The longer the teachers stay away from school and behave poorly, the less sympathy they will get from the people who they serve and who pay their salaries. They are public servants: they serve the public. I know they may not see it that way. I guess they see it as some sort of sinecure like that enjoyed by the ancienne regime in France before the revolution. Heads up baby! The revolution is coming, and the sinecures are going to be abolished. Not that I'm advocating the following view, but some people see the public school as their free daycare center. People whose kids can't go to school because the teachers are out with phony illnesses have to take time off from work to stay home with their kids or pay someone money out of their pockets unexpectedly. Are these people, who aren't sinecured themselves, going to be sympathetic under these circumstances? I think not.
I'm a person that reads between the lines. Often I can learn more about what defines the character and value of a person or an organization (unions) not by analyzing facts but observing their behavior. Abandonning their pupils, lieing about being out sick, making outrageous claims about how the sky is falling and we would all be working in sweatshops without adequate light 16 hours per day cheek-by-jowl with 8 year old workers but for the unions . . . these things tell me everything I need to know about these people and the unions. Nuff said. I understand them.
Frankly, my recollection of history is that a number of work environment reforms were initiated at a national level -- not imposed by unions collectively bargaining with companies one company at a time.
Last edited by Alsatian; 02-23-2011 at 12:45 PM.
|
