whats_happening_qr.jpg

events_sidebar_calendar_header.gif




community_header.jpg
visitors_guide.jpg
annual_manual.jpg
best_of_athens_1.jpg
lodging_guide.jpg
bridal_guide_1.jpg
announcements_1.jpg

SoA_Anews_ad.jpg

 

 

 

 

 

 

 
Home / Articles / Editorial / Wearing Thin /  If you think S.B. 5 will just affect unions, you’re crazy
. . . . . . .
Thursday, March 10,2011

If you think S.B. 5 will just affect unions, you’re crazy

By Terry Smith
It’s gratifying to see all the support that union opponents of Ohio Senate Bill 5 have been receiving in their fight against this transparent union-busting bill.

It’s not just members of the public-sector unions who are fighting it, but a broad cross-section of Ohioans who see “collective-bargaining reform,” as it’s euphemistically called, for what it actually is – a blatant effort to cripple one of the last bastions of labor power in Ohio.

Make no mistake, one can be alarmed about this legislation, even while agreeing that in some respects, public-sector unions have benefited from too many sweetheart deals at the expense of taxpayers.

Just like anyone else who toils at a non-union private-sector job, I’ve always thought it unfair that state workers could accumulate sick and vacation time through the years, and then get a huge cash windfall upon retirement.

My reaction to crazy-good benefits for unionized state employees has generally been one of envy rather than resentment, however. It’s “more power to them if they can swing a deal like that!” rather than, “Hey, you dirty rotten SOBs, that’s not fair!”

Granted, a little deeper thought on the topic would have led me to conclude, “By God! these folks are benefiting from my tax dime.”

The point is that Gov. John Kasich and his legislative Republicans could have addressed those issues, along with greater employee contributions to benefits, merit-pay reforms and other worthy provisions, without striking directly at the heart of their ability to function as unions. Did they really need to eliminate the ability to strike, turn binding arbitration into a charade weighted heavily in the government’s favor, and in general, destroy public-employee unions’ ability to leverage concessions from management?

Instead, their fundamental hostility to unions – especially those representing government workers — betrayed itself in any number of provisions whose main effect — and I would presume goal — is to cripple the public-sector unions, and indirectly hurt the Democratic politicians who benefit from their largesse.

This is why S.B. 5 involves much more than the benefits and wages of your neighbor who works on the police department, teaches at the local school, or has a job with the city street department.

If passed in the Ohio House and signed by the governor, S.B. 5 will have the indirect consequence of sucker-punching not just Ohio Democrats, but all of the moderate independents who have been driven out of the Rush Limbaugh/Sarah Palin Republican Party over the past five years.

If you support mainstream and/or moderate positions on public and higher education, health care, environmental regulation, the economy, social issues, gun rights, and any number of other areas, then you can’t support legislation that will enhance the power of a Republican Party that’s increasingly controlled by its wing-nut fringe.

Do you really want to hand the keys of government to people who think nothing of painting schoolteachers as money-grubbing fat-cats, but who weep at the thought of asking a millionaire to pay an extra percentage point in taxes?

Or who won’t acknowledge that reckless state tax cuts approved several years ago not only didn’t help the economy but are directly responsible for at least half of Ohio’s current $8 billion budget shortfall?

Or who don’t think twice about raising the specter of communism when talking about unions?

Here’s a little taste of the sort of insanity that’s fueling the union-busting campaigns across the country these days:

That is the real issue here. AFSCME and their D.S.A. (Democratic Socialists of America) comrades understand that this is a 'class' battle, a 'struggle' to advance socialism. They understand that the winner of this battle gets to decide America's future.

“While very few of the firemen and teachers putting their bodies on the line for AFSCME would realize this, they are merely pawns in their leadership's Marxist agenda.” — a conservative New Zealand (!) blog that’s being widely circulated by right-wing bloggers in this country.

If you think about politics in broad terms, with every policy debate a battle in a larger war, then you should think of Senate Bill 5 as Gettysburg. And when it passes, that will place you solidly on the losing side if you’re afraid of the political right consolidating its power in Ohio. And don’t think they’ll stop with just that one battle.

 

  • Currently 3.5/5 Stars.
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
REPLY TO THIS COMMENT

Oblivious to many, Ohio does not have a tenure system for K-12 teachers. They have a contract system along with ten other states. If a teacher performs poorly, their contract is not renewed. My wife has been a school teacher for over 17 years. She does NOT get a free ride. She spends a lot of her OWN money on her children because the school either won't, or doesn't have the funding and she does not have insurance that is free. If she doesn't do her job, she gets canned like anybody else.

 

 

REPLY TO THIS COMMENT

Well earlbob, get a clue. Ohio does have a tenure system it's called continuing contracts that until last year teachers were eligble for after only 3 years if they met certain provisions then for the next 27-32 years it would take a miracle and somtimes hundreds of thousands of dollars to fire a bad teacher and no way can you fire a below avarage teacher if they show the slightest bit of improvement. This is BECAUSE of the union. Get a clue.

 

REPLY TO THIS COMMENT

Boomer,

You seem to think that teachers should be fired for being "below average."  Really?  Do you have any idea what percentage of teachers are below average?  Clue: You can answer that with a very specific number.

Some teachers certainly do need to be fired, but relatively few.  Where teachers are not fired, the problem can almost always be located in the administration, who fail to establish a proud, coherent, effective identity for the school and who refuse to go through the emotionally difficult and tedious task of documenting the problems and getting the teacher removed.

Without the protections you criticize, the finest teachers would be subject to firing at the whim of principals who don't like to be challenged by passionate and intelligent people. In fact, passionate and intelligent people wouldn't enter the field in the first place if they thought they could be fired by the first lazy, authoritarian principal who came along.

 

 

REPLY TO THIS COMMENT

Also, with a shift to merit assessment of teachers, it will be difficult to separate the poor teachers from the teachers who are charged with teaching poor students, and I mean poor in both main definitions of the word. The students that get funneled into public schools have already been subsantially shaped by their home situations. In many cases, these kids come from poor, single-parent households where reading and at-home education often doesn't happen to any significant degree. So teachers who are asked to teach these kids, including many in depressed parts of Athens Couunty, have an infinitely more challenging job than teachers in, say, your typical suburban school district in Columbus. Should their work be measured by the same standards? I don't think so.

 

REPLY TO THIS COMMENT

"Merit assessment" of teachers opens up a whole new world of unfairness. 

What about the incompetent principal or dean or school VP who holds grudges over being continually proven wrong, and now has the power to do something about it?

You've heard of the term "teacher's pet", I am sure...  Well, get ready for "principal's pet", "dean's pet", and "VP's pet", etc...

You think you just got rid of incompetent teachers, but all you did was open the door for favoritism.

 

 

 

 

 
 
Close
Close
Close