Parents: Would you support a teacher strike if it means there is no DL?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Fascinating. Do union people not realize that your actions are interpretable by others with experience? You are blaming others for commenting on their interpretation of your actions, like what you are doing is some secret? Man oh jeez you guys are bad at negotiating.

A former union president of the WTU- I assume I think it’s inappropriate.
You are not involved in the union and don’t need to know any inner workings, you just need to know teachers do not feel safe, valuable, or appreciated.

Especially when some IPL is just CARES 2.0 or there’s only 2 freaking students showing up!

You assume that you think? Weird phrasing but ok.

Again, people get to look at the union’s actions and comment. It’s odd that the union seems to think people who have a stake in their decisions are creating a problem by discussing those actions. Take responsibility for your actions and communication. Hate to tell you this if this is not known to you. but the public is now involved in the union’s workings. Bc the union impacts so much more than just the union members.

Eh, I made a mistake in the phrasing.
You never cared before and you still don’t care now. It’s unlikely your kid will die or get very ill so I understand why your only issue is your child. However by that same token I think it shouldn’t be surprising teachers are now thinking af themselves first and don’t want your opinion about our safety.

My problem is not with parents it’s with DCPS. I’m perfectly willing to teach in person once my school’s issues are fixed. I’d also prefer full vaccination. My friend in CA was FULLY vaccinated weeks ago.

I care about the union now, but no I didn’t before. That’s bc the union didn’t impact my life before and it does now. Um...did I have to come out of the womb caring about the WTU for it to matter? The argument is specious.

But you’ve deflected the of conversation from “don’t discuss the union’s actions publicly!” to “you don’t care about teacher safety.” I mean, at this stage it’s just a tired ploy. But for funnies I’ll play along for a moment: I’m happy that you say you will teach when fully vaccinated. The WTU’s own communication suggests they think teacher vaccination is not enough. I would agree that in the present that other mitigation factors are necessary.....it would be pleasant for the WTU to state AND THEN STICK TO what actions will provide them with a level of non-zero risk they can work with. Instead, as in the case of the last arbitration, they say that they aren’t happy with the MOU that they signed. So I have no faith that they will ever be satisfied, and will go on threatening a strike.

+1. And parents will discuss whatever we want, and we don't need union approval to do so.

Dumb*** you misunderstood the comment. No one said you couldn’t.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Fascinating. Do union people not realize that your actions are interpretable by others with experience? You are blaming others for commenting on their interpretation of your actions, like what you are doing is some secret? Man oh jeez you guys are bad at negotiating.

A former union president of the WTU- I assume I think it’s inappropriate.
You are not involved in the union and don’t need to know any inner workings, you just need to know teachers do not feel safe, valuable, or appreciated.

Especially when some IPL is just CARES 2.0 or there’s only 2 freaking students showing up!

You assume that you think? Weird phrasing but ok.

Again, people get to look at the union’s actions and comment. It’s odd that the union seems to think people who have a stake in their decisions are creating a problem by discussing those actions. Take responsibility for your actions and communication. Hate to tell you this if this is not known to you. but the public is now involved in the union’s workings. Bc the union impacts so much more than just the union members.

Eh, I made a mistake in the phrasing.
You never cared before and you still don’t care now. It’s unlikely your kid will die or get very ill so I understand why your only issue is your child. However by that same token I think it shouldn’t be surprising teachers are now thinking af themselves first and don’t want your opinion about our safety.

My problem is not with parents it’s with DCPS. I’m perfectly willing to teach in person once my school’s issues are fixed. I’d also prefer full vaccination. My friend in CA was FULLY vaccinated weeks ago.

I care about the union now, but no I didn’t before. That’s bc the union didn’t impact my life before and it does now. Um...did I have to come out of the womb caring about the WTU for it to matter? The argument is specious.

But you’ve deflected the of conversation from “don’t discuss the union’s actions publicly!” to “you don’t care about teacher safety.” I mean, at this stage it’s just a tired ploy. But for funnies I’ll play along for a moment: I’m happy that you say you will teach when fully vaccinated. The WTU’s own communication suggests they think teacher vaccination is not enough. I would agree that in the present that other mitigation factors are necessary.....it would be pleasant for the WTU to state AND THEN STICK TO what actions will provide them with a level of non-zero risk they can work with. Instead, as in the case of the last arbitration, they say that they aren’t happy with the MOU that they signed. So I have no faith that they will ever be satisfied, and will go on threatening a strike.

You should come out of the womb caring for human life, yea.

And I didn’t say you couldn’t talk about the union, you misunderstood. I said the ‘former union president.’

I can’t answer that, I can only say what teachers have discussed as a group and what has been discussed has not always been reflected by union leadership. The point is teachers still don’t feel safe and even if they do teach in person I promise people who hold distrust, bitterness, or fear in their hearts will not be a good or as good a teacher.

Oh please. Conflating the WTU and human life is just histrionic. Calm down.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:PP, former union leader here:

So, this is obviously bad. First, there's a clear solidarity problem within the union, where you do have union members saying they don't support what their union is doing, posting internal emails here, etc. That doesn't bode well for collective action, especially a strike which will leave each member legally vulnerable. The WTU membership would have to be VERY serious and VERY committed in order to pull off a strike, but it seems like they're not. This suggests to me that if we're aware of it, management is aware of it. This is why management is pre-emptively invoking the courts--to remind members of their potential legal peril.

Now, we have all seen clear communication from the WTU about a vague threat of a strike. This was a bad move for a couple of reasons. They've tipped their hand and allowed management to prepare ahead of time AND by saying they're calling for a vote, they're indicating that they don't know if the whole membership is on board.

You do not ever want management to realize that you don't have enough people on board to strike meaningfully. This is basically your main union power, and once its gone, your union is toothless.

They went into this completely frivolously. It's appalling strategy. There are basically two outcomes: they demonstrate that they can't/aren't willing to strike, reducing the power of the WTU immensely or they do strike and put themselves in extreme legal peril, which could cause enough damage to destroy the union.

The best thing they could do right now is to stop talking about it and act like they never said anything.

Your outside analysis is pretty good. I've been watching this from the inside shocked at how it played out - one major flaw in this case (no secret here, dots are easily connected) is how much she relied on external forces, city council for one, to act on behalf of the union.All talk amounting to no action. Lots of wasted time with the council. Also creating the narrative of "safe" and making assumptions on behalf of parents/guardians, etc really early on and never considering pivoting and/or changing the messaging based on listening to the community rather than telling them what to think.

Notifying the union membership at large what the implications of a strike are, at this point, is a dereliction of duty when it could have been messaged months ago. This was never going to end well.

Yes, whoever created the "only when safe" talking point should be flogged. It means everything and nothing at once. Some on here seem to define "only when safe" to mean "no risk" which is absurd. I can no longer hear people use this phrase without rolling my eyes.

Like they could have fired almost 5,000 people

Do those 5,000 people want to lose their salaries, health insurance and years built toward (but not yet achieved) retirement? Do they really want to play chicken with their careers, particularly those who are eyeing administration as their next step? There would have been many teachers who would not have participated in the strike because, guess what, they don't agree with it. The union did a piss poor job. My child's teacher has done an amazing job.

Teachers have no retirement plan in DC. Just another slap in the face.

Guess what out of those 5k at least half would have participated and that’s enough. No one wants to risk their life. I just started IPL and already there’s 2 positive cases!! It doesn’t make me feel safe to now have to quarantine and wait for my test. It doesn’t make my wonderful kids and families feel safe either. I had quite a few parents message me because their child was riddled with anxiety asking their parents if they could FaceTime me to make sure I’m ok.

So yea teachers are amazing and no one treats us like it. It’s not just about money or benefits it’s about being respected and seen as humans, not just an expendable teaching machine. I came back because I don’t view your children as just a student, I try to give them as much love, care, and nurturing as possible.

But now I’m a bad person because DCPS hasn’t shown me it’s safe. They’ve shown me they don’t care about anything except green and that’s a stark reality check.

So the takeaways are :

- as a teacher you don’t understand something as simple as the basics of the spread of Covid
- you were very concerned for your safety - but didn’t take a few minutes to educate yourself about Covid basics
- it is safe - science and medicine both say this - but you as a teacher think both are wrong and dismiss them
- the two positive tests after one day in the classroom were not the result of an in school transmission
- parents have encouraged hysterics and done a bad job helping children - they should not be worried about you to the point they are
- I hope you made this story up for drama - otherwise it makes my already dim view of teachers even worse

Ok Karen. Of course you hate teachers who here are majority Black. Takeaway whatever you like, we no longer care what you rich whites think

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Fascinating. Do union people not realize that your actions are interpretable by others with experience? You are blaming others for commenting on their interpretation of your actions, like what you are doing is some secret? Man oh jeez you guys are bad at negotiating.

A former union president of the WTU- I assume I think it’s inappropriate.
You are not involved in the union and don’t need to know any inner workings, you just need to know teachers do not feel safe, valuable, or appreciated.

Especially when some IPL is just CARES 2.0 or there’s only 2 freaking students showing up!

You assume that you think? Weird phrasing but ok.

Again, people get to look at the union’s actions and comment. It’s odd that the union seems to think people who have a stake in their decisions are creating a problem by discussing those actions. Take responsibility for your actions and communication. Hate to tell you this if this is not known to you. but the public is now involved in the union’s workings. Bc the union impacts so much more than just the union members.

Eh, I made a mistake in the phrasing.
You never cared before and you still don’t care now. It’s unlikely your kid will die or get very ill so I understand why your only issue is your child. However by that same token I think it shouldn’t be surprising teachers are now thinking af themselves first and don’t want your opinion about our safety.

My problem is not with parents it’s with DCPS. I’m perfectly willing to teach in person once my school’s issues are fixed. I’d also prefer full vaccination. My friend in CA was FULLY vaccinated weeks ago.

I care about the union now, but no I didn’t before. That’s bc the union didn’t impact my life before and it does now. Um...did I have to come out of the womb caring about the WTU for it to matter? The argument is specious.

But you’ve deflected the of conversation from “don’t discuss the union’s actions publicly!” to “you don’t care about teacher safety.” I mean, at this stage it’s just a tired ploy. But for funnies I’ll play along for a moment: I’m happy that you say you will teach when fully vaccinated. The WTU’s own communication suggests they think teacher vaccination is not enough. I would agree that in the present that other mitigation factors are necessary.....it would be pleasant for the WTU to state AND THEN STICK TO what actions will provide them with a level of non-zero risk they can work with. Instead, as in the case of the last arbitration, they say that they aren’t happy with the MOU that they signed. So I have no faith that they will ever be satisfied, and will go on threatening a strike.

You should come out of the womb caring for human life, yea.

And I didn’t say you couldn’t talk about the union, you misunderstood. I said the ‘former union president.’

I can’t answer that, I can only say what teachers have discussed as a group and what has been discussed has not always been reflected by union leadership. The point is teachers still don’t feel safe and even if they do teach in person I promise people who hold distrust, bitterness, or fear in their hearts will not be a good or as good a teacher.

Oh please. Conflating the WTU and human life is just histrionic. Calm down.

Ok, next time you say you’re kid is having trauma from having class on a computer screen I’ll think of this. Next time your kid has a traumatic moment I’ll remember not to care about what you or your family is going through. Thanks.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:PP, former union leader here:

So, this is obviously bad. First, there's a clear solidarity problem within the union, where you do have union members saying they don't support what their union is doing, posting internal emails here, etc. That doesn't bode well for collective action, especially a strike which will leave each member legally vulnerable. The WTU membership would have to be VERY serious and VERY committed in order to pull off a strike, but it seems like they're not. This suggests to me that if we're aware of it, management is aware of it. This is why management is pre-emptively invoking the courts--to remind members of their potential legal peril.

Now, we have all seen clear communication from the WTU about a vague threat of a strike. This was a bad move for a couple of reasons. They've tipped their hand and allowed management to prepare ahead of time AND by saying they're calling for a vote, they're indicating that they don't know if the whole membership is on board.

You do not ever want management to realize that you don't have enough people on board to strike meaningfully. This is basically your main union power, and once its gone, your union is toothless.

They went into this completely frivolously. It's appalling strategy. There are basically two outcomes: they demonstrate that they can't/aren't willing to strike, reducing the power of the WTU immensely or they do strike and put themselves in extreme legal peril, which could cause enough damage to destroy the union.

The best thing they could do right now is to stop talking about it and act like they never said anything.

Your outside analysis is pretty good. I've been watching this from the inside shocked at how it played out - one major flaw in this case (no secret here, dots are easily connected) is how much she relied on external forces, city council for one, to act on behalf of the union.All talk amounting to no action. Lots of wasted time with the council. Also creating the narrative of "safe" and making assumptions on behalf of parents/guardians, etc really early on and never considering pivoting and/or changing the messaging based on listening to the community rather than telling them what to think.

Notifying the union membership at large what the implications of a strike are, at this point, is a dereliction of duty when it could have been messaged months ago. This was never going to end well.

Yes, whoever created the "only when safe" talking point should be flogged. It means everything and nothing at once. Some on here seem to define "only when safe" to mean "no risk" which is absurd. I can no longer hear people use this phrase without rolling my eyes.

Like they could have fired almost 5,000 people

Do those 5,000 people want to lose their salaries, health insurance and years built toward (but not yet achieved) retirement? Do they really want to play chicken with their careers, particularly those who are eyeing administration as their next step? There would have been many teachers who would not have participated in the strike because, guess what, they don't agree with it. The union did a piss poor job. My child's teacher has done an amazing job.

Teachers have no retirement plan in DC. Just another slap in the face.

Guess what out of those 5k at least half would have participated and that’s enough. No one wants to risk their life. I just started IPL and already there’s 2 positive cases!! It doesn’t make me feel safe to now have to quarantine and wait for my test. It doesn’t make my wonderful kids and families feel safe either. I had quite a few parents message me because their child was riddled with anxiety asking their parents if they could FaceTime me to make sure I’m ok.

So yea teachers are amazing and no one treats us like it. It’s not just about money or benefits it’s about being respected and seen as humans, not just an expendable teaching machine. I came back because I don’t view your children as just a student, I try to give them as much love, care, and nurturing as possible.

But now I’m a bad person because DCPS hasn’t shown me it’s safe. They’ve shown me they don’t care about anything except green and that’s a stark reality check.

Welcome to EMPLOYMENT

Then your kid is just a client and will be treated as such. Given that have fun with DL for the rest of this school year.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:New press release from WTU has them continuing to maybe possibly talk about a strike but probably that's just them trying to grasp as some sort of power:

https://d3n8a8pro7vhmx.cloudfront.net/wtulocal6action/pages/406/attachments/original/1612286384/2-2-21_WTU_Teachers_Want_to_Go_Back_to_School_and_Want_It_Done_Safely.pdf?1612286384

Former union leader: this is part of the problem with their inconsistent messaging. The website link we were looking at here earlier indicated that avoiding an illegal strike would be possible if DCPS fully met its obligations per the MOA as well as full vaccination. This communication drops the vaccination requirement and instead requests that the arbitrator go back through the school safety evaluation again, which was presumably completed very recently. Almost certainly the result would be the same, with the possible improvement of the two closed schools--this result would harm, rather than help, the union's negotiating position.

To negotiate successfully with management, you need consistent messaging and asks. It's not clear to me exactly what the WTU needs in order to be pacified, and remember that both of these documents are public and official. Behind closed doors, it's unlikely that their demands are any more coherent.

They agreed to the MOU and arbitration and didn't like the results. It is not good strategy to reject things you have agreed to, otherwise what is the point of management attempting to meet your demands? If management no longer feels like this conflict can be resolved through pacification, they will move to other (namely legal) strategies. That brings us to "bad faith" negotiation.

If the underlying WTU goal is to simply stop IPL and not something like "full vaccination" or "better HVAC," this is negotiating in bad faith. This is a legal issue, and another point on which DCPS could sue for unfair labor practices. Often it's management which is subject to accusations of bad faith, but it can be used against unions. Here's more information about it: https://www.aaup.org/sites/default/files/files/Good%20Faith%20Bargaining%20Handout.pdf

You can see that the WTU is skirting, if not crossing, the line here. And then the WTU is going to antagonize DCPS, the mayor, and the arbitrator? No no no no no.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:PP, former union leader here:

So, this is obviously bad. First, there's a clear solidarity problem within the union, where you do have union members saying they don't support what their union is doing, posting internal emails here, etc. That doesn't bode well for collective action, especially a strike which will leave each member legally vulnerable. The WTU membership would have to be VERY serious and VERY committed in order to pull off a strike, but it seems like they're not. This suggests to me that if we're aware of it, management is aware of it. This is why management is pre-emptively invoking the courts--to remind members of their potential legal peril.

Now, we have all seen clear communication from the WTU about a vague threat of a strike. This was a bad move for a couple of reasons. They've tipped their hand and allowed management to prepare ahead of time AND by saying they're calling for a vote, they're indicating that they don't know if the whole membership is on board.

You do not ever want management to realize that you don't have enough people on board to strike meaningfully. This is basically your main union power, and once its gone, your union is toothless.

They went into this completely frivolously. It's appalling strategy. There are basically two outcomes: they demonstrate that they can't/aren't willing to strike, reducing the power of the WTU immensely or they do strike and put themselves in extreme legal peril, which could cause enough damage to destroy the union.

The best thing they could do right now is to stop talking about it and act like they never said anything.

Your outside analysis is pretty good. I've been watching this from the inside shocked at how it played out - one major flaw in this case (no secret here, dots are easily connected) is how much she relied on external forces, city council for one, to act on behalf of the union.All talk amounting to no action. Lots of wasted time with the council. Also creating the narrative of "safe" and making assumptions on behalf of parents/guardians, etc really early on and never considering pivoting and/or changing the messaging based on listening to the community rather than telling them what to think.

Notifying the union membership at large what the implications of a strike are, at this point, is a dereliction of duty when it could have been messaged months ago. This was never going to end well.

Yes, whoever created the "only when safe" talking point should be flogged. It means everything and nothing at once. Some on here seem to define "only when safe" to mean "no risk" which is absurd. I can no longer hear people use this phrase without rolling my eyes.

Like they could have fired almost 5,000 people

Do those 5,000 people want to lose their salaries, health insurance and years built toward (but not yet achieved) retirement? Do they really want to play chicken with their careers, particularly those who are eyeing administration as their next step? There would have been many teachers who would not have participated in the strike because, guess what, they don't agree with it. The union did a piss poor job. My child's teacher has done an amazing job.

Teachers have no retirement plan in DC. Just another slap in the face.

Guess what out of those 5k at least half would have participated and that’s enough. No one wants to risk their life. I just started IPL and already there’s 2 positive cases!! It doesn’t make me feel safe to now have to quarantine and wait for my test. It doesn’t make my wonderful kids and families feel safe either. I had quite a few parents message me because their child was riddled with anxiety asking their parents if they could FaceTime me to make sure I’m ok.

So yea teachers are amazing and no one treats us like it. It’s not just about money or benefits it’s about being respected and seen as humans, not just an expendable teaching machine. I came back because I don’t view your children as just a student, I try to give them as much love, care, and nurturing as possible.

But now I’m a bad person because DCPS hasn’t shown me it’s safe. They’ve shown me they don’t care about anything except green and that’s a stark reality check.

So the takeaways are :

- as a teacher you don’t understand something as simple as the basics of the spread of Covid
- you were very concerned for your safety - but didn’t take a few minutes to educate yourself about Covid basics
- it is safe - science and medicine both say this - but you as a teacher think both are wrong and dismiss them
- the two positive tests after one day in the classroom were not the result of an in school transmission
- parents have encouraged hysterics and done a bad job helping children - they should not be worried about you to the point they are
- I hope you made this story up for drama - otherwise it makes my already dim view of teachers even worse

Ok Karen. Of course you hate teachers who here are majority Black. Takeaway whatever you like, we no longer care what you rich whites think

nothing you said deals with the content of the post at all, suggesting that you are simply attempting to derail conversation. you are a bad troll.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:New press release from WTU has them continuing to maybe possibly talk about a strike but probably that's just them trying to grasp as some sort of power:

https://d3n8a8pro7vhmx.cloudfront.net/wtulocal6action/pages/406/attachments/original/1612286384/2-2-21_WTU_Teachers_Want_to_Go_Back_to_School_and_Want_It_Done_Safely.pdf?1612286384

Former union leader: this is part of the problem with their inconsistent messaging. The website link we were looking at here earlier indicated that avoiding an illegal strike would be possible if DCPS fully met its obligations per the MOA as well as full vaccination. This communication drops the vaccination requirement and instead requests that the arbitrator go back through the school safety evaluation again, which was presumably completed very recently. Almost certainly the result would be the same, with the possible improvement of the two closed schools--this result would harm, rather than help, the union's negotiating position.

To negotiate successfully with management, you need consistent messaging and asks. It's not clear to me exactly what the WTU needs in order to be pacified, and remember that both of these documents are public and official. Behind closed doors, it's unlikely that their demands are any more coherent.

They agreed to the MOU and arbitration and didn't like the results. It is not good strategy to reject things you have agreed to, otherwise what is the point of management attempting to meet your demands? If management no longer feels like this conflict can be resolved through pacification, they will move to other (namely legal) strategies. That brings us to "bad faith" negotiation.

If the underlying WTU goal is to simply stop IPL and not something like "full vaccination" or "better HVAC," this is negotiating in bad faith. This is a legal issue, and another point on which DCPS could sue for unfair labor practices. Often it's management which is subject to accusations of bad faith, but it can be used against unions. Here's more information about it: https://www.aaup.org/sites/default/files/files/Good%20Faith%20Bargaining%20Handout.pdf

You can see that the WTU is skirting, if not crossing, the line here. And then the WTU is going to antagonize DCPS, the mayor, and the arbitrator? No no no no no.

I probably should have said appeasement, rather than pacification.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:PP, former union leader here:

So, this is obviously bad. First, there's a clear solidarity problem within the union, where you do have union members saying they don't support what their union is doing, posting internal emails here, etc. That doesn't bode well for collective action, especially a strike which will leave each member legally vulnerable. The WTU membership would have to be VERY serious and VERY committed in order to pull off a strike, but it seems like they're not. This suggests to me that if we're aware of it, management is aware of it. This is why management is pre-emptively invoking the courts--to remind members of their potential legal peril.

Now, we have all seen clear communication from the WTU about a vague threat of a strike. This was a bad move for a couple of reasons. They've tipped their hand and allowed management to prepare ahead of time AND by saying they're calling for a vote, they're indicating that they don't know if the whole membership is on board.

You do not ever want management to realize that you don't have enough people on board to strike meaningfully. This is basically your main union power, and once its gone, your union is toothless.

They went into this completely frivolously. It's appalling strategy. There are basically two outcomes: they demonstrate that they can't/aren't willing to strike, reducing the power of the WTU immensely or they do strike and put themselves in extreme legal peril, which could cause enough damage to destroy the union.

The best thing they could do right now is to stop talking about it and act like they never said anything.

You’re really something discussing this here.

Agree.

Because it doesn't seem clear: The "former union leader" commenting is not a former WTU leader. That person is a former leader from a DIFFERENT union (which is clear when that person says "former leader from a much larger union").

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:PP, former union leader here:

So, this is obviously bad. First, there's a clear solidarity problem within the union, where you do have union members saying they don't support what their union is doing, posting internal emails here, etc. That doesn't bode well for collective action, especially a strike which will leave each member legally vulnerable. The WTU membership would have to be VERY serious and VERY committed in order to pull off a strike, but it seems like they're not. This suggests to me that if we're aware of it, management is aware of it. This is why management is pre-emptively invoking the courts--to remind members of their potential legal peril.

Now, we have all seen clear communication from the WTU about a vague threat of a strike. This was a bad move for a couple of reasons. They've tipped their hand and allowed management to prepare ahead of time AND by saying they're calling for a vote, they're indicating that they don't know if the whole membership is on board.

You do not ever want management to realize that you don't have enough people on board to strike meaningfully. This is basically your main union power, and once its gone, your union is toothless.

They went into this completely frivolously. It's appalling strategy. There are basically two outcomes: they demonstrate that they can't/aren't willing to strike, reducing the power of the WTU immensely or they do strike and put themselves in extreme legal peril, which could cause enough damage to destroy the union.

The best thing they could do right now is to stop talking about it and act like they never said anything.

You’re really something discussing this here.

Agree.

Because it doesn't seem clear: The "former union leader" commenting is not a former WTU leader. That person is a former leader from a DIFFERENT union (which is clear when that person says "former leader from a much larger union").

Oh man that poor prior WTU leader is getting some phone calls today.

[Anonymous]

As a parent, it seems like WTU keeps moving the goal post, so of course their needs can't be met. They keep changing. Just get the teachers vaccinated QUICKLY and let's all get back to learning.

[Anonymous]

I used to respect the union and all teachers. I grew up in a family of teachers including my mom. But DC WTU has not acted in good faith and claims to know more than the CDC and the Amer Pediatric Association. So yeah, all respect lost. I will never support anything else the WTU asks for, even if its reasonable. They are mismanaged.