WTU rallies for new contract

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:They are absolutely evil to be threatening to strike.

Could you provide some examples of other ways you would like them to advocate for a new contract?

Pretty much any way except that? But sure, you can keep on asserting that teacher’s unions can do whatever they want to advance their interests, and that the interests of children are irrelevant to the union. And if you say that, I will assert that the union is evil because they are using their power to hurt children. Even the threat of hurting children is unconscionable. The sad part is, most DC parents would actually support teachers getting a good contract - but when you make clear you don’t GAF about hurting kids, you lose your natural allies.

Ok, can you elaborate? If your employer is unwilling to negotiate in good faith and just wants to give you a little money instead of better working conditions what would you do? The option is wait until Bowser is no longer mayor?
I’m seriously asking.

[Anonymous]

All teacher's unions have enormous power now with teachers quitting, retiring, etc. I suspect a deal will get done fairly quickly. One side has all the leverage and it's not even close.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I am new to DCPS (first year was last year) so new this particular issue. Has Bowser not been willing to sit at the table because their demands have been un-meetable?

This is how contract negotiations have happened for years. Contract expires, lots of negotiation but no one actually knows what the demands are because it’s all behind closed doors, eventually a contract is agreed to with not much change except a pay increase and teachers get back pay for the years the contract was expired.

Thank you. It's hard to rally support (at least for me) when we don't know what they're fighting for. I find it hard to believe that if they are making reasonable demands that Bowser would just ignore them, but again I'm new so....

This is my 4th year in DCPS so it’s not like I’ve been here forever but I’m not sure how you can be so naive? You must work in a non title 1 school. Teachers in the very general sense love what we do and just want to feel respected, valuable, and have enough resources to teach ALL of our students. And by resources I do not mean paper and pencils, I mean social workers, paraprofessionals, etc. And better building conditions.

Of course we also want an evaluation system that is not punitive, this is coming from an HE teacher.

I suggest you do research past covid 19 as well. Money is nice of course, I can’t lie. But I think and hope we are past just accepting money for ourselves and nothing that is going to actually attract and KEEP excellent teachers.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It’s unconscionable that they don’t have a contract after 3 years. Bowser needs to sit down and get this done before august.

I don’t think WTU was trying to negotiate for a contract during covid - why would they have wanted to? this is a lie.

The union did, in fact, negotiate through the pandemic. When the pandemic started, DCPS asserted that they would not negotiate during the public health emergency. The union had to sue DCPS, and the public employee relations board ordered DCPS to resume bargaining. This was summer, 2020, I believe.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:All teacher's unions have enormous power now with teachers quitting, retiring, etc. I suspect a deal will get done fairly quickly. One side has all the leverage and it's not even close.

Then why no contract after over 3 years? If they have ‘enormous’ power.

Please, I encourage you to stop spreading misinformation. It only hurts us and ultimately the kids pay the price as they have been. And yes, covid was a part of that and the learning loss. I volunteered to go back in Jan 2021 but even still I understand the hurt parents feel for their babies’ loss.

But we can only move forward and we (teachers) need a better evaluation system, title 1 schools especially need more resources, we need to figure out how we can stop chronic absences and tardies, and yes teachers do need a raise. I know we are paid ‘well’ but I want to continue living in DC, I support better wages for literally almost everyone.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:They are absolutely evil to be threatening to strike.

Could you provide some examples of other ways you would like them to advocate for a new contract?

Pretty much any way except that? But sure, you can keep on asserting that teacher’s unions can do whatever they want to advance their interests, and that the interests of children are irrelevant to the union. And if you say that, I will assert that the union is evil because they are using their power to hurt children. Even the threat of hurting children is unconscionable. The sad part is, most DC parents would actually support teachers getting a good contract - but when you make clear you don’t GAF about hurting kids, you lose your natural allies.

Would you mind building on your first sentence? What are some other ways?

NP but teachers could work to the contract:
Only at school during contracted hours (no after school extra help, club meetings, etc.)
Only cover classes under the contractual way (I don’t remember what it is but there’s something where you don’t have to give up your planning every day for class coverage)
Don’t write any college recommendation or scholarship recommendation letters because it’s not in the contract (HS mostly, and this one most teachers won’t actually do but it’s effective)

The problem is that all of these things would hurt kids too. Working to the rule would get some parents what they wanted, for sure, but it would most definitely hurt kids. Lessons wouldn't be planned, and certainly not planned well. Bowser knows this. She has all the leverage because the bulk of UMC white parents would balk at any attempt by teachers to push back.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:They are absolutely evil to be threatening to strike.

Could you provide some examples of other ways you would like them to advocate for a new contract?

Pretty much any way except that? But sure, you can keep on asserting that teacher’s unions can do whatever they want to advance their interests, and that the interests of children are irrelevant to the union. And if you say that, I will assert that the union is evil because they are using their power to hurt children. Even the threat of hurting children is unconscionable. The sad part is, most DC parents would actually support teachers getting a good contract - but when you make clear you don’t GAF about hurting kids, you lose your natural allies.

Would you mind building on your first sentence? What are some other ways?

NP but teachers could work to the contract:
Only at school during contracted hours (no after school extra help, club meetings, etc.)
Only cover classes under the contractual way (I don’t remember what it is but there’s something where you don’t have to give up your planning every day for class coverage)
Don’t write any college recommendation or scholarship recommendation letters because it’s not in the contract (HS mostly, and this one most teachers won’t actually do but it’s effective)

These are all really good ideas! However I’m looking at the first two and I don’t see how they would work practically. A lot of teachers are afraid to defy their admin or ruin a positive working relationship by refusing to cover.

And honestly for the first one; teaching is so much harder if you don’t have your materials prepped, and that typically gets done outside of contract hours. We’d be making our lives worse. I totally get what your saying but I think it works better in theory than in practice

Are you worried that all teachers working to contract would somehow be worse for admin relations than a general strike?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:They are absolutely evil to be threatening to strike.

Could you provide some examples of other ways you would like them to advocate for a new contract?

Pretty much any way except that? But sure, you can keep on asserting that teacher’s unions can do whatever they want to advance their interests, and that the interests of children are irrelevant to the union. And if you say that, I will assert that the union is evil because they are using their power to hurt children. Even the threat of hurting children is unconscionable. The sad part is, most DC parents would actually support teachers getting a good contract - but when you make clear you don’t GAF about hurting kids, you lose your natural allies.

Would you mind building on your first sentence? What are some other ways?

NP but teachers could work to the contract:
Only at school during contracted hours (no after school extra help, club meetings, etc.)
Only cover classes under the contractual way (I don’t remember what it is but there’s something where you don’t have to give up your planning every day for class coverage)
Don’t write any college recommendation or scholarship recommendation letters because it’s not in the contract (HS mostly, and this one most teachers won’t actually do but it’s effective)

These are all really good ideas! However I’m looking at the first two and I don’t see how they would work practically. A lot of teachers are afraid to defy their admin or ruin a positive working relationship by refusing to cover.

And honestly for the first one; teaching is so much harder if you don’t have your materials prepped, and that typically gets done outside of contract hours. We’d be making our lives worse. I totally get what your saying but I think it works better in theory than in practice

Are you worried that all teachers working to contract would somehow be worse for admin relations than a general strike?

Yes.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:They are absolutely evil to be threatening to strike.

Could you provide some examples of other ways you would like them to advocate for a new contract?

Pretty much any way except that? But sure, you can keep on asserting that teacher’s unions can do whatever they want to advance their interests, and that the interests of children are irrelevant to the union. And if you say that, I will assert that the union is evil because they are using their power to hurt children. Even the threat of hurting children is unconscionable. The sad part is, most DC parents would actually support teachers getting a good contract - but when you make clear you don’t GAF about hurting kids, you lose your natural allies.

Would you mind building on your first sentence? What are some other ways?

NP but teachers could work to the contract:
Only at school during contracted hours (no after school extra help, club meetings, etc.)
Only cover classes under the contractual way (I don’t remember what it is but there’s something where you don’t have to give up your planning every day for class coverage)
Don’t write any college recommendation or scholarship recommendation letters because it’s not in the contract (HS mostly, and this one most teachers won’t actually do but it’s effective)

The problem is that all of these things would hurt kids too. Working to the rule would get some parents what they wanted, for sure, but it would most definitely hurt kids. Lessons wouldn't be planned, and certainly not planned well. Bowser knows this. She has all the leverage because the bulk of UMC white parents would balk at any attempt by teachers to push back.

Strikes are meant to hurt management, not the vulnerable. It's not a good look to hurt kids because of your beef with management. The WTU is completely awful at strategy here. You DO want a sympathetic public when you're negotiating in a political space. This is why it is illegal for teachers to strike. What could they do? Stop fulfilling administrative requirements--stop taking formal attendance, stop administering mandated tests, stop data gathering, stop performing any (non-safety related) reporting to admin. All of this while continuing to hold high standards for education in the classroom--in fact educational quality may improve when teachers don't have to waste time on these sorts of things. However, admin depends on this kind of information to meet funding and reporting requirements.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I am new to DCPS (first year was last year) so new this particular issue. Has Bowser not been willing to sit at the table because their demands have been un-meetable?

This is how contract negotiations have happened for years. Contract expires, lots of negotiation but no one actually knows what the demands are because it’s all behind closed doors, eventually a contract is agreed to with not much change except a pay increase and teachers get back pay for the years the contract was expired.

Thank you. It's hard to rally support (at least for me) when we don't know what they're fighting for. I find it hard to believe that if they are making reasonable demands that Bowser would just ignore them, but again I'm new so....

You’re new so you have no idea. Yes Bowser will ignore reasonable demands. Reasonable in itself is subjective as it stands. Are you new to education, or just new to DCPS? I’ve worked in three school systems and this is the only district that consistently lets contracts expire for years. This is not normal.

I’d love to know how the non educators on this board would feel if their employer refused to give them a “reasonable” contract.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:They are absolutely evil to be threatening to strike.

Could you provide some examples of other ways you would like them to advocate for a new contract?

Pretty much any way except that? But sure, you can keep on asserting that teacher’s unions can do whatever they want to advance their interests, and that the interests of children are irrelevant to the union. And if you say that, I will assert that the union is evil because they are using their power to hurt children. Even the threat of hurting children is unconscionable. The sad part is, most DC parents would actually support teachers getting a good contract - but when you make clear you don’t GAF about hurting kids, you lose your natural allies.

Would you mind building on your first sentence? What are some other ways?

NP but teachers could work to the contract:
Only at school during contracted hours (no after school extra help, club meetings, etc.)
Only cover classes under the contractual way (I don’t remember what it is but there’s something where you don’t have to give up your planning every day for class coverage)
Don’t write any college recommendation or scholarship recommendation letters because it’s not in the contract (HS mostly, and this one most teachers won’t actually do but it’s effective)

These are all really good ideas! However I’m looking at the first two and I don’t see how they would work practically. A lot of teachers are afraid to defy their admin or ruin a positive working relationship by refusing to cover.

And honestly for the first one; teaching is so much harder if you don’t have your materials prepped, and that typically gets done outside of contract hours. We’d be making our lives worse. I totally get what your saying but I think it works better in theory than in practice

Are you worried that all teachers working to contract would somehow be worse for admin relations than a general strike?

Yes.

That doesn't make any sense.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:They are absolutely evil to be threatening to strike.

Could you provide some examples of other ways you would like them to advocate for a new contract?

Pretty much any way except that? But sure, you can keep on asserting that teacher’s unions can do whatever they want to advance their interests, and that the interests of children are irrelevant to the union. And if you say that, I will assert that the union is evil because they are using their power to hurt children. Even the threat of hurting children is unconscionable. The sad part is, most DC parents would actually support teachers getting a good contract - but when you make clear you don’t GAF about hurting kids, you lose your natural allies.

Would you mind building on your first sentence? What are some other ways?

NP but teachers could work to the contract:
Only at school during contracted hours (no after school extra help, club meetings, etc.)
Only cover classes under the contractual way (I don’t remember what it is but there’s something where you don’t have to give up your planning every day for class coverage)
Don’t write any college recommendation or scholarship recommendation letters because it’s not in the contract (HS mostly, and this one most teachers won’t actually do but it’s effective)

Guess what? Teachers aren’t going to strike. You know it, and so do we. Also, your ideas are great. If I did any of them my Impact rating would be abysmally low. That’s right, part of our evaluation is based on what we do outside of our contracted requirements. How fair is that?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:They are absolutely evil to be threatening to strike.

Could you provide some examples of other ways you would like them to advocate for a new contract?

Pretty much any way except that? But sure, you can keep on asserting that teacher’s unions can do whatever they want to advance their interests, and that the interests of children are irrelevant to the union. And if you say that, I will assert that the union is evil because they are using their power to hurt children. Even the threat of hurting children is unconscionable. The sad part is, most DC parents would actually support teachers getting a good contract - but when you make clear you don’t GAF about hurting kids, you lose your natural allies.

Would you mind building on your first sentence? What are some other ways?

I don’t really care. If WTU believes its only tactic is to threaten school closure on the heels of the disastrous covid closure, then WTU is a broken, amoral organization and should be dealt with accordingly.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:They are absolutely evil to be threatening to strike.

Could you provide some examples of other ways you would like them to advocate for a new contract?

Pretty much any way except that? But sure, you can keep on asserting that teacher’s unions can do whatever they want to advance their interests, and that the interests of children are irrelevant to the union. And if you say that, I will assert that the union is evil because they are using their power to hurt children. Even the threat of hurting children is unconscionable. The sad part is, most DC parents would actually support teachers getting a good contract - but when you make clear you don’t GAF about hurting kids, you lose your natural allies.

Would you mind building on your first sentence? What are some other ways?

NP but teachers could work to the contract:
Only at school during contracted hours (no after school extra help, club meetings, etc.)
Only cover classes under the contractual way (I don’t remember what it is but there’s something where you don’t have to give up your planning every day for class coverage)
Don’t write any college recommendation or scholarship recommendation letters because it’s not in the contract (HS mostly, and this one most teachers won’t actually do but it’s effective)

The problem is that all of these things would hurt kids too. Working to the rule would get some parents what they wanted, for sure, but it would most definitely hurt kids. Lessons wouldn't be planned, and certainly not planned well. Bowser knows this. She has all the leverage because the bulk of UMC white parents would balk at any attempt by teachers to push back.

Strikes are meant to hurt management, not the vulnerable. It's not a good look to hurt kids because of your beef with management. The WTU is completely awful at strategy here. You DO want a sympathetic public when you're negotiating in a political space. This is why it is illegal for teachers to strike. What could they do? Stop fulfilling administrative requirements--stop taking formal attendance, stop administering mandated tests, stop data gathering, stop performing any (non-safety related) reporting to admin. All of this while continuing to hold high standards for education in the classroom--in fact educational quality may improve when teachers don't have to waste time on these sorts of things. However, admin depends on this kind of information to meet funding and reporting requirements.

^^ +1 This one unions.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:They are absolutely evil to be threatening to strike.

Could you provide some examples of other ways you would like them to advocate for a new contract?

Pretty much any way except that? But sure, you can keep on asserting that teacher’s unions can do whatever they want to advance their interests, and that the interests of children are irrelevant to the union. And if you say that, I will assert that the union is evil because they are using their power to hurt children. Even the threat of hurting children is unconscionable. The sad part is, most DC parents would actually support teachers getting a good contract - but when you make clear you don’t GAF about hurting kids, you lose your natural allies.

Would you mind building on your first sentence? What are some other ways?

NP but teachers could work to the contract:
Only at school during contracted hours (no after school extra help, club meetings, etc.)
Only cover classes under the contractual way (I don’t remember what it is but there’s something where you don’t have to give up your planning every day for class coverage)
Don’t write any college recommendation or scholarship recommendation letters because it’s not in the contract (HS mostly, and this one most teachers won’t actually do but it’s effective)

These are all really good ideas! However I’m looking at the first two and I don’t see how they would work practically. A lot of teachers are afraid to defy their admin or ruin a positive working relationship by refusing to cover.

And honestly for the first one; teaching is so much harder if you don’t have your materials prepped, and that typically gets done outside of contract hours. We’d be making our lives worse. I totally get what your saying but I think it works better in theory than in practice

so you think hurting kids by closing schools is preferable because the other tactics are “too hard” and “too scary” for teachers. got it!