.com/lu9c7x), automobile manufacturing (GM takeover), shipping (U.S. Postal Service), medical care (public hospitals such as Harborview, Medicare, Medicaid) or even housing (subsidized and/or free gov't housing). That's just scratching the surface.
One finds your standard leaves a lonely few "free markets" where the government does not offer competing products and services.
Posted by: Bronson on September 18, 2009 12:05 PMOnce that story got out, w/ Vargas and Berrios facing some heat of their own, the KSD Admins capitulated on something they have never before capitulated on in the history of the district.
Posted by: Bronson on September 18, 2009 02:53 PMThere is no free market in health care. That has led us to the health care problems we are having.
There is no free market in 1st class letter. In fact we have a government protected monopoly that is going bankrupt in that industry.
I could go on, but I think you are starting to see my point.
Posted by: Lysander on September 18, 2009 08:01 PMSpecifically what district does that?
I know teachers in Bellevue, Lake Washington and Renton and -all- of them see high class size as the single worst problem facing K-12 education (including teacher pay). As a tax payer I was astounded to hear that Kent had -no- size cap in elementary school. -My- 3rd grader certainly wouldn't be stuck in a classroom with 35 other kids, none should be. And anyone running up the administrative costs in that district should hear it.