In the city’s funny math, you get only one teacher for the price of two.
The Department of Education pays about 1,500 teachers for time they spend on union activities — and pays other teachers to replace them in the classroom.
It’s a sweetheart deal that costs taxpayers an extra $9 million a year to pay fill-ins for instructors who are sprung — at full pay — to carry out responsibilities for the United Federation of Teachers.
With Mayor Bloomberg calling for thousands of teacher layoffs to balance the 2012 budget, critics say it’s time to halt the extravagant benefit.
That $9 million would cover the salaries of 198 new teachers at the current annual $45,530 starting pay
The DOE lets 40 experienced teachers collect top pay and fringe benefits, but work just one class period a day.
Under a longstanding contract agreement, the DOE excuses these veterans to work for the UFT — currently 38 as district representatives and two as union vice presidents. The UFT pays them another salary, plus expenses.
English teacher Tom Dromgoole, for instance, collects top teacher pay, $100,049 a year, from the DOE for his slot at Leadership and Public Service HS in downtown Manhattan. But he is relieved for most of the day to serve as a UFT high school rep. The UFT supplements his salary by $50,461, records show.
Dromgoole is outspoken on state budget cuts, which he blasted at a boisterous protest last March with UFT President Michael Mulgrew. Reached Friday outside his Brooklyn townhouse, Dromgoole brushed past a reporter who asked about his UFT work, saying, “No comment.”
Another veteran teacher said of the lucrative gigs, “It’s a plum because you’re not teaching. Some principals give them little or nothing to do” because the UFT reps are powerful. (NYP)
But don’t worry, it’s “for the children” and as Rep. Dick Durbin said, “a basic human right”. 🙂
Mike Tobin, Fox News: “One thing I think should make clear – the people coming after us from every live shot here, these people hate,” Tobin said. “These are people who don’t respect diverse viewpoints. In fact, they’re so afraid I’ll present a diverse viewpoint, that’s why they try to heckle me and shut down every live shot. They’ve made it clear, that what they want to make it harder for me to do my job. They are proud of that when they disrupt a live shot, when they really trample over the First Amendment rights or the First Amendment’s obligations of a reporter. Now, I am not saying that’s all of the people. Those are the people that come here and heckle and try to disrupt things. I look in their eyes – there is hate in their eyes. They don’t want to hear any kind of viewpoint that is different from their own. That’s why they do what they do.”
Then the protesters attacked him (but he didn’t file any assault charges).
These are the people who allege that they are for “free speech” and “civility”.
Let me reiterate my version of the Liberal First Amendment:
Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of Any religion,and mocking the free exercise thereof but forgive anything to do with Islam; or abridging the freedom of LIBERAL PROGRESSIVE speech, or of the LIBERAL PROGRESSIVE press; and abridging as much as possible anyone who disagrees with the Liberal Progressives;or the right of the people to peaceably (or not) to assemble to worship the LIBERAL PROGRESSIVES, any assembly in opposition must therefore be “terrorism” or “racism”, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances against Corporations and to seek “social justice” at all costs; any redress of grievances against a Liberal are automatically not to be taken seriously and must be discounted,discredited,destroyed or ignored.
See this (from Reason TV): http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=je3UT7ol1JY&feature=player_embedded
At times they state this openly. A Service Employees International Union (SEIU) representative told California legislators that “We helped to get you into office, and we got a good memory. And come November, if you don’t back our program, we’ll help get you out of office.”
Institutional collective bargaining was a policy decision made by state and local governments. Labor unions had traditionally opposed collective bargaining in government. During the 1950s, private-sector union membership peaked and began to decline. The union movement then came to see government employees as valuable new dues-paying members. It reversed its stance on government bargaining in the late 1950s. Beginning with New York City in 1958 and Wisconsin in 1959, many state and local governments across the country began to bargain collectively, largely as a result of union pressure.(Heritage.org)
In the early 1990’s: the California Teachers Association reached new heights of thuggishness after a business-backed group began a petition to place a school-choice initiative on the state ballot. In a union-backed effort, teachers shadowed signature gatherers in shopping malls and aggressively dissuaded people from signing up. The tactic led to more than 40 confrontations and protests of harassment by signature gatherers. “They get in between the signer and the petition,” the head of the initiative said. “They scream at people. They threaten people.” CTA’s top official later justified the bullying: some ideas “are so evil that they should never even be presented to the voters,” he said. (City-Journal)
Now, their drug habit (free taxpayer money) is being threatened so they are all up-in-arms to protect their addiction.
Government-employee unions now spend more than any other outside group on U.S. elections.
And that’s taxpayer money, remember. Government has no money until it takes it from you. And Unions take money from their mandatory membership, which is also you the taxpayer.
No wonder the liberals are so mad. The drug addicts are facing a forced intervention and massive delirium tremons (DTs).
It’s like trying to sober up a drunk after they’ve been chronically drunk (on taxpayers money) for 53 years.
They will kick and scream and yell and whine and be in denial. Sounds like the protesters to me.
- Irritability or easily excited
- Emotional volatility, rapid emotional changes
- Difficulty with thinking clearly